Welcome to Inkbunny...
Allowed ratings
To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )
Crassus
Crassus' Scraps (1)

Were the Cub Porn Ban Votes FAKED?

Medium (920px wide max)
Wide - use max window width - scroll to see page ⇅
Fit all of image in window
set default image size: small | medium | wide
by Crassus
6/01 -- Just a quick edit..

A lot has gone on over these past few days. Lots of people have seen this post and made very strong arguments in the comments. I share people's concern for the escalation of things that mean so much to them. I respect everyone's opinion on these matters. They're hot topics, and they deeply reach into some of the very elements of what it means to be furry.

The hate has to stop, guys. Everyone needs to relax and chill. It's all cool.

FYI: Someone posted a dump of all of Tartii's FA posts prior to a purge in 2010. This is something both horrible and fascinating. Horrible that someone did not respect her privacy, but fascinating in that it gave me the ability to gain insight on someone I have never met or spoken to. To see the cubby, cute, loving and adorable things she drew, I can tell this is something that meant a great deal to her and she loved very much. Something massive had to happen to this person to pull away from it. As someone who's been attacked in the past, I know what it feels like, and I 100% sympathize with this person.

The hate has to stop guys. It just does. Lay off her; lay off the subject entirely for a while guys. Just chill. Smoke a joint or something. She doesn't deserve the type of ire that people have been pointing at her. Tartii, if you're reading this, I hope you're doing okay and I really think you're a good person.

That's all I wanted to say. Peace.


" Just thought you all should know. Several topics have been compromised with this exploit as well.


https://support.furrynetwork.com/topics/958-voting-pron...

1389
votes were cast in less than 24 hours to ban cub porn on FurryNetwork. But it turns out that there is a high chance of probability that a huge amount of those votes were faked. How?

Because up until someone pointed it out to Varka, you did not need to have an account to vote on support topics. This means that one person could vote repeatedly by spoofing their IP using proxy services like TOR and are likely illegitimate. There was a report of one person voting over 200 times.

Upon enacting the ban, Varka put out the statement: "we had a large number of our users express concerns about our content policy," but it may turn out that the number of voices calling out for the ban were much smaller than we all thought.

Keywords
cub 121,902, porn 5,553, ban 28, furrynetwork 3
Details
Type: Picture/Pinup
Published: 2 years, 2 months ago
Rating: General

MD5 Hash for Page 1... Show Find Identical Posts [?]
Stats
1,800 views
29 favorites
139 comments

BBCode Tags Show [?]
 
Loupy
2 years, 2 months ago
They basically did the vote to cover the fact they will follow the loud anti-cub minority whatever happens in my opinion.
ProjectDemise
2 years, 2 months ago
I'm pretty sure it isn't a minority. Most people are squicked by what they see as child pornography, even if it's just a drawing and even if it's a furry not a human. I think the actual minority are the people who enjoy cub art (myself included).
Loupy
2 years, 2 months ago
Cub art isn't child pornography.
greenmont
2 years, 2 months ago
Most people are squicked by age-play and cub porn, then.
fluffderp
2 years, 2 months ago
A lot of people are squicked by furry porn in general, and because they don't understand it, and might falsely view it as a desire to hurt animals or something, or eat people if they see vore, or whatever else weird stuff furries are often into, they might want to ban it "for the sake of the poor children".
greenmont
2 years, 2 months ago
Hey, it seems you understand their motivations and why those motivations are flawed.

It would probably be better to try and make the (correct) argument that cub/ageplay are not related to pedophilia in a constructive way and get them to understand the flaws and misunderstandings behind their argument, than to get mad about it and make a bunch of ragey posts.

In the mean-time I have no problem dealing with the idea that my kink upsets a lot of people and that they'd prefer not to see it. It shouldn't have been banned from the site in my opinion (unless other similarly extreme content were also banned?), but its impact on me is not very high.
fergus
2 years, 2 months ago
People assume all furries are zoophiliacs. The fact that FA did this means not only do they not know anything about the community they hosted, but that knowing anything about it is physically impossible for them.
Danjen
2 years, 2 months ago
The goalposts are back over there
greenmont
2 years, 2 months ago
Give the Internet Argument Playbook shit a rest. I didn't make the first argument, and the first post simply said that those people see cub art as equivalent to child pornography, not that the comparison was valid.

Zephri
2 years, 2 months ago
It's kinda ironic a minority attempting to suppress another minority.
Taleir
2 years, 2 months ago
There is also the fact that FurryNetwork came out and announced they would defend artistic freedoms and keep cub-porn on the site.  This had the effect of pacifying a lot of cub defenders, leading them to think the argument was over and got on with other things.  This meant that when the vote went on, most of the people who would have voted against the ban weren't present or even aware a vote was occurring.  The people who were still fighting for the ban, though, were still very much present.

