Uploaded by Background Pony #D05E
640x480 JPG 28 kBInterested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Tags
+-SH suggestive197646 +-SH fluttershy269641 +-SH human270406 +-SH g42131311 +-SH belly54392 +-SH belly button118979 +-SH black underwear5018 +-SH bra23217 +-SH breasts417066 +-SH cleavage49713 +-SH clothes681370 +-SH crop top bra1220 +-SH female1914892 +-SH human exhibitionism622 +-SH irl86743 +-SH irl human30249 +-SH mismatched underwear87 +-SH model766 +-SH panties67460 +-SH photo101055 +-SH pink underwear4774 +-SH pony print underwear75 +-SH silly panties260 +-SH solo1509507 +-SH solo female248551 +-SH underwear83541
Source
not provided yet
Loading...
Loading...
Given that this series of photos involves no nudity whatsoever, I certainly hope so.
I want to make it clear that in this post I meant repeatedly removing automatically spoilered/hidden tags (such as explicit, or in this case, human nudity) when you know you shouldn’t could end up getting you banned. Not like removing it once will make that happen.
It’s still early morning for most of the staff so they’ll come and settle everything when they can : ) Don’t worry about it too much. It’s clear there’s a lot of confusion about the human nudity tag still. It’s a new rule and the terminology/semantics seems to be preventing people from wrapping their heads around it.
But she’s not nude. Exhibitionist, certainly. But not nude. Do you see naughty bits? I don’t.
Sources needed.
>possible jail-bait trap here
Seriously, as long as one does not attempt to touch, who the hell cares?
never mind then
but still, all I see is covered “naughty bits” (well, she’s 10% covered)
no nudity
Well I still think its a bit silly but alright
yes, she is legal
possible jail-bait trap here
https://derpiboo.ru/meta/poll-on-expanding-rule-5
I was feeling uppity. That tag irritated the piss out of me…