Roleplay/Partyfinder Discrepancies & Policy Enforcement by GM's

[Nakarumi]

The problem is that the conflation doesn't matter. SE is technically well within their rights to request that 18+ adverts not be posted publicly because the game is legally rated and breaches of that legal rating could get them into trouble. So, if the stance is "You cannot have 18+ adverts on PF because we cannot condone anything above our legal rating on an official level" then that is a fair stance. It doesn't matter if your 18+ content isn't sexual, you have still rated it as more mature than the game's legally intended audience and SE can, rightly, ask you to not use PF to advertise content above that age limit. Legally, in fact, they might very well have to. Recall that this is the same game that can only have minor depictions of blood and has previously had to outright manipulate cutscenes they wanted to do (like a soldier being shot with an arrow I'm fairly certain is an exact example Yoshida himself gave) because the legal rating of the game made those depictions inappropriate.

This is already protected by their statement: "Online interactions are not rated."

[TheRedChameleon]

This is already protected by their statement: "Online interactions are not rated."

Also protected by the fact that they are not legal bodies capable of issuing fines, the only tool they can use is advocating for retailer boycotts which would be an outlandish move for them to make.