SparktehFox: Rule 34 is "if it exists, there is porn of it" Just because there is an episode with Ren and Stimpy in pornographic environment, does not bar the fact that Ren and Stimpy exist, and there is porn of them. That rule in no way states it's limited to fanart.
chicknclub: @SparktehFox: Listen to yourself! Can't you follow this: If you take a clip from a porn show, is it rule 34? Of course not. Same thing if you take a clip from the actual Ren and Stimpy show - of course it's not rule 34.
Look, rule 34 isn't just any porn. It is something that you are supposed to invoke when you look at a character that you don't think there is porn of, then you expect to see some porn of it. This is kinda forgotten but on imageboards you would go for example "rule 34 on that girl in the background with the mini skirt" and then wait to see if someone delivers.
If you watch this show you can go "rule 34 on that chick that is being washed". If someone then posts the same scene as you were watching when you laid out the challange, it's not rule 34! Nothing was delivered. It's a unaltered clip from the actual show that you just were watching, it already existed and proves nothing when it comes to whether or not there is porn of her.
I could try to explain it in simpler terms if you wish me to but I hope it's not needed.
SparktehFox: @chicknclub: That's not what Rule 34 states, which is simply "If it exists, there is porn of it." You are clinging to rule 35 which states "If there is not porn of it, porn will be made of it."
chicknclub: @SparktehFox: No! Listen: If it exists, and already is porn, it never will apply to rule 34. The true meaning of rule 34 has been lost and a lot of people today seem to think that "rule 34" is synonym to "porn". This is not so. Only something that is NOT porn can have the rule 34 applied to it.
If this Ren & Stimpy image is to be considered porn it cannot have R34 applied to it because it is already porn. If this image is not porn it could have R34 applied to it but doesn't belong on this site since it isn't porn.
I thought I could explain it in simpler terms before but I was wrong. Right now I can't think of anything to type that explains it simpler than my previous post.
@Cculber007: I made one for you but you never picked it up! It got old and started to attract flies so I had to throw it away.
- Reply
Your statement is invalid.
- Reply
@Anonymous: Posting this is like posting a clip from a porno movie where two people are fucking and then claiming it applies to rule 34.
Look, rule 34 isn't just any porn. It is something that you are supposed to invoke when you look at a character that you don't think there is porn of, then you expect to see some porn of it. This is kinda forgotten but on imageboards you would go for example "rule 34 on that girl in the background with the mini skirt" and then wait to see if someone delivers.
If you watch this show you can go "rule 34 on that chick that is being washed". If someone then posts the same scene as you were watching when you laid out the challange, it's not rule 34! Nothing was delivered. It's a unaltered clip from the actual show that you just were watching, it already existed and proves nothing when it comes to whether or not there is porn of her.
I could try to explain it in simpler terms if you wish me to but I hope it's not needed.
If this Ren & Stimpy image is to be considered porn it cannot have R34 applied to it because it is already porn. If this image is not porn it could have R34 applied to it but doesn't belong on this site since it isn't porn.
I thought I could explain it in simpler terms before but I was wrong. Right now I can't think of anything to type that explains it simpler than my previous post.
@Cculber007: I made one for you but you never picked it up! It got old and started to attract flies so I had to throw it away.