>We'd have to ban all AI realism
Of course. I didn't mean it like that, was thinking along the lines of lora training and
mostly involvement of real CP in that case.

>celebrity fakes
I don't care about those, apart from the fact, that people with money and power might be a problem for the board.
thought that the "nothing real" rule should cover that anyway.
On the other hand, I myself made a manga involving some British Royals a while back (unpublished) it is a manga,
and a story featuring some real people and some fantasy girls (reality / fantasy crossover you know, like roger rabbit).
The real persons are so far mentioned just in name only, but still... glass house, bricks...
Actually I haven't seen anything like celeb-fakes on Gurochan so far, but maybe I just missed it. Doesn't appear to be a problem.
I used that as an example for a case, where something real had been altered to look obviously fake, but still would
be a problem, since the real nature of the original would be still recognizable.

>if someone needs a knife or a coffee cup or a dildo as a prop
totally agree. was going to mention that and put emphasis on persons, especially children, but...

>The biggest realism no-no is using a particular real child for AI porn.

... I didn't want my post to look like yet another loli-fan bashing, which it is not.
I do however think, that given the nature of most international politics, this is the topic with the highest potential
of endangering the board and therefore should be handled with caution.

my idea was to create a guideline along which lines to think when posting AI content with realistic style to the board,
since the same questions and misunderstandings seem to occur again and again.
Maybe it would be helpful, to put here some links to examples how to do it right.
What not to do is harder to visually explain, since it gets deleted.

just two quick examples no specific reason for my choice picked the first I saw:

>>30966
that image is still a bit problematic imo. This is a typical filter often used on photos,
so it could be just an altered photography which would be "real"

>>30923
this image on the other hand uses realism, but is for very obvious reasons not real at all.
(not a "fake" which could still mean real. damned terminology.)
but as I mentioned above, something like this depends on the kind of content and not everyone wants to do "fantasy".

Still, I said it before in another discussion:
the problem with slapping some cat's ears on something that looks 100% like real CP is,
that it does not change the nature or perception of the content.

post 30923 on the other hand makes very clear, that this is not real and more important not realistic.
at least in my opinion. no idea what lawyers, depending on the country would say to that,
but again just in my opinion this one does not contradict the rules of Gurochan
and that should be enough.