Second post about this. You can find the original topic here: t/269045

The end effect of the last topic was "You're a fucking pervert CDFA", and more importantly "Don't even attempt to put something suggestive."

However, as I've been downloading new maps, I've been seeing a lot of inconsistency regarding this.

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/331228
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/130446
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/287318
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/298770
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/232451

Stuff like this, in the last thread that was made, would have been seen as innapropriate, especially since many of these are depicting very young girls.

So I'd like to re-open the discussion, this time with a clean slate and no previously stated opinion. We've seen that having just a "Use Common Sense" rule does NOT WORK.

So I'm proposing that we have explicit guidelines as to what IS and ISN'T allowed in a background.

What makes these acceptable, but this not acceptable? https://osu.ppy.sh/s/333273 . Hell, you can even argue that my avatar is innapropriate because Mikasa is exposing her stomach.

My idea for this is that there is a document held somewhere that is accessible on the Ranking Criteria, clarifying what counts and doesn't count as NSFW, not just for QAT use, but for mapper and BN use, so these issues do not arise and there is consistency on what is and isn't allowed.

I'm hoping this time that there can actually be some progress instead of "Use common sense."

EDIT:
Current Standing:

Ephemeral wrote:

All images should be appropriately targeted to an audience of all ages, and be considered "safe for work". Anything that could be reasonably considered sexually suggestive or otherwise lewd is deemed inappropriate - including (but not limited to) visible outlines of genitalia, underwear that is plainly visible or any imagery that otherwise encompasses concepts that are not appropriate for children (drug use, overt violence etc).

well in my opinion the beatmaps backgrounds, that you linked are sweet and doesn't have any sexual/violent/blood content, these are just normal girls at the beach, but that isn't the case with your example: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/333273 where the image is really sexual suggestive.
I think common sense can be apply easy to background selections.

Ok so bad example. Whoops. Sorry me.

Since I've been out of the modding game for about 6 months, I don't have any super relevant examples, but I'm citing things like https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3447572 (Can't link the map with the original BG since it was changed, but uhhhh here's the map + discussion: t/232687 )

And a lot of other BGs have had to be changed in the past for content that was considered "too suggestive"

Even this map had a lot of flack: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/235274 (The ranked version of this mapset had the BG changed. I don't know if that was Gero's choice or a BN thinking about NSFW but stuff, the point still stands), but I think it's cute too. In my common sense mind, there is nothing wrong with this image. It's fun and happy, much like the fun and happy nature of the song, and the girls are from the anime.

I'm mostly re-starting this debate because I've been seeing back-tracking on the previous ideas that Loctav had stated in the original thread, which seemed to dislike any sort of exposing bodies, especially in pools and stuff. It seems very inconsistent and I see no disbenefit upon having guidelines for what and what isn't considered safe, so debates like these do not happen.

I'd be happy to draft up a list of what could and couldn't be proper in questionable situations. The subjectivity though is just too much, and without a clear guideline, it falls into the trap of inconsistent rules, which is not good.

About first map the bg was showing ¨ALOT¨ I still remember it xD, and the second one I think was Gero's choice, but anyways I still think that's easy to avoid using NSFW stuff.

Here's a map with a slightly NSFWish, it's proved not an NSFW but to me it is because she's naked for real. (only use a hair as coverage)
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/83430

I think this is too repetitive - it did never seem any conclusion when it comes to this rule would be done. Even maps containing loli hentai where video showed a little girl holding guy's "toy" were never removed (I for example got answers like: "it's okay, it's low resolution"), while Andrea's map was unranked after years, because it had panties visible. So if we consider this, let's say anything less than 640x480 can contain anything, because it is low resolution and it does not really matter whether it might be illegal or something, people don't see it, it's small.

