I finally got verified on VGen!

[feff@comicscamp.club]

I finally got verified on VGen!

But I also got a warning that the banner image I was using is considered nsfw so I guess I need to go and sort that now I've managed to have a proper break

[feff@comicscamp.club]

Maybe working with comics and after-dark peeps has skewed my sense of what is NSFW but this is the banner image I was using.

I guess from what they list as being suggestive I could see but I'm wondering if it's been a case of not seeing the forest for the trees here (i.e. focusing so much on the fact that one lady has impressive cleavage that they ignore that that the image as a whole is not actually sexually suggestive nor was it designed to be sexually suggestive imo)

I can go back to them to say I think this warning comes in error but it would be good to hear thoughts from others.

[dona@mastodon.art]

@feff What the actual f?? This is not NSFW at all imo. Sounds like standard sexism because of the cleavage... which shouldn't be inherently sexual, and you didn't frame it that way either. I'm sorry you have to deal with this.

[helenmclaughlinart@mastodon.art]

@feff The only other thing I can think of that might have been flagged (either by an algo or a human, I dunno) is that they're a bit shiny and flushed looking - which again is bollocks, being a normal bodily function of a human.

[feff@comicscamp.club]

@helenmclaughlinart @dona between you both I am actually tempted to ask them to highlight what they thought the problem was, so at least I am aware for the future.

[not_a_label@toot.lgbt]

@feff if that's NSFW then we're all doomed 😔 ( I know I'm also skewed thanks to my dealings with everyone's local T&A dealer, but WTF!!??)

[feff@comicscamp.club]

@not_a_label
I think it falls more into "sensitive" content rather than being explicitly nsfw but it still feels weird to me that a curvy woman in swimwear is considered sexualised because of her body shape.

It'll be interesting to see what they come back with if they do reply.

[not_a_label@toot.lgbt]

@feff I see far more 'sensitive' things on the beach every day here (well, when the sun can be bothered to put in an appearance!) - I shall be intrigued to see their response...

[saadazim@mastodon.art]

@feff 😬

[jsstaedtler@mastodon.art]

@feff Good lord, there are billboards and music album covers far more lascivious than this (and lascivious this is *not*). You have total justification to raise the biggest stink in the world over this.

[pogono@mastodon.art]

@feff Kind of weird that they hire the horniest people on Earth to set up systems like these.

[hika@sakurajima.moe]

@feff that's wild, nowhere close

[vulgalour@birdbutt.com]

@feff That's just not NSFW, it's just two people with people shaped bodies and it's not even suggestive. You see more skin on show at an all ages swimming pool, or a public beach, than is visible here. They're not even suggestively posed.

It's just a really nice picture. Baffling that they'd give you a warning for it.

[fabianfucci@socel.net]

@feff just draw and that's it

[feff@comicscamp.club]

The response was to just quote the very part of the "sensitive" content page that highlights "outfits that emphasise anatomy" (so for example, if you drew Zero Suit Samus, you'd have to mark it as sensitive and therefore can't have it as a banner image), and the explanation that clients see the full image on receipts, not the cropped version.

I literally thought they were gonna write "oh yeah actually when cropped it looks like there's more emphasis on certain body parts", but no.

And then something about payment processors so I guess we can blame $tripe

[minka@verse.averagedood.xyz]

@feff@comicscamp.club Not NSFW in my opinion but I can see the cleavage being the issue.