>>1318895Could you explain that a bit more? From what I understand, /c/ was never intended to be sexual. Just heart-meltingly adorable. The rules I wrote up leave room for non-nude "tease" sort of images on /e/ (that you can apparently find on /c/ too).
>>1318900I think what they're saying is that if a girl is shown "wet" that the wetness should be obviously vaginal, not ambiguous and possibly something else. So "dripping wet" would be allowed whereas "splattered" would not.
Personally I find this covered by the softcore/alternative(/d/) rules.
>>1318883Are you talking about mosaics and censor bars? Some people like "convenient" censoring where girls are covered by an integrated part of the image, like a hand or a potted plant. Some pictures are hot despite censorship as well o_o;;