Obviously, just kidding there - This is really a thing which must be defined seriously, people do not know whether they can use this or not (I expected that song might contain pu**y in lyrics, then got week mute), also it's not that long time where I made a storyboard where some people said: "You should remove the image with girl lying on ground covered with blood", but QATs then said it is completely okay. I would say there should be something to define when does the map element need warning and when it cannot even be used. Just an example, this might work, maybe:

Safe
Needs warning
Cannot be used

1. Blood without appearance of violence
2. Overly big or overly small breasts size
3. Loli/Shota
4. Underwear/Swimsuit visible in common, non-suggestive pose
5. Drug appearance without its usage (for example poppy flower in background)
6. Blood with appearance of violence or more visible focus on wounds
7. Any act related to genitals, butt or breasts (physical contact shown in image - i.e. kick in butt is supposed to be funny - it's okay, touch by a hand is not okay because as well as it might be used as a fun, it is moreover sexual reference)
8. Underwear/Swimsuit visible in pose that exposures genitals, butt or breasts in a way to emphasize them or in position that is related to sexual act.
9. Drug appearance with its consumption
10. Gore (nothing related to disembodied parts of any being or overly aggressive behavior to shown object)
11. Nudity, no matter whether censored or not. Same applies to genital fluids
12. Humiliation of any race or country (obviously, this might have exceptions - If song said "I slog one's guts out as a German worker", that would actually not be that offensive - Most people know that German products are really good quality and that they really are perfectionists when it comes to work, I think regular guy from there would just smirk a little ignoring it completely, but if I actually say "As dumb as Czech government" (Just for example said my country because I did not want to be offensive to anyone, all is just example), then it would be offensive to those who actually like that government, but actually the thing about German is imo adequate - it is nothing what should really offend certain person.

Obviously, that's just few which came to my mind, but this list does not really matter, but we would need something similar to this to know almost 100% (yes, there will still be exceptions) whether we can submit it or not or whether we need warning or not.

I don't think a list would work, It's extremely hard to make a comprehensive set of rules that will cover everything. It's all subjective, in some situations a certain thing will be ok, and on others not. In the end it's the sum of a lot of things that determines if it is 'appropriate' or not, and that is impossible to quantify with set rules. The best you can do is have some guidelines, and have the QAT or whoever make a ruling when it's unclear. And honestly, ambiguous rules like 'no panty shots' do more harm than good.

In my opinion, moderate amount of sexual themes should be ok. Mild sexual themes , that you can already find in popular media, don't do any harm to children so I don't see why it's important to be so intolerant of anything of that nature. Because you're not really protecting anyone or anything.

Wafu wrote:

1. Humiliation of any race or country (obviously, this might have exceptions - If song said "I slog one's guts out as a German worker", that would actually not be that offensive - Most people know that German products are really good quality and that they really are perfectionists when it comes to work, I think regular guy from there would just smirk a little ignoring it completely, but if I actually say "As dumb as Czech government" (Just for example said my country because I did not want to be offensive to anyone, all is just example), then it would be offensive to those who actually like that government, but actually the thing about German is imo adequate - it is nothing what should really offend certain person.

No. There is no reason to be so politically correct. Why do we need to be worried if people are 'offended' or not?

Wafu wrote:

Most people know that German products are really good quality and that they really are perfectionists when it comes to work, I think regular guy from there would just smirk a little ignoring it completely, but if I actually say "As dumb as Czech government" (Just for example said my country because I did not want to be offensive to anyone, all is just example), then it would be offensive to those who actually like that government, but actually the thing about German is imo adequate - it is nothing what should really offend certain person.]

Lmao what

I agree that a hardcore list is more harmful than good. But there needs to be SOMETHING. The goal is consistency. If its going to be an issue to have girls im bathing suits one day, it needs to be an issue every day, not just whenever the mapper isnt a QAT member

B1rd wrote:

I don't think a list would work, It's extremely hard to make a comprehensive set of rules that will cover everything. It's all subjective, in some situations a certain thing will be ok, and on others not. In the end it's the sum of a lot of things that determines if it is 'appropriate' or not, and that is impossible to quantify with set rules. The best you can do is have some guidelines, and have the QAT or whoever make a ruling when it's unclear. And honestly, ambiguous rules like 'no panty shots' do more harm than good.

In my opinion, moderate amount of sexual themes should be ok. Mild sexual themes , that you can already find in popular media, don't do any harm to children so I don't see why it's important to be so intolerant of anything of that nature. Because you're not really protecting anyone or anything.

Reditum wrote:

Lmao what

I agree that a hardcore list is more harmful than good. But there needs to be SOMETHING. The goal is consistency. If its going to be an issue to have girls im bathing suits one day, it needs to be an issue every day, not just whenever the mapper isnt a QAT member

Guys, what's going on? Did you even read the post?

