..But not all? Or none? I can even see with my own eyes right now Gem art that doesn't have any anthro features onsite that hasn't been removed. And it was posted five months ago. Legit the only thing nonhuman is the skin color, the gem isn't even showing. Should I be flagging posts like this, or are they grandfathered in?

Preferably, I'd like to see some sort of official clarification on non-anthro Gems if this site isn't going to go all or nothing on them. What makes a non-anthro Gem acceptable despite appearing exactly like a recolored human, and not appearing alongside any anthros? Does the gem matter at all? Because according to the guidelines, skin color isn't enough.

If you would like to know why a specific post was not deleted when you feel it should have been deleted, you can ask the staff member who approved it why they did so.

Could you link the post(s) in question? Sometimes we take into account "attenuating" factors that most users may not be aware of.

This one I definitely don't think qualifies.

There's also quite a few pieces involving Jasper about, though I'm not sure if her nose counts as an alien feature or not? Or the stripes?

Not to mention plenty of Peridot art. The only things that I could see counting as alien features on her are her gem and limb enhancers -- but often she isn't even wearing the latter.

Most of these I do understand are older posts, but it's still boggling to me that they would be grandfathered rather than removed if it should be understood that Gems aren't furry and shouldn't be posted like that anymore. It feels a lot less clear than the distinction between, say, posting catgirls and regular lolis.

I guess my thing is, I need to know where the line is just in case I find more Gem art to upload? I just got three pieces deleted, all of which had what I thought were alien enough features to be posted.

posssauce said:
This one I definitely don't think qualifies.

There's also quite a few pieces involving Jasper about, though I'm not sure if her nose counts as an alien feature or not? Or the stripes?

Not to mention plenty of Peridot art. The only things that I could see counting as alien features on her are her gem and limb enhancers -- but often she isn't even wearing the latter.

I definitely wouldn't consider those relevant. Although I also don't consider much of what the_legend_of_zelda has to be relevant either, so...

It seems like most of these were from before Steven Universe gems were firmly codified as "humans of another color". They most likely survived the purge by accident.
Others seem like approval mistakes. We are not infallible, and sometimes posts slip through the cracks.

As gattonero pointed out, if you think that something should not have been approved, simply message the staff member who approved it.

posssauce said:
(...)

Thank you for pointing out the issue. Most of the posts that you presented as examples were indeed approved by mistake and have been deleted, since only posts originally uploaded in 2015 or before are considered grandfathered_content and humans with technicolour skin are still not considered relevant.

One minor exception is post #1564626, since Peridot's floating fingers are enough to classify her as a humanoid.

There is no need to report SU posts for being irrelevant, staff is now reviewing posts uploaded after 2015.

Thanks, y'all. It's much appreciated.

watsit said:
I definitely wouldn't consider those relevant. Although I also don't consider much of what the_legend_of_zelda has to be relevant either, so...

Yeah, I don't either, because even in games hylians are addressed as "humans" really often and the only deviation from human is pointy ears, but current guidelines make the differenciation with anatomical deviation and if the ears are clearly non-human it's acceptable.

bitwolfy said:
It seems like most of these were from before Steven Universe gems were firmly codified as "humans of another color". They most likely survived the purge by accident.
Others seem like approval mistakes. We are not infallible, and sometimes posts slip through the cracks.

As gattonero pointed out, if you think that something should not have been approved, simply message the staff member who approved it.

I thought things that were present before a change were grandfathered in and wouldn't be deleted? Anything more recent than the change should be deleted, but anything from before the change should have been left up.

furrin_gok said:
I thought things that were present before a change were grandfathered in and wouldn't be deleted?

I think that only applies for a change in the rules, not necessarily a clarified definition. Humans and photos for example, used to be explicitly allowed, so when the rule changed to disallow them, preexisting posts were grandfathered in. But things like this where it was presumed some feature classified a species as humanoid, avoiding the no-humans rule according to the janitors that approved them, was eventually clarified to not count as humanoid, the no-humans rule that existed when those posts were made applied to them.