Before I go, here is a sample of what I suggested in the pm:
This is a long way shorter than the huge list of examples the muscle bird is proposing in the proposed ranking criteria change. See if you can shoot some bullets at this meanwhile.
I propose to reword the rule to clarify what is considered "obscene" and resolve the contradiction. The following is a simplified version of the Miller Test altered to include violence and drug use. All three conditions have to be satisfied for something be considered obscene:[/quote]The new rule would remove "This includes nudity, near-nudity, sexual references, violence, drug abuse, etc. Keep things PG (suitable for ages 12+)" and instead better define what is considered obscene:
- It can be argued that that the work, taken as a whole, encourages or promotes sexual, violent, or drug related interests
- The work depicts or describes ideas/concepts in an offensive manner
- The work, taken as a whole, lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value
There must not be any obscene imagery in the background/storyboard/video content. Images should be on a level that can be displayed on all-audience TV, on public signage, and of nature that does not require censoring in any country. Imagery is considered obscene if all of the following three are true:
- The work, taken as a whole, encourages or promotes sexual, violent, or drug related interests
- The work depicts or describes ideas/concepts in an offensive manner
- The work, taken as a whole, lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value
This is a long way shorter than the huge list of examples the muscle bird is proposing in the proposed ranking criteria change. See if you can shoot some bullets at this meanwhile.