Wafu wrote:

this list does not really matter, but we would need something similar to this to know almost 100%

That we need something similar to tell us whether issue is unrankable or not doesn't mean that it does have to be a hardcore list nor the list I said above, that was example, obviously we won't put such thing to RC, giving examples of how it could work doesn't mean that it will be done this way, I myself said that the list I mentioned does not matter - That means, do not consider this as stuff which we put to Ranking Criteria.

We need something that will determine what is okay and what not, it does not have to be in-depth and obviously, there will be exceptions because every of these things needs to be considered case-by-case, if we say that it's okay to show panties on the background, it won't be like: "yeah, the person is not naked, panties are enough" - We have to consider how much is that explicit, there is difference whether we just see panties or whether we see genital details through panties. I agree that 'no panty shots' rule would be more harmful than helpful, but we need to thing about this as 12+ game and then consider whether it is safe enough to not have warning or safe enough to be still used even with warning.

List would be too long to cover everything, we need something that would cover everything, but there is no way it would prevent usage of common sense, there will be exceptions no matter what rule is it (unless it would be changed to no NSFW at all, but that would not be so cool), we need something like: "Imagery is considered explicit if contains details on genitals, wounds (and others, I cannot really find words now ) or if using high amount of violence or clearly sexually suggestive theme. In that case the map must have warning in description, if imagery contains extreme form of previous themes, it cannot be used." (Clearly sexually suggestive theme = Positions that are used for some kind of sexual act, i.e. Euny's BG was removed because there was a girl that had hand stuck between her breasts, which is obviously reference to paizuri - I think this is enough obvious why it shouldn't be there without warning) - The rule I said won't work anyway, we need something better, but this is the core of thing we need, some rule that would say mild NSFW is okay, casual NSFW needs warning, high NSFW cannot be used, but well, I cannot form a good rule for this.

Anyway writing this, because you complained about list, which was just an example of what should be unrankable, not what should be in RC, so it shouldn't have been considered, never mind.

Calm down lmfao we're talking about the creation of a list in general. We haven't even said anything about your particular list. The only issue I had with it (Since, oh no, I only skimmed it because I was at work) was the Loctav-fanboying going on, lmfao (Like, really? "German products are always good"?)

Anyways, I'd really like to hear more QAT opinion on this, since they're on the side of having to make these decisions.

Reditum wrote:

Calm down lmfao we're talking about the creation of a list in general. We haven't even said anything about your particular list. The only issue I had with it (Since, oh no, I only skimmed it because I was at work) was the Loctav-fanboying going on, lmfao (Like, really? "German products are always good"?)

Firstly, I am calm and yes, you said anything about that particular list which was an example, B1rd quoted it and said "No. There is no reason to be so politically correct. Why do we need to be worried if people are 'offended' or not?" and you actually laughed to one part of it and called it "Loctav-fanboying". So I had to say it is just example and that nobody should consider it, but that dividing things to these 3 sections would work imo.

Also yeah, QAT members are probably those who know how to consider this, so their opinions would be fine. (I mean in this post, not like asking them for each map )

No, German products are overpriced for their quality.

Back to topic: I think one of the biggest discussion are panty shots such as https://osu.ppy.sh/s/53249 while https://osu.ppy.sh/s/300232 got disqualified, because of the visibility of underwears. Not calling that specific body parts should be visible or acceptable but underwears are honestly not a big deal for a PG-13 game.

Wafu: 2010 was a different time where you could approve a two minute long difficulty as long it fullfilled the criterias. Such things will never be allowed again (and actually never was, it's an accident it became ranked).

Wafu wrote:

1. Underwear/Swimsuit visible in common, non-suggestive pose

I would like to consider the underwear part. I don't think anyone just walks on the street or beach in underwear. That's obviously not safe. It can depend on the pose and quantity but in overall, no.

Stefan wrote:

Not calling that specific body parts should be visible or acceptable but underwears are honestly not a big deal for a PG-13 game.

Who said this game is pg13? This supposed to be an all aged as it is stated in the rules: http://puu.sh/jhEzy/5fe6126019.png (see osu!wiki as reference). And underwear is not belongs to an all aged game imo.

RC wrote:

Keep things PG, suitable for ages 12+.

I'd say Stefan is right or our Ranking Criteria outdated

Kurokami wrote:

Who said this game is pg13? This supposed to be an all aged as it is stated in the rules: http://puu.sh/jhEzy/5fe6126019.png (see osu!wiki as reference). And underwear is not belongs to an all aged game imo.