So, whether on purpose or not, Varka royally screwed over the cub supporters with that false-announcement.  Even if the voting was legitimate, which it probably wasn't, this would still suggest the results would be skewed against the cub supporters.
Chelsea
2 years, 2 months ago
I wasn t aware until the vote was already closed, yet i had an account there.
Vladimir
2 years, 2 months ago
Agree D:
Danjen
2 years, 2 months ago
>"This had the effect of pacifying a lot of cub defenders"
Jukain
2 years, 2 months ago
Enough of the hate, just let people do what they want.  Otherwise, you just create more hate and before you know it, you hate everything.  I can almost guarantee the people behind this hate furries in general as well.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" Enough of the hate

What are you talking about?
Kamashari
2 years, 2 months ago
Nevermind, I don't know if this is a positive or negative comment. Sounds negative.
Jukain
2 years, 2 months ago
This wasn't meant to be negative.  All I'm saying is that all things like this do is generate hate, and that's not good for anybody.
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
No it doesn't generate hate, it generates awareness at the underhanded methods these people use to push their ideas and tastes on others
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
I'm not in any way trying to spread hate on anyone. Everyone has a right to their opinion. All I'm trying to do is make sure that people are aware of as many facts as possible, because most people wouldn't think to check these small little details. I wouldn't have even thought of it if someone hadn't told me about it. And that set off a whole chain reaction of "if x = this then do y" type cascades... "If (votes = fake) and if (Varka = knowledgeable) then why did he ban anyways?"
Jukain
2 years, 2 months ago
I didn't mean that, either.  I didn't have time to edit it and say so.  I know you're trying to raise awareness.  If it helps, I'm truly against the people who flooded with these votes.  They're the ones who don't even like furries to begin with.  I am sorry for causing such confusion, though.  I don't know how to say things sometimes.  Please don't be angry with me.
jbyoung100
2 years, 2 months ago
Hmm, I smell FA trolls.
HeavyheartHare
2 years, 2 months ago
They have a peculiar stench. I can best describe that odor as "hypocrisy". Want to ban cub, while so many of them post rape, snuff, and the like...
NinoM4ster
2 years, 2 months ago
" Well spotted! Login / registration is now required to vote.


well, it seems ok now...
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
Yep. After the fact that all those fake votes came in. So it makes you wonder, why did they decide to ban so quickly when it was known that the votes were compromised?
NinoM4ster
2 years, 2 months ago
true...  =/
FurrinGok
2 years, 2 months ago
In addition to the large number of votes, the merchant system they wanted to use wouldn't work for them if they allowed cub, which heavily weighed in favor of the ban anyways. Whether this is better or worse is for you to form an opinion on.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" FurrinGok wrote:
In addition to the large number of votes, the merchant system they wanted to use wouldn't work for them if they allowed cub


Why not?

" which heavily weighed in favor of the ban anyways.


How can you say it weighed in favor of the ban if the votes are fake?
NaughtyThorn
2 years, 2 months ago
The weighing in favor is from the fact that the merchant system wouldn't work, not from the fraudulent votes. As to why, the companies who do the credit card processing for such merchant systems have their own rules of what they will and won't do transactions for. Currently, most adult artists get away with being paid for their services though these card processors by not explicitly stating what the charge is for. By placing the merchant system on the same site as the material and the advertising the link becomes clear. Even for non-cub works there are few credit card processors who are willing to explicitly work with adult performers/artists/creators and those that do are able to charge exorbitant rates. I honestly don't see FN's proposed plan working at all, cub content or not.
BunnyFoxglove
2 years, 2 months ago
We'll see how long the merchant system lasts when they find out about the bestiality, along with other fetishes. Even if their hosts allow it, most of the payment systems do not.
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
One good example of why not. As far as I can tell this hasn't changed much, but at the time the only payment processor allowing transactions for adult content, and thus viable for a furry art site with adult art, was AlertPay. FurAffinity's banning of cub content specifically came about because AlertPay dropped them citing the cub content is against their ToS. Far as I know, though, it didn't do FA any good because AlertPay still refuses to do business with them.
fryhop
2 years, 2 months ago
even so they still had a larger number pro ban even after the duplicates were taken away.
Zaltys
2 years, 2 months ago
Which is to be expected since the vote only ran for a few days and those who wanted it banned had large "go vote for this"-style campaigns.

Whereas many (most?) of the users who would've opposed the ban only learned about it afterwards, because they generally don't follow artists and blogs that are anti-porn and pro-censorship.
Zaltys
2 years, 2 months ago
Not to mention that FN administration had just released a statement that extreme content will be allowed - https://twitter.com/FurryNetwork/status/735910404434460673

When I saw that vote, I chose to ignore it. Because it seemed obvious that FN wouldn't ban anything. I wonder how many others didn't take it seriously until it actually happened.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" Zaltys wrote:
Which is to be expected since the vote only ran for a few days

It wasn't a few days. It was less than 24 hours. The thread was created on May 26th and locked that evening.

" and those who wanted it banned had large "go vote for this"-style campaigns.

To suggest that the campaign was the reason why they gained so many votes ignores the evidence shown before you. It is more likely that the votes were spoofed and compromised by a few individuals, not by a mass campaign.

