@Liggliluff
That’s a real shame, but deciding whether a pic is sexual is a subjective question. The mods opinion may differ from yours or mine. Also, some mods are more relaxed than others, so these grey area pics can lie around until a stricter mod sees the picture and deletes it.
@Enkidu
Then the question is why this image was removed; as it contains nothing more sexual to it than just simple exposed underwear … like the one here.
And these images: [1][2][3] are also just some exposed underwear.
This is even more tame – and not at all as exposed as >>695434
@YoyoTripleThree
The rule prohibits - “Sexualized material involving characters that appear to be underaged and are not ponies (ie, humanizations)”
So underage characters are acceptable if there’s nothing sexual about the image
Maybe, the attitude might have changed, I dunno
I think these were removed during the “remove all sexual images”-spree.
If these were uploaded again, maybe they can stay this time?
That’s a real shame, but deciding whether a pic is sexual is a subjective question. The mods opinion may differ from yours or mine. Also, some mods are more relaxed than others, so these grey area pics can lie around until a stricter mod sees the picture and deletes it.
Then the question is why this image was removed; as it contains nothing more sexual to it than just simple exposed underwear … like the one here.
And these images: [1] [2] [3] are also just some exposed underwear.
This is even more tame – and not at all as exposed as >>695434
The rule prohibits - “Sexualized material involving characters that appear to be underaged and are not ponies (ie, humanizations)”
So underage characters are acceptable if there’s nothing sexual about the image
UK extreme laws.
Nope, but it was already uploaded here.
Now it was taken down. Maybe there’s a reason?
Edited