All ages does not necessarily mean as defined by some arbitrary rating system. As I've stated in my previous post, stuff like underwear is perfectly suitable for all ages.

Kurokami wrote:

Who said this game is pg13? This supposed to be an all aged as it is stated in the rules: http://puu.sh/jhEzy/5fe6126019.png (see osu!wiki as reference). And underwear is not belongs to an all aged game imo.

Personally I think age 13 should be a minimum requirement to use the internet in general, for the same reason why games get pushed from a T rating to M solely based off voice chatting online (games like Halo for example).

The fact that people can already type to each other in a public in-game chat (even with a couple filters) and on these forums already pushes things to a pg-13 level at the very least. "All ages" really does not exist. So I feel that matters regarding this topic is best suited around the pg-13 level. But that's just my opinion.

Kurokami wrote:

Who said this game is pg13? This supposed to be an all aged as it is stated in the rules: http://puu.sh/jhEzy/5fe6126019.png (see osu!wiki as reference). And underwear is not belongs to an all aged game imo.

So things such as verbal language, violence in form of war and weapon usage, blood in any form and anything nearly scary/horrifying/creepy doesn't belong in the game. The game can be met by all ages but the requirement we have for content is PG-13.

Stefan wrote:

Kurokami wrote:

Who said this game is pg13? This supposed to be an all aged as it is stated in the rules: http://puu.sh/jhEzy/5fe6126019.png (see osu!wiki as reference). And underwear is not belongs to an all aged game imo.

So things such as verbal language, violence in form of war and weapon usage, blood in any form and anything nearly scary/horrifying/creepy doesn't belong in the game. The game can be met by all ages but the requirement we have for content is PG-13.

I heared that kids below 13 years are crazy about underwears, maybe puberty starts there. Can be a rumor.

Yeah, Stefan, it shouldn't. That's why need to confirm this before we can start suggesting rules like this. At the moment we do not have clear clarification about the limit, either 13 or all aged. I'm all in for 13 because of the songs and stuff and because this game is internet related.

Considering that many staff members have spoken with me in public using a variety of curse words and name calling that would be frowned upon in a kids game, I think 13+ is fine and dandy.

Thinking about what's happening in the world of osu, 13+ sounds just fine.

To desugun (dont want to spam more posts): I think so. I really see no problem with random underwear if it's not completely "Hey, look at my pantsu, LOOK AT THEM". It's not like we live in some age where pantsu are the most sexual thing ever.

If PG13 becomes real, underwear will be allowed?

PG-13 movies that have underwear - a lot of them. Hell breaking dawn part 1 goes way beyond that.

What's wrong with a triangular shape lost into a picture of a girl ?
When we go out, we see a lot of advertising for underwears, right ?
When we go shopping, we can see many underwears store, right ?
And when we were shopping with our mother when we were younger, was it somewhere like ^ ?

Just be simple and reasonable, don't use a background that makes your **** harder.
And everything will go well.

swimsuit is totally fine
you can see many kids play on beach with their parents

Cherry Blossom wrote:

What's wrong with a triangular shape lost into a picture of a girl ?
When we go out, we see a lot of advertising for underwears, right ?
When we go shopping, we can see many underwears store, right ?
And when we were shopping with our mother when we were younger, was it somewhere like ^ ?

Just be simple and reasonable, don't use a background that makes your **** harder.
And everything will go well.

that's why we call you hentai CB >w<

wcx19911123 wrote:

swimsuit is totally fine
you can see many kids play on beach with their parents

As well as underwear, it is equal to swimsuit, just moment of usage is different. Thing that should be considered is whether ones ***** shape is not clearly visible. As far as I know, these regular swimsuit/underwear situations were around 13+ in anime, and we see that pretty much often on commercials, shops, TV and there are almost never warnings or age restrictions.

- Context is important. If I'm downloading "X.X.X" then I might expect some NSFW material; if I'm downloading "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" then I don't really expect bikini wear or anything NSFW.

- Culture is a factor in what's NSFW. What's NSFW to you may not be to me. What's acceptable in Japan may not be in Iran.

- If it's PG13+ then by whose definition. What classes as PG13+ is different in each country see PEGI, ERSB, USK, CERO ratings for games.

Due to the above I think it's going to be very difficult to come to a consensus on what is NSFW in borderline cases. If in doubt slap a NSFW tag on it and at least then it's appropriately flagged.