" Whereas many (most?) of the users who would've opposed the ban only learned about it afterwards, because they generally don't follow artists and blogs that are anti-porn and pro-censorship.

This is a valid point, especially in such a short period of time. For FN to ban cub art based on these preliminary votes that weren't widely known suggests that either Varka made a really bad knee-jerk decision or ignored the fact and went with it.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
There were no votes taken away. And there are no duplicates. Each come from a unique IP address. All one person has to do is keep changing TOR circuits repeatedly and each vote will be cast from a new IP, making it appear unique. You could vote hundreds of times and no one would be able to prove otherwise.
fryhop
2 years, 2 months ago
i know how it works, and i don't care, they can offically do what they want, i'm not really worried about the votes, even the whole thing was one sided, it wasn't the votes it was ambush, i get that there should be a redo in voting, but you won't get an accurate answer in either way. plus the fact that peolpe that like cubs are minority we wouldn't win, because the most group the majority is furries that don't care one way or another and why force them to choose a side? you know. I also get that it was unfair that it happened rather fast and like swift in the night kindof thing where cub lovers thought they were safe but now it's gone, i don't think they would change their mind even if a vote was taken, but it probably be a give it time thing.

you have to consider both sides probably did that cheating vote side, both probbaly would have lowered, i would no doubt it probably would have been still more anti-cubs or even voting with legit voters.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" fryhop wrote:
you have to consider both sides probably did that cheating vote side, both probbaly would have lowered, i would no doubt it probably would have been still more anti-cubs or even voting with legit voters.

The fact remains, these votes should not count for anything regardless who's side they were for on the issue. They can not be properly accounted for, and yet this was the primary reason why erotic cub art was banned:

" Varka wrote:
a large number of our users express concerns about our content policy

He states it right there, clear as can be. But there was no "large number of users." It was a hoax, in all likelihood.

Not only was the tech feature forum an improper place to host a policy discusson more akin to civil rights, but that history has shown democratic majority never rules in favor of the minority and is best handled by magistrates based on principle. And yet, these votes are the exact cause for the ban. You cannot ignore this.
FancyCat
2 years, 2 months ago
But, think of the children!
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" FancyCat wrote:
But, think of the children!


"You're court-ordered NOT to think of the children!"
BullseyeBronco
2 years, 2 months ago
OMG! x3
treos
2 years, 2 months ago
isn't that one of peoples favorite lines when they're out to block and/or censor things that would be even mildly offensive?

oh and to play along: what children? i see no humans here. :P just lots and lots of fur...and scales
Gozoid
2 years, 2 months ago
" If cub artists are excluded from these services, the community stands to lose out on a large scale.


Oh no whatever will furries do without the pedophile segment of their fetish pie chart.
Zaltys
2 years, 2 months ago
You'd be surprised by how many artists have occasionally drawn cubs. FN looked like a site that would allow all content, which is precisely why so many were moving there. Now that it doesn't, the artists might as well stay on the old sites instead of splitting their uploads to multiple places.

Not to mention cub art actually tends to be rated high on sites such as e621. Judging by the favorited-count, some of it is in the top one percent. No matter how you spin it, FN has lost a lot of artists and users because of this decision.
superredfox
2 years, 2 months ago
apparently come to this site. :-P
lazarwolfe
2 years, 2 months ago
Ok, I'm lazy.  I want to vote for allowing cub, each time I try, I end up not finding the link.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
You can't. All of this thread and voting stuff was stopped within a 24-hour period on March 26th. The new legislation was decided upon the next day. That's how fast all of this came down. That's why I'm wondering why FurryNetwork came to such hasty conclusions when Varka was made aware of the possible fraudulent nature of the votes.
Roel
2 years, 2 months ago
Not to be one for the conspiracy, but it is pretty obvious that for some reason he wanted to ban this sort of content. This whole thing I know only from reading about it, but it is such a theatric display...
HeavyheartHare
2 years, 2 months ago
This shit... AGAIN?! The fuck, these are the same fuckers who get off on BESTIALITY, if you want to be loose in how you define this shit!
HeavyheartHare
2 years, 2 months ago
... And snuff, rape, torture...

I certainly hope those people who fancy the above list of the ART depicted here don't fancy fucking someone they're killing!

Which brings us to a double standard with fucking cub porn that struck FA. I love cub porn, in reality, I hate kids. I've also was responsible for reporting on an underaged user. TWICE. Another nice little hypocricy: the same dolts who fancy rape and snuff pics and expecting everyone to believe that THEY will not be responsible for killing someone they're fucking... and yet they assume we who love cub lack ALL clue of what it is not fucking ok to do.

Or it's trolling. Stupidity, or assholery (cruel assholery, to so hypocritically point and label someone a pedo, especially when you have youre head stuck up your ass on what the hell "infantilism" indicates (hint: it does NOT involve children). Funny, I thought a person had to be GUILTY before convicted, and I likewise thought we had freedom of speech & expression!)

