[QUERY] PG-13 Policy

[Racoda]

Yesterday, about 30 nations were deleted in the region Jasmin.

Please note I am not the owner of and I am not trying to appeal on behalf of the owner of those nations.

I am quite sure this deletion is due to the PG-13 site content rules (a combination of name and flag) and would like to request some additional clarification on what is/isn't acceptable, as I was surprised by those events.

I've come across some nations that while not strictly "non-PG-13", do, just as those DEATed, hint in some way at non-PG-13 topics.

Thus, I'd like to request clarification on whether references or hints to the following in nation names/fields/flags are acceptable or if they should be reported:

• Suggestive wordplay (ex. Bangcock Thighlands)
  
• Adult performer names (actual names and aliases)
  
• Drugs
  
• Weapons/Guns

I understand that each report is considered on a case-by-case basis when reported; so I'm asking for guidance rather than a definitive classification: The OSRS only explicitly mention sexuality and swearing, but all of these themes do seem not to be PG-13.

I'm especially concerned about the last two: is a nation openly referring to drugs fully PG-13-compliant (ex. Crack, Cocaine), despite the adult nature of the theme, while those with a hint of sexuality are not? It does feel a bit inconsistent.

If the answer is that drugs and guns are ok/performers are not, that's fine, just want to make sure that's the official PG-13 policy and not my perception of it

As an addendum, should nations such as Jessica Alba, not referring to adult performers, but having perhaps even more sexually suggestive flags be reported?

*leaves cookies and milk*

[Reploid Productions]

Those deletions are actually currently under discussion and internal review, but very broadly speaking I would recommend steering clear of naming nations after adult performers- why play with fire like that in the first place? Especially if we're talking name coupled with photographic flag or national fields making lewd insinuations; in the past we have smacked folks for flags where technically all the bits were covered (usually via careful cropping of the image) but it was still QUITE clearly sexualized or clearly from a non-PG-13 work. (Examples of such: stills from porn tactically cropped to barely hide the genitalia, anime girls one deep breath away from their breasts exploding out of their shirts, a woman who is covered but in a clearly sexual pose, men wearing pants but with a visible erection through the fabric, etc.)

Wordplay is a tricky area, because subtle enough wordplay can slip under the radar just fine, but the more blatant it gets the more likely it is to get toasted. Again, especially when coupled with flag/fields. The usual rule of thumb is that "if you have to ask, better not to do it."

Merely making mention of pornography by itself doesn't generally push a nation over the line (look at the nations that have "hentai" or "porn" in their names for example.) Same with mentioning drugs, or weapons, unless the combination of name and/or flag and fields tips it over the line. A nation that just so happens to mention porn in the name can get by, but one that mentions porn, has a photo focusing on some woman's ample cleavage, and fields talking about fucking or penises and so on is most likely going to get itself nuked. Similarly, a nation can mention guns or drugs, but if the fields stack up with that name to make it clear it's trolling or going into any level of detail about the use or procurement of those things then deletion is more likely. A nation named after a gun manufacturer for instance is most likely going to be fine; a nation named after a gun manufacturer who's motto talks about shooting down a specific group of people not so much. A nation name mentioning hard drugs is one thing, a nation name mentioning hard drugs and implying how to get/make/use them or trying to claim that members of a particular group of people use them is another entirely.

A user's past history also comes into play. A player with a clean history is going to be given more benefit of the doubt when looking at fringe or borderline cases than a player who already has a lengthy history of content violations.

[Racoda]

Thanks Reppy! The penultimate paragraph was really helpful