We probably want to apply the guidelines used and setup for the United States, as the beatmap distribution follows US American law, as far as I am informed. (Correct me, if I am wrong)

Loctav wrote:

We probably want to apply the guidelines used and setup for the United States, as the beatmap distribution follows US American law, as far as I am informed. (Correct me, if I am wrong)

Im not 100% sure, but i THINK the servers are located in the United States.

If thats the case, then we can pull up rating systems for that and use those aa guidelines (idunno if we'd look at movie rating systems or video game rating. Like, video games would correlate most with the games, but we use movie rating terminology in the ranking criteria)

Ill edit this post with the guidelines later. Just woke up, lol

Also, thanks for replying its good to get input from the higher ups so i can make sure that the discussion is going in a positive manner.

bm4.ppy.sh appears to be in OVH's Canada datacenter...

EDIT: yas-online & altosu off in OVH France, bloodcat in Korea

abalabahaha wrote:

bm4.ppy.sh appears to be in OVH's Canada datacenter...

In that case, everyone will have to put apologies for every beatmap image regardless of it being nsfw or not.

I think all of this can be avoided if USERS REFUSE to make beapmaps with backgrounds showing panties, underwear, naked body parts and such.

Come on boys and girls, this is NOT that hard.

Ex: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/39537 <- This map is kind of okay, I'm not against this but I don't like this BG, whatever, moving on.
Ex2: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/26946 <- THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL. BGs like this one should replaced. I know it's not gonna happen because I reported this map some years ago and one one did anything about it.

Mercurial wrote:

I think all of this can be avoided if USERS REFUSE to make beapmaps with backgrounds showing panties, underwear, naked body parts and such.

Come on boys and girls, this is NOT that hard.

Ex: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/39537 <- This map is kind of okay, I'm not against this but I don't like this BG, whatever, moving on.
Ex2: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/26946 <- THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL. BGs like this one should replaced. I know it's not gonna happen because I reported this map some years ago and one one did anything about it.

Pretty much agreed, but reporting stuff unfortunately does not work. Andrea's map could be unranked after years, but this or that map with hentai (really) is okay, because it is old, that does not mean it is safe and that people cannot get that map. It's a pity no logic is applied here. I don't want to see maps unranked or removed, but if this is 12+, make it 12+ or put visible warning, but avoid naked or overly visible stuff completely.

I'm about as old as you in this game and if you understand this point, why modders, mappers and even this game's staff aren't able to understand this?

Well the staff HAS been like "hurr use common sense" for a while now

But the reason this thread even exists is because that hasnt been working.

Mostly because everyones idea of common sense is different when it comes to these issues

Hence the need for standardization

Well, common sense is just common sense, it is not like one does have different common sense, they are just unable to use it. As I was talking previously, removing BG from Andrea's map, but not from h3k1ru's was reasoned as: "It's 2010, deal with it" or "Nobody's gonna play it today anyway" no common sense was applied at all, that's called fallacy - That's the thing you use to avoid work or creating a valid argument. On another map I got an argument of "how is innocent girl NSFW" - Not considering what was in the picture but that she was innocent - People don't use logic at all, rape is usually done against innocent person, am I eligible to put it in a map with this argument? If people were using common sense, it would work, but they don't even think of making a valid argument, so the standardization is (unfortunately) needed.

Wafu wrote:

Well, common sense is just common sense, it is not like one does have different common sense, they are just unable to use it. As I was talking previously, removing BG from Andrea's map, but not from h3k1ru's was reasoned as: "It's 2010, deal with it" or "Nobody's gonna play it today anyway" no common sense was applied at all, that's called fallacy - That's the thing you use to avoid work or creating a valid argument. On another map I got an argument of "how is innocent girl NSFW" - Not considering what was in the picture but that she was innocent - People don't use logic at all, rape is usually done against innocent person, am I eligible to put it in a map with this argument? If people were using common sense, it would work, but they don't even think of making a valid argument, so the standardization is (unfortunately) needed.

Ok so let me just explain this.

The issue is that the idea of what is good or bad differs between individuals.

There are commonly held truths that are seen as bad. That's why nobody puts crotch-level organs in plain sight in maps. That's why there's no BGs of IRL gore. However, for either personal or societal reasons, certain things are seen as inappropriate to others, but fine to others.

What you may see as fine may not be seen as fine to others. It's the problem that happens in a multi-cultural game like this.