Either way, I am NOT amused.
Vladimir
2 years, 2 months ago
I don't mind either of your themes... well as long as they are cubs =)
treos
2 years, 2 months ago
funny you should mention the "innocent till proven guilty" aka "due process".

theres apparently a feminist working on that...on stooping that concept.
NioTechCCL17
2 years, 2 months ago
*Takes a handful of Popcorn* Now THIS is the best movie I've ever seen all week. Bravo.
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
The ironic thing is the person who started the petition to ban cub on FN was a cub artist herself AND has an account here on IB
Vladimir
2 years, 2 months ago
source plz?
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
https://inkbunny.net/journalview.php?id=231881  i can only prove she has an account here but people who "know" her claim she used to draw cub art but quit for some reason
Roel
2 years, 2 months ago
Neophyte's fervour.

When you turn away from a belief and/or towards new one, you go to further lengths to prove your dedication to 'the cause' than others would.
Danjen
2 years, 2 months ago
Don't forget Dragoneer himself had many adult pictures of his hyena Preyfar drawn as a cub before FA's cub ban
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
Yeah i heard about that too but then again Neer is known for that shit
Selomroo
2 years, 2 months ago
As much as I would love to say that cub art should be allowed everywhere, it's a huge uphill battle.  Probably best to just leave it be.  
curtainshowers
2 years, 2 months ago
Whatever. FN clearly doesn't want cub on their site, and that's their beef. I'd prefer it if cub were still OK there too, but honestly, if this is what artistic freedom means to them, then they're probably not worth visiting.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" curtainshowers wrote:
then they're probably not worth visiting.


Would your opinion change if they held to a set of principles the way InkBunny does?
curtainshowers
2 years, 2 months ago
In what way? Do you mean IB's ban on human art?
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
No, the part that says "No one has the right to harass anyone for their tastes or the content of artwork they post on Inkbunny."
curtainshowers
2 years, 2 months ago
Gotcha. No, it's not the harassment I object to, it's that they claim to promote artistic freedom and then turn around and ban art they deem unacceptable. I'll probably still pop in from time to time, but if they limit what can be posted, it just puts them on par with all the other sites that restrict what art can be shown.
FriskyWoods
2 years, 2 months ago
I'm okay with FN banning cub artwork, although I wish they'd done it from the start rather than pretending there was ever a choice. What bothers me is that babyfur artists who AREN'T posting explicit pictures are getting punished too, for the crime of having diapers in their art. Like YouTube with its asinine copyright infringement rules, anyone can flag your images, and you're guilty until proven innocent. So fuck them. Furiffic banned cub too, but I'm okay with them because that policy has been there from the start, and there's little of the artist-directed abuse I've been seeing on both FN and Weasyl.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" FriskyWoods wrote:
I'm okay with FN banning cub artwork, although I wish they'd done it from the start rather than pretending there was ever a choice. What bothers me is that babyfur artists who AREN'T posting explicit pictures are getting punished too, for the crime of having diapers in their art.

The people who started this aren't attacking the art; they're attacking the artists. What they are essentially saying is "cub lover = child rapist."  That is how far we've come with the irrationality of the haters.

Mark my words, what will happen next is they will start attacking cub artists, lovers and sympathizers simply for being on FurryNetwork. I bet you anything it'll happen. FN gave them this much. You think they'll stop here?
FriskyWoods
2 years, 2 months ago
Depends on the administration. If the person in charge is anything like Dragoneer, they'll roll over if they think it will benefit them. Furiffic doesn't do this kind of nonsense, though... at least, not yet.
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
The person in charge of FN is Varka, aka the person behind Bad Dragon AND F-List, a site that arguably has worse stuff than cub art
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
Worse or better? ;D ;D ;D
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
Depends on how you look at it XD
FriskyWoods
2 years, 2 months ago
So we're getting a morality lesson from a guy who makes dildos for a living? Okaaaay...
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
Not sure if he himself makes them but he does own Bad Dragon Entertainment, the company that sells the toys. but yes i know what you mean
Roel
2 years, 2 months ago
F-list has a lot of pockets of insane hate towards specific kinks that are hiding under the veil of private channels, because there is sorta-kinda loophole that allows people in these to do as they please with kinkshaming and such.
But yeah, as a F-list regular, I can confirm that some stuff that happens there reaches nuclear level of cringe/weird/perverted.
Weiss
2 years, 2 months ago
I wouldn't go as far as to say people kinkshame in private channels. Kinkshaming is one of the core things that's no allowed anywhere on the site and on occasion general mods go into private channels to make sure that isn't happening. As a channel owner myself i don't kinkshame but i DO disallow certain kinks in my channel such as bestiality,watersports and scat. Not because i don't like them(except scat) but because they go against the theme of my channel
greenmont
2 years, 2 months ago
[wrong thread sorry]
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
Having learned of this issue, they should obviously do the voting again, but they won't because they were most likely looking for an excuse to get rid of cub art anyway.. If they have any evidence that the voting may have been faked, they will hide it and say it's unimportant, and use other excuses to that people don't get to re-vote. In fact it wouldn't be surprising if they knew all along, and chose to ignore it, and the voting was a farce to placate people, making it seem like the ban wasn't their personal choice but rather a democratic vote, when the outcome was decided before it even happened.
If one looked at the comments under the votes, just that by itself would make one question, because there is way more comments defending the cubs compared to the comments praising it, but somehow in the votes it is inverted? Sounds unlikely.

