MAP Forum

I had asked twice in other threads whether simply referring to manga by name was allowed or not and had not received a response. Thus I was under the impression that it was allowed.

I would point out that a very strict interpretation of the rule might also prohibit any discussion of Kodomo no Jikan, since that more-or-less mainstream manga is banned in the West.

Split topic. New thread for discussing forum matters, please.

I'd been told the above-mentioned is just a mainstream anime and nothing of concern as regards prohibited images in US, Australia, Sweden etc.

Certainly you can't mention anything pornographic as per rule 2, and this is pretty clear from the rules. It endangers the forum operators and forum host to be seen as a conduit for that, particularly with minor users. We rely on volunteers to check everything that is mentioned on the forum, and in some cases these volunteers may be leaning on legitimate reasoning (content moderation) since the content they are potentially viewing is illegal in their jurisdiction. Of course that legitimate reasoning might be established 2 years after their HD was confiscated, in a lengthy, embarrassing and expensive court trial.

[I might or might not break the rule in this post. That's the point, though.]

The Kodomo no Jikan anime has been largely sanitized, but the original manga is banned in the West because of a single panel that shows 9-year-old Kokonoe Rin masturbating with a detachable shower head. That one scene would definitely fit into any erotic manga.

The grey area regarding what is "mainstream" in Japan can get very fuzzy. In this thread, I mention two lolicon/part-lolicon anime of great historical significance as part of my argument. That is allowed? (I would hope so.)

We can go much further: what about Naruko Hanaharu's Shoujo Material, the best-selling erotic manga of all time and a literal cultural phenomenon in Japan, which at its release led to long lines at shops that sold it (the author has worked on many popular non-ero anime too). It's about half lolicon. Should we be prohibited from discussing such a culturally important work by name? Similarly, the works I mentioned by name in the posts you edited, albeit erotic in nature, were popular and well-received in Japanese otaku circles even beyond ordinary fans of lolicon material.

In any case, the rule as it stands isn't clear at all. "Directing" sounds like what's forbidden is specifically linking to a work, rather than general discussion of such.

Your first example shows just how blurred the boundary is with manga, but the boundary with respect to this forum is simple. Do not direct a forum user to the edition of said artwork that violates statutes in some of MAP Forum's served jurisdictions, as this will lead to warning and (probably accelerated) suspension of a repeat offending account. There is some degree of privilege people in certain parts of the world benefit from, with constitutional protections, and we have to remain mindful that others do not always have those privileges.

It is preferred that in discussing erotic manga works that might be prohibited, you do not share the name, or provide any information that might be seen as directing a forum user to that material. We will need to address this as we would material that is illegal in your jurisdiction, with dark web CP sites only being named after they have been subject to an investigation, shut down and named in the media.

I'm quite satisfied your single post linked is critical commentary and not direction, but please be careful in the future when mentioning series. As a rule of thumb, if it has a Wikipedia/IMDB article, it can be mentioned, alongside any controversy (this may be instructive in helping viewers avoid any material that violates local laws).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodomo_no_Jikan

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... in_English

There's also nothing wrong with disclaimers. If the material you are discussing (and not directing a user to) has been subject to public scrutiny (e.g. as to be mentioned on a list such as above), but may in some of its iterations, violate some laws, point this out, so users can avoid running searches for that material.

Beyond this, do not share links to or direct users to conventional erotica or erotic manga regardless of content.

Another example... If sharing a link to the Wikipedia article for Virgin Killer (an album whose cover artwork sparked a major public controversy years after the fact), mention that users may want to avoid visiting said page for that reason. While I'm pretty sure viewing the image on Wikipedia and having ones browser cache the image would be interpreted as a legitimate reason in most jurisdictions where it is controlled, deliberately downloading it and keeping it for some reason or another would most certainly be problematic.

You mention Wikipedia/IMDB pages. What about AnimeNewsNetwork? While being perhaps the most mainstream news site of its kind, it has a page dedicated to Comic LO (so does Wikipedia for that matter) and the most popular associated works, including those I mentioned. The main author I had named has [no thank you] and was in the news several times, including for his non-ero work Prism. His erotic manga also have their own pages because of his popularity.

Sites like ANN can be linked as long as the linked page doesn't violate, but personally, I would see their notability demands as more of a niche thing. It's something we haven't considered as a mod group yet, so I'd have to ask the others.

Generally we will moderate according to a good faith interpretation of not directing traffic to, or providing tips to find erotica. W. respect prohibited images, simply mentioning the name of a set which is not notable enough to be seen as a broader cultural phenomenon, is problematic. This is because you would be exhausting the reasonable possibilities as to why you are providing this information, if, for example, Wikipedia or IMDB did not deem it notable.

Imageboards and forums upon which this material is shared should be avoided, and not mentioned. We stopped mentioning a major Lolicon board on Newgon, for example, but sites like Pawoo\Baraag get mentions (alongside warnings and disclaimers) as they are broadly culturally relevant clear web sites that have been around for years. Any self-respecting fediverse admin setting up a server these days might want to consider blocking baraag, etc, as a matter of content moderation.

Jim Burton wrote: Sat Mar 29, 2025 8:45 pm Sites like ANN can be linked as long as the linked page doesn't violate, but personally, I would see their notability demands as more of a niche thing. It's something we haven't considered as a mod group yet, so I'd have to ask the others.

It generally gives dedicated pages only to works with a major publisher and broad circulation. It's simply a fact that some high-quality lolicon works fit the bill, especially when the authors are also involved in non-ero work.

Jim Burton wrote: Sat Mar 29, 2025 8:45 pm Generally we will moderate according to a good faith interpretation of not directing traffic to, or providing tips to find erotica. W. respect prohibited images, simply mentioning the name of a set which is not notable enough to be seen as a broader cultural phenomenon, is problematic. This is because you would be exhausting the reasonable possibilities as to why you are providing this information, if, for example, Wikipedia or IMDB did not deem it notable.

Is it a "broader cultural phenomenon" that some mangaka like Naruko Hanaharu and Higashiyama Show start their careers in erotica, but later publish non-ero works that become popular? In other words, their start off as "niche" artists but later become mainstream. They simply are very good manga artists altogether.

Jim Burton wrote: Sat Mar 29, 2025 8:45 pm Imageboards and forums upon which this material is shared should be avoided, and not mentioned. We stopped mentioning a major Lolicon board on Newgon, for example, but sites like Pawoo\Baraag get mentions (alongside warnings and disclaimers) as they are broadly culturally relevant clear web sites that have been around for years. Any self-respecting fediverse admin setting up a server these days might want to consider blocking baraag, etc, as a matter of content moderation.

That much is clear from the rules as they are written now.