For instance, let's take a look at this

https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3493995

This is a BG for a map that I'm working on. I think it's fine because the song is a song from Busta Rhymes and Twista, and discusses. . . well generally they discuss gang life and stuff but this one is moreso just about how they can run fast, but the beat still is befitting of a rap song. Some people would be offended that guns were being shown in plain view, but others find it fine. Who's in the right? Who's common sense is the common sense?

It's the big reason that I was very unhappy with Loctav's answer in my previous thread and decided to re-open this discussion, because just saying "COMMON SENSE" is such a broad statement that literally it can't be used as a rule. It's why the ranking criteria isn't just "use common sense.", because what some people see as common sense, others see as unnatural.

Unrelated, but here's some more beatmaps that have been ranked after this thread has opened up. These are the same people approving these that called me a degenerate pervert for wanting to have a BG with girls on a beach, waving hello with the bottom part cut off.

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/330147
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/302634

It's even easier
Ban swimsuits, underwear and overly naked suggestive body parts
Probably no borderline bgs will remain
But no one is going to do this + fix older maps' bgs

Kert wrote:

It's even easier
Ban swimsuits, underwear and overly naked suggestive body parts
Probably no borderline bgs will remain
But no one is going to do this + fix older maps' bgs

Well, since it's come up twice now, I'll explain how the old map thing works

We're literally not allowed to unrank maps after a certain while. Before the QAT/BN system, maps were ranked, and if they needed to be taken down for unrankable issues, an admin or someone unranked the map. But after that, the map was free to be the way it was. It's mostly a fairness of scoring thing, as well as giving players some safety from random unranks months after their map become ranked.

But now the qualified section emulates that week. So once it's ranked, it's a no-touch zone unless there's a DMCA notice.

So regardless of the rules that are created, they'll only be applied to maps in the qualified section that day, as well as all other unranked maps that are trying to get ranked.

It's also not a really smart idea to look back on how policy was done back then and take it as fact. The modding process, as I've seen it for 6 years, is a constantly growing thing, and things that were done in 2010 wouldn't be how things are done now. In 2010 I literally pointed out some wrong metadata to DJPop that were like completely wrong and he was like "lmao whatever" (magical times)" and got it ranked. Regardless of how things were done back then, we need to focus on 2 things

1) What was done wrong back then? What do we feel should be changed?
2) How do we change that so that does not keep happening in the future.

And that's how the majority of this discussion should be going like. Nobody cares about what was done in the past, except that it raises issues currently. Nobody is going to try to wipe up the past, but instead we just move forward and make it so things are better in the future.

@Reditum Let me explain something else:
Common sense is based on judging (both objective and subjective) - That means if you use common sense and look at your background, you will say: "It is fine for me, but wouldn't this guy from <insert random country> mind because it is not-so-okay in his country?"

Common knowledge is based on knowledge (objective) - That means if you use common knowledge and look at your background, you will say: "It might be fine for my country, but is not fine for this country." or "It is fine for my country and as far as I know, it is not inappropriate for any other country."

Fallacy is no use of knowledge or judging, but avoiding them - This is actually most used in osu!, which IS the source of all problems. That means if you use fallacy and look at your background, you will just say: "If it is okay for me, why should it be not okay for others?" or "It is okay for me, if it is not for someone, just don't play the map."

If we use common sense or common knowledge, there won't be problems, because both are objective. But most of people use fallacies, so that means people complain because what is okay for them isn't okay for anyone else and then he's the focus of the bullets. If we want to have an objective results, we need a rule that would set the borderline, but the problem is, it will not be objective nevertheless - For example some people are not okay with a rainbow in background, because it is a sign of homosexuality or is sign for drug consumption. I bet if we consider all exceptions like this to be 100% objective, we won't have any backgrounds at all, this will never be "okay" for every country, so some rule will actually replace mapper's brain, if he is unable to use it, but won't solve many problems, because no rule of what is NSFW is objective.

Edit:

Reditum wrote:

Nobody is going to try to wipe up the past, but instead we just move forward and make it so things are better in the future.

So it is completely okay if my future kid plays osu! as a 12+ game, finds and old beatmap with loli hentai which is half-illegal in this country? I don't think that we should actually ignore things, because rules were different back and then, it is still 12+ game. Also I mentioned this issue in 2012, just after p/1651744 was unranked.
Wiped scores are not that critical as someone below age seeing really inappropriate stuff.