Normal PR tactics. I could be wrong, but I very much doubt it. I predict that if they have any evidence that the votes may have been faked, they will hide it, destroy it, and make excuses about it, or call it unimportant and irrelevant.
If people complain about it too much they can always kafkatrap, and say cub fans are aggressive and that it was a good choice all along, and that angry people being angry proves that it was a good decision. Have seen that kind of tactic happen way more than I would like to.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" Having learned of this issue, they should obviously do the voting again, but they won't because they were most likely looking for an excuse to get rid of cub art anyway..

FurryNetwork never did voting to begin with. The thread was started by someone opposed to "cub porn." They did so on a forum set up for technical feature suggestions, not website policies.

Plus, let me ask you, do you really think that any civil rights issue should be resolved by a majority vote? Where would we be with any sort of issue if that were the case? What they should have done is what InkBunny did when they started. They put out a document called "The InkBunny Philosophy" which states in no uncertain terms:

" No one has the right to harass anyone for their tastes or the content of artwork they post on Inkbunny.

InkBunny is built on principle. So the question remains: Will we hold FurryNetwork to the same standard? If they are so concerned about what the users think, what about its founding principles? What are they? Will they continually succumb to pressure and shift stances because the majority rules? OR will they set the ground rules from the beginning and stick by them while providing adequate filtering measures for those who may be personally offended?

Like I mentioned, I drafted an Artwork Protection Clause which I proposed in the Support section. (I figured if they could, so can I.) It would be the FN Artist's Bill of Rights, so to speak, and would protect artists from discrimination or exclusion based solely on artist taste or merit.

https://inkbunny.net/journalview.php?id=231836

No one has ever forced anyone to view artwork they might find distasteful. That's not the game with these people raising a fuss about erotic cub art. They are fighting for a complete site-wide ban on anything that makes them feel "uncomfortable." Why should a small minority be able to change policy? What is Bad Dragon afraid of?
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
I don't think cub art should be banned at all, anywhere, neither do I think there should be a vote for it to be banned. I don't think loli or shota should be banned either, or 3d, or any art which doesn't directly hurt some person by slander or by some other way. I can understand the logic behind banning photographic art which depicts real underage people in a way which could damage or hurt them, but that's about it.

I'm only saying, that if this is supposed to be viewed as a democratic decision, then the vote obviously should be redone, because it was faulty.

I have no interest in furry network in general, but I am against any art being banned or censored anywhere, by principle.
I view freedom of artistic expression and freedom of speech are absolutely crucial values in any modern society.

You are asking/saying this to the wrong person.

My guess is they were looking for excuses to ban it in the first place, or that someone threatened/complained about it privately and they didn't want the trouble involved. Perhaps the same person who called for the ban sent them private emails threatening about it or something, or maybe they didn't even need to be threatened. Either way I think hiding behind a vote is just a PR thing to make people complain less.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" supremekitten wrote:
I don't think cub art should be banned at all, anywhere, neither do I think there should be a vote for it to be banned. I don't think loli or shota should be banned either, or 3d, or any art which doesn't directly hurt some person by slander or by some other way.

Believe it or not, from a purely legal standpoint, I can understand if FurryNetwork did not allow for human underaged fictional depictions of sexual conduct, because unlike animal hybrids, human artwork is indeed in legal jeopardy, not only in the U.S. (in a very gray and murky series of common law precedence in various districts), but also in United Kingdom and its 15 commonwealths (including Canada, Australia, Northern Ireland), and I believe most of the European Union (though I don't know the full facts on this). This poses an actual real legal threat to Bad Dragon which is hosted in Arizona. However, whether or not their legal teams come to that specific conclusion is up for debate, because they allow it on F-List, so perhaps there's something I'm missing.

" I'm only saying, that if this is supposed to be viewed as a democratic decision, then the vote obviously should be redone, because it was faulty.

If anything, it would be interesting to see how the vote tallies really would come out, but I don't think it should take place on the Support Forum to be sure. There have been some independent polls put out by various people, but having one on FN's front page would surely get more attention. If they do, the poll should be run on a verified, independent server made for this sort of thing, and it should take place over a reasonable span of time to allow for people to cast their votes. But should it affect actual policy directly? I still really think that such a thing is too sensitive and important to leave up to a simple majority decision. It really comes down to preserving artistic freedom.

