There IS visible genitalia, but also a nude loli sitting on the lap of a nude man is pushing it as is.
Yeah I know, that's why I said *my bad*.
Post #268456

Isn't the image on konachan a waifu version?
When I uploade the version on Twitter it's jpeg with artifacts and not a png.
I cleaned it with waifu, yes. But there was no change in the drawing visually, and no change in resolution, so there was no real need to upload the one from Pixiv.

There's technically nothing wrong with using waifu to clean things up.
Thought a original version would be more appreciated than a waifu version that is no longer an original.
It's not been enlarged though, is my point. It's still the exact same image.

Edit: I'll just ask someone.

Edit 2: From an Admin:

"I'd say generally going by upload date (in the case of identical quality of images) makes the most sense
so whatever is uploaded second is the repost, if there's no discernible difference in quality between the two images"
Regarding post #268404 - The character outlines are "eye catching" in all the wrong ways: They don't conform the the character with background showing between the character and the character outline. The outlines have gaps in them and in areas the line work looks aliased. Then there are those random white spots. It is for these reasons, I did not approve the image. Other mods may have other/additional issues with the image.
I'm pretty sure it was upscaled by the third party person who removed the text from the original too. The colors and line work looked a bit muddied to me, and the resolution of the image from Twitter, the source, is smaller.
Really?
Oh that's too bad.
It was a beautiful image.
It wasn't upscaled, somone just ran it thru a lot of noise reduction.
Yeah, something like that will do it too. Make it too blobby.
Best not to source jpeg images from Twitter. It has a horrible compression ratio that'll tank quality on most images if you try to fix it.

PNG with alpha channel gets around it.
I think she may have gotten that particular image from Danbooru.
Post #270403

Wasn't quite sure if she is looking enough like a loli. So I deleted it.
If she doesn't, could someone bring it back?
That would be kind. :3

(I have an very confusing day today hngh ~)

Edit: Thank you <3
BattlequeenYume said:
Post #270403

Wasn't quite sure if she is looking enough like a loli. So I deleted it.
If she doesn't, could someone bring it back?
That would be kind. :3

(I have an very confusing day today hngh ~)
post #270391 wasn't tagged as loli, so pretty sure it was fine.
The only reason I didn't like it was because her back is too curved. But I approved them both anyways.
Post #270607

Potential explicit loli isn't explicit loli.
So shouldn't be in the questionable ratio then? :<

Gnaaah damn it.
BattlequeenYume said:
Post #270607

Potential explicit loli isn't explicit loli.
So shouldn't be in the questionable ratio then? :<

Gnaaah damn it.
It would've been pointless for me to add the pussy_juice tag, change the rating, and THEN delete it. I just saved a few extra steps.

Plus her proportions are bad.
Okay.
Just beeing mad about my mistake here. :3
What was the problem with Post #271342 ?
Her lower half is facing a different direction than her torso and it looked weird.
Post #271470

Reason: Artifacts, which artifacts?
Blocking artifacts throughout the background and also clearly visible in the shading on the the girls sleeves. In fact is is so intense throughout the background that the background may have been upscaled.
Okay learned something new today. ^^
Those aren't artifacts, that's super low resolution detail work. The things in the foreground on the clothing are supposed to be feathers.

But yeah, that's why it wouldn't have been approved. I would have deleted it sooner had I been paying closer attention to the BG, actually.