sanahtlig

Each post should contain the following elements: 1. Discuss something in Japanese. 2. Translate the post above your's from Japanese to English. 3. (Optional) Point out an error in the Japanese or English translation of another post, or clarify a misunderstanding resulting from one of your posts if you can't address it in Japanese. Please put all English in spoilers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 俺はｓａｎａｈｔｌｉｇです。英語の字は面倒ですから、サナもいいです。俺の名前の古事来歴を知りたいですか？ｇｉｌｔｈａｎａｓの逆走です。とてもオリジナルですから、ウェブけんさくには便利です、ＳＥＯもいいです。

I am generally opposed to features that crowd out actual discussion with redundant static content (signatures). If it were up to me, images probably wouldn't even be allowed in signatures. In addition, I'd possibly restrict signatures to one line of text.

Burnout is real. No one wants to deal with Eternal September: training an endless line of candidates that consume your time and energy, write a couple of articles, and then disappear. Figuring out how to manage interns without wasting valuable resources is one of those difficult aspects of managing an organization. Sometimes you just have to cut your losses, as you've done here.

The peer review idea was more along the lines of: "for every article you submit, you have to review someone else's article". Alternatively, a revolving team composed of one veteran and several new members could go through submissions, with the team composition in constant flux. That way new reviewers would be teaching each other to some extent. The veteran would be there to sign off on the final result, but most of the revision process would be on the new reviewers.

Peer review for better or worse is powered by ego. That's probably why in academic circles the submitter is blinded to who's commenting on the submission. I could definitely see how that could put a cramp in the style of this site, which is less about results and more about having a good time.

This is for the best. A poorly-implemented feature is a morale killer for all involved. If you ever want to revive this, I'd suggest a peer-review system similar to what's used in academic circles. This would spread out the work and put more responsibility on those submitting articles to also help review articles. I think the issue with this system was you had one person handling all submissions who had very little interest in writing submissions or reviewing them. That's not fun; that's just work.

I think you're misunderstanding how court precedent works. Juries don't analyze a case history and painstakingly compare images to decide if the new images are more or less offensive than images from previous cases. They're simply going to judge based on gut instinct, based on personal values. Where court precedent DOES apply is when the judge sees charges based on laws that have been generally debunked on legal grounds in past cases. In the pre-trial hearing he'll throw out such charges, as happened in Christopher Handley's case. I assume the judge also has to power to look at the images and say "there's no way any reasonable person would consider these obscene; this doesn't deserve to go to trial."

That's more important than you seem to think. Imagine if your neck was on the line? Wouldn't you care about minimizing risks? I'm sort of puzzled that you acknowledge how fuzzy obscenity law is, then immediately follow that up with a definite, unqualified statement. Take a look at the Miller Test. There are no definites, especially when artistic and literary value are part of the definition. In fact, JAST specifically explained that they believe Littlewitch Romanesque was ok uncensored because they could demonstrate artistic or literary value. Starless... maybe not. And I guess they thought the same about Shiny Days, for whatever reason. That's an argument I specifically address in my Shiny Days article. I consider that an alarming viewpoint that tends to restrict freedom of expression rather than promote it. If you forbid compromise and workarounds, then you're essentially magnifying the chilling effect of the law. That's NOT the line to toe if you want to see more extreme content down the line.

Oops. I was misled by the way they mixed the case with the judge's own indiscretions. Nonetheless, the charges weren't bestiality (there's separate laws regulating bestiality). The charges were obscenity. Obscenity law does not distinguish between drawn and real acts--the key element is offensiveness. I have nothing to prove to you. You're the silly one for accusing JAST of lying through their teeth that this is a legal issue. Ask a lawyer specializing in obscenity law if you don't want to believe me. Or just read my Shiny Days article (including the relevant comment). I didn't write a companion article for Starless because the game didn't interest me sufficiently to invest the time in giving it a proper write-up, and my focus is more on anti-loli legislation for personal reasons. I'm not getting paid enough to do your legal research for you. You're on your own there.

And I'm telling you that you're wrong in this specific context. Obscenity law applies to drawn depictions as much as it applies to fictional depictions using real actors.

You're dismissing relevant evidence based on an irrelevant distinction. You don't understand obscenity law do you?

Why yes, there is evidence that the US prosecutes such thought crimes.

Why isn't Shiny Days in the ad?! *Flips table* General forum ads are fine, but the most effective ones will be affiliate links in related topics. Like imagine if a thread has the Shiny Days tag, then an affiliate link displays somewhere with a link to the game. People won't pay attention to ads unless they're relevant.

Art restored by the (un)official patch did not have mosaics. Some weird zooming issues did occur as a result of the localization process, which JAST is currently working on fixing. It took fans comparing the Japanese and English versions side-by-side to catch the issue. You're implying that content should be sterilized to meet your standards / tastes. That's a message likely to provoke outrage. The content was censored for legal reasons. Never forget that. It's a title about degradation and sexual slavery. It's not supposed to be pleasant.

This is probably the best-suited Japanese VN I've seen so far. However, if the point is to learn English you want something with voices--and they have to be English voices. I'm not sure if ANY of the games recommended meet this condition. Obviously OELVNs and mainstream sorts of games (i.e., not VNs) are where you'd be most likely to find full English voices. Honestly, what you're probably looking for are picture books with audio recordings. I use to read / listen to those as a child.

Giving a loli game to your 7-year-old niece is probably not the greatest idea. Unless you're trying to groom her. I know it's tempting because of the light atmosphere and comedy, but in this case it's probably prudent to "think of the children". Now if she were 12, that would be more in the strike zone.

IP address get-to! Gotta catch them all.

If my Heart had Wings was intended for 12-year-old French girls, I heard. But really, VNs aren't generally meant for children, at least the Japanese ones. OELVNs would be your best bet.

Let's all rant at each other using machine-translated Japanese rather than a language we commonly understand! That'll definitely avoid misunderstandings! Well...

You should only feel guilty if you're also straight and fervently anti-censorship (except when it comes to material that offends you). It's a message of hypocrisy, and that was my point. I posted an edited version on my personal blog.

XReaper doesn't give much care to his phrasing, but he's saying Fraternite is dark and suggests Starless isn't dark enough.

I'm from the US. We have a strong tradition of freedom here signified in the words of the US Declaration of Independence: All men (and only men, but not African men) are created equal. We have a right to Life (except if drafted into the army), Liberty (except when others disagree with you), and the pursuit of Happiness (except if you're a repressed minority). In addition, we enjoy unparalleled freedom of expression and as a culture we're strongly opposed to censorship in all its forms. We believe in democracy and the right for the people to decide their own government, both at home and abroad. We believe that America is a model for democracy everywhere, and that other nations should follow our example. American, and proud of it.