There still remains one question though.. What could ever be considered a fair vote, even if it WAS only for those with user accounts? I mean think of it... anyone can sign up for an account. What grants random people on the Internet authority to decide the policies of others? There is no Furry Nation or government. Who would be the presiding authority over votes? This really is a flawed idea.
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
The difference is that
1. f-list is a lower profile website, so it's less likely to be attacked
2. f-list is not an art portal
3. f-list is not an escrow, related to escrows, and doesn't deal with money

As for the attitudes, I would like to think that a lot more people would support protecting the art today than they would have a year ago. I believe all this social justice censorship of things and opinions that happened over the last year has shifted the internet-public opinion far more towards freedom of expression than it has been in the past. People trying to ban nudity, ban games, petitioning to ban gta5, and actively denouncing the value of free speech have caused a backlash, and now we have a lot more people who support freedom of expression than we had before. There are a lot more people today who would oppose such a ban by the principle that it is art that doesn't hurt anyone.
A lot of the people who oppose sjw stand by these principles, even if they hate this kind of art, more so now than they did before.
People like pewdie go watching through whole boku no pico making reactions to it, it's a video with many millions of views, and maybe half of the comments share this sentiment, that it's art which doesn't hurt anyone and hence should be protected.

I think the last year or so has changed a lot of sentiments people had on this matter. Or at the very least, that's what I would like to believe, because otherwise, what was it all for?

The thing which I'm not sure of is, if the amount of such people is higher than the amount of people who still want to ban things. And there are a lot of people who will support freedom of expression with passion, but do 180 the moment anything related to underage art is mentioned and go "ewww, pedoes, disgusting, we have to protect them fictional children!"
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
Right, I didn't mention the absurd amount of forum censorship, shadowbans, deleting of threads, shilling, nepotism, secret mailing lists, colluding journalists, and the downfall of 4c. That's what started it all, after all. Then a lot of people moved to 8c and the attitudes began to change and evolve into much more open ones which care about freedom of expression a lot more. And so it blossomed into what we have now.

But still, it would be an error to not notice how selective this fight for free expression can be at times. "How dare you people call our tastes wrong, freedom of expression! What is this? Ewww, ban this one, this one doesn't count because it disgusts me!" Humanity at it's finest.
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
But it's not like I can't understand why they wouldn't want it there to begin with.
Keeping cub art causes issues on any site, and even more so on one which wants to be an escrow.
People will threaten you, they will threaten your webhosts, DDoS you, hack you, they will potentially call you, email you, tell your friends, your family, harass you about it, harass your money providers, it is likely to cause all sorts of issues like that.

The hierarchy of ostracism and harassment of art is probably something like:
underage 3d > toddlers > loli > shota > toddler cubs > cubs
(although, loli fans will also sometimes harass shota fans because of ewww boys are icky)
Allowing for things like gore and scat at the same time further enhances this effect.
Usually nobody will harass a site for only allowing gore, but if you allow something like gore and underage at the same time, they will attack you way more than if you only had underage art.
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
Not to mention just the slander and bad press by itself. For example I've seen inkbunny called pedobunny more often than not on some other sites and pretty much waved of as "that site for pedophiles"
superredfox
2 years, 2 months ago
you know what ethink is funny, the anti cubbers don't realize by saying that its CP and it does not matter if its drawn or a real life photo can go both ways, for example rape you cant have real pics unless you are turning them in same with bestiality, murder, drugs, ect. so if you cant have real ones you cant have drawn ones also.  this is basically what they are saying, but there has been many different laws passed, then reformed and finally struck down.  go here for more info on that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_cartoon_p...
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
Yepyep, and also I would have you take a look at http://cbldf.org/ Very important site.
superredfox
2 years, 2 months ago
I'm suppressed the book Go Ask Alice is not on that list
lolLNno
2 years, 2 months ago
Honestly I'm not bothered by the fact that cub is banned there, but as you said, there should be a re-vote now that the exploit has been fixed.

The part about the ban that bothered me was that it was, despite what they may say to the contrary, a decision made by the majority rule first and foremost. Censorship via majority rule doesn't sit right with me, even if it's content I'm not interested in and would have likely blacklisted anyway.

I did have some concerns about the after-effects of the ban, for example "What ELSE featuring cubs is banned?", so I sent them a support ticket asking what the new policy is for mature-rated cub work that isn't pornographic, for example non-fetishized violence or works such as vore that could be rated Mature even with no nudity or sex. Thankfully they told me that content was still fine, so it's not a far-reaching "more than we said" censorship. Obviously I screencapped their reply for safety just in case.

But as you said, the fact that the voting exploit was discovered AFTER the "majority" had voted in favor of the ban is grounds for a re-vote, albeit they'll likely still uphold the decision for the hazy legal reasons behind it and to avoid looking wishy-washy moving forward. The fact that since the exploit has been fixed, pro-cub messages are being voted primarily positive and anti-cub messages primarily negative should give at least some indication that "Ban cub" wasn't the will of the majority after all.
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
Yeah, if they are going to hid behind a vote and say it's the majority's decision, then at the very least they could put effort to make it a legit vote and not a fake one which is only used as an excuse.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
" lolLNno wrote:
Honestly I'm not bothered by the fact that cub is banned there, but as you said, there should be a re-vote now that the exploit has been fixed.

I do believe that voting democratically is good for certain issues and gives real empowerment to the people to have control over their government, but I also believe that if a government founds itself on certain principles, they should stick to them and not fold so quickly.

