Fictional violence is not applicable as an exception to rule 2 as no definition of what constitutes violence is expressed. None of what you stated is in either rule 2 or 16. Promotion of materials that contains violence does fall under a violation of rule 2 per written definition.
Fictional violence is, by definition, fictional. I expect normal human beings to understand that violence that does not exist in reality is not capable of being violent in reality. This is also not the promotion of violence, and the author's work is an attempt to ward people away from the violence of dystopia.
Again there is no definition or differentiation of what constitutes violence per rule 2. This means anything that can be described as violence falls under rule 2.
No, because it's explicitly portrayed as a dystopia. Furthermore, GoldenPlains isn't endorsing it, and it's also intentionally identified as fiction.
Fictional violence is not applicable as an exception to rule 2 as no definition of what constitutes violence is expressed. None of what you stated is in either rule 2 or 16. Promotion of materials that contains violence does fall under a violation of rule 2 per written definition.
Fictional violence is, by definition, fictional. I expect normal human beings to understand that violence that does not exist in reality is not capable of being violent in reality. This is also not the promotion of violence, and the author's work is an attempt to ward people away from the violence of dystopia.
Again, you know this.
Again there is no definition or differentiation of what constitutes violence per rule 2. This means anything that can be described as violence falls under rule 2.
No, that is your assertion because you are deliberately choosing to define every word beyond all possible meaning.