Is a website a government? Not literally, but those who administer still govern over its users. Would you appreciate if InkBunny suddenly caved to pressure and renounced the founding philosophies it founded itself on?

" No one has the right to harass anyone for their tastes or the content of artwork they post on Inkbunny. Inkbunny encourages a community where people of all different interests can co-exist. The community attitude is one of acceptance of the widest possible range of views and ideas, as long as they do not encourage hate and intolerance.

If FurryNetwork's philosophy was also based on such principles, what does that say about them now?

There are too many shifty-slidey things that happen online today. Technologies change, friends lists change... do we really want our ideals to change too? Imagine if the Burned Furs came in and launched a coup? That's pretty much what happened on March 26th.
lolLNno
2 years, 2 months ago
That kind of reads like you're preaching to somebody who already said he agrees that the ban shouldn't have taken place, at the very least not under the circumstances that it did.

Addendum: "Is a website a government? Not literally, but those who administer still govern over its users."

No, but it is a business and the property of its owners. If said business/owners decide it's in their best interests to change a rule or introduce a new one, that's their prerogative to do so. If something like allowing cub art seemed like a bad business decision, especially for a website that's still not fully off the ground yet, then by all means are they within their rights to disallow it.

Does that mean we have to agree with the decision? Absolutely not. All we can do is reach out and hope that they hear what the community is saying now, and weigh that voice against any possible backlash they could experience in the future for pulling the new rule, be it through userbase or any other source.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
Sowwy. :( Didn't mean to point my finger at you personally.. This kinda stuff just gets my dander up. *hugs* :(
lolLNno
2 years, 2 months ago
Don't worry, I get it. It's a hot button issue with fiery tempers and valid points on both sides. XD
supremekitten
2 years, 2 months ago
This is inkbunny after all, so with the exception of a small minority of cub haters who still exist here, all of this is, of course, preaching to the choir.
soggymaster
2 years, 2 months ago
Although I was at BLFC, I didn't attend the launch panel as it wasn't of much interest to me.  Maybe I should have.
FelligerDrache
2 years, 2 months ago
No login required for voting is a joke, no matter what it is about.
Providers that work with Dynamic IP's are extremely common in Europe for example - making it as easy as restarting the Router to vote again.

They should clearly redo the vote, now that they have fixed it. Try to get a statement from them.
EmptyAli
2 years, 2 months ago
What's the difference? The votes were 4:1. ONE QUARTER of voters was against the decision, if they felt that it's not enough for using a compromise decision, no vote can change it.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
What difference does it make what ratio the votes were if all could be faked?
EmptyAli
2 years, 2 months ago
What i mean is if they forced radical decision even though 1/4 of the votes was against, it means that they really wanted to do it and would force it one way or the other anyway.
FelligerDrache
2 years, 2 months ago
Nope. There is a huge difference in terms of effort and time invested in manipulating open vs. login required polls.

Polls that do not require a Login to vote can be manipulated with a simple click of a button while running TOR, which is all that is necessary to obtain a new IP address, allowing another vote.
Same for Users of Providers that give out Dynamic IP's, which are very common in Europe. Restarting the Router will result in a fresh IP.
Making it possible to fake hundreds of votes with minimal effort in very little time.

For Polls that do require a login, the hurdles are significantly higher - each fake vote requiring a new account with a new, valid, unused e-mail address to be created, resulting in excessive workload and time required to even make a small impact.

Most people will not bother to do that, unless they are really, really weird.
EmptyAli
2 years, 2 months ago
Not what i mean.
Our situation is (lets assume that votes are real for the moment): the administration banned cubs instead of using black lists even though ONE QUARTER of votes were against it. I say, it means that the administration WANTED to ban cubs and would make up some shit even if votes were 1:1, like legality reasons or something like that.

Sorry if it's difficult to understand me, english is not my native.
Teddy
2 years, 2 months ago
Personally, I don't care either way.  It's a new site, they can do whatever they want.  It doesn't mean I need to frequent the place.  Most of the cub art comes here anyways.  Why do I care what some other site is doing?

Is it a sham, probably.. much like FA did it..  Do I care, not really.
Shevek
2 years, 2 months ago
Let them have FN. In fact I think IB should ban most non-cub material (safe for work non-cub material is okay if you get permission from a mod or make a donation). Ban anyone with an FN account too. :)
FelligerDrache
2 years, 2 months ago
Nah, you are missing the point. Doing so would make IB no better than FA or FN.

It would be a shame too, since IB is a superior website for a lot of reasons. I personally like it for allowing Images to have a lot higher/larger resolution, while sites like FA restrict the filesize so much, that a lot of images are tiny.

We need MORE artists to move here, not less. :-)
Shevek
2 years, 2 months ago
Turn the other cheek.
tkongingi
2 years, 2 months ago
Exclude people who draw both cub and non-cub because of spite.
theuncalledfor
2 years, 2 months ago
Fuck FN then. What a scummy piece of shit site.
Glad I didn't make an account there.
Kalibran
2 years, 2 months ago
Based on the sheer ratio of votes in that thread versus votes in any other suggestion thread, almost certainly. Furthermore, posts in favor had an unbelievably thorough positive record, wheras those against were downvoted with suspicious fervor, especially considering the ratio of opinions put forth in the thread itself.
Amanda
2 years, 2 months ago
Honestly I don't mind it. Its another website, it's not the end of the world tbh.
Amanda
2 years, 2 months ago
(I will add in that everyone is being SUPER unnecessarily hostile. Jesus christ.)
GreenReaper
2 years, 2 months ago
I'm reminded of the "hostile" moment in The Mouse Problem.
(Of course, they were talking about being gay, not being furry or a cub-lover, but it's prescient!)
EvilDog
2 years, 2 months ago
maybe they should redo with a 'closed' vote (meaning you need to have an account (maybe even make it so that has to be at least 48 hours old before the start of the vote))
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
Unless you can convince him that the number of users who would not leave FurryNetwork over allowing cub content, plus the number of users who would specifically use FurryNetwork BECAUSE it allows cub content, is greater than the number of users who would leave FurryNetwork over allowing cub content, Varka will not change his "views" on the matter, nor will he care if the vote was faked or not.

If you CAN convince him that it's financially more important to allow it than ban it, he will likely pull yet another 180 and give another half-assed excuse about how he was "jumping to conclusions too quickly", etc.
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
A large problem with all of this that I forsee, is Varka's eagerness to change his stance to appeal to popular opinion, much like Hilary Clinton. He's a far more competent business person and site owner than Dragoneer, but he still has this key downfall. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone to raise a large enough fuss over any type of content that isn't universally accepted as "normal" by furries, such as humans, ferals on anthros/humans, or the harder content that he currently states is allowed, and to turn around and start a similar vote like this asking if it should be banned.

Should this happen again, a splintering is likely, with each group that enjoys the newly axed content leaving or otherwise becoming disgruntled with FurryNetwork much like FA. Another issue is that this lack of rigidity means that people with absolutely no interest in furry content outside of not liking it or not liking a particular subgroup, can come in and raise a stink, and then cast votes and get buddies to cast votes, etc, and the fact that none of those people are even known or have any appearance of being a part of the community will matter to Varka.
Zaltys
2 years, 2 months ago
Precisely.

I don't care about cub art, but I have three major problems with this decision. Firstly, their obvious flip-flopping on the issue: first they release an official statement stating that cub art will be allowed "...we believe in user choice... Extreme content will be opt-in, and tagging enforced", but then barely 24 hours later they completely reverse that by outright banning it. That by itself made me lose all interest in the site. I'd just log in one day to find out that something I actually like is suddenly gone. No thanks, I'll stick to the old sites instead.

Secondly, it is too hypocritical for my tastes. Cub art gets banned, but gore, vore, snuff, rape and bestiality are perfectly okay. Not to mention that half of Bad Dragon's founding members have drawn cub art at some point.

And thirdly, I've been recommending FN to artists who were looking for site that allows everything. Because I trusted the FN staff to stick to their word. Which, obviously, makes me feel quite foolish now.
Vladimir
2 years, 2 months ago
It's a trap!
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
This sums up the ultimate reason why I won't be using FN: hypocrisy and the inability to keep to one's word. ESPECIALLY as you said, flipping stances on such a significant matter a mere day or less after the first announcement, coupled with the BS excuse he gave. "We believe in freedom of creativity." --> "We wish to prevent harm to minors."

For one, cub art on your site does NOT directly affect minors in any way, unless it is a depiction of a real life act or explicitly advocating or encouraging the abuse of minors in real life, and any person who browses it and then later harms a minor, is the one to be held accountable for their actions, not you, and nine times out of ten they would have done it regardless of the content held on your site. The "empowering" and "encouraging" argument is growing old as an SJW scapegoat.
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
Hello! Could you lead me to this comment from Varka where he states he supports artistic freedom a mere day before the reversal? I am constructing a polemic which accurately portrays the general situation, and would very much like to include this if it can be found.
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
If I can, I will! It was on FN via the form of "Our stance on the matter", knowing Varka there's a chance it may have been quietly removed to make accurate criticism difficult, but I would hope it's still findable.
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
I found something along those lines in the maelstrom of tweets on the 26th. This is one of three, less than 36 hours before the decision was made, about one before Tartii's offensive. https://twitter.com/FurryNetwork/status/735910404434460673  This one is slightly earlier. https://twitter.com/FurryNetwork/status/735902551262908416
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
Unfortunately reading some of your other comments, you seem pretty irrational and dedicated to stirring the pot with these issues. 'Fraid I'm not interested in talking to you now, no offense but it's really not helping anyone's case to try and "start a war".
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
That is fine. I have much to do and conversing with you just consumes stamina, I also do not need your assistance with mobilization,
KNIFE
2 years, 2 months ago
" Even so? So what's the big deal? Who cares?

FurryNetwork will prove to be a heavy contender when it comes to furry creation services. The tools they discussed at the BLFC presentation are going to be like Etsy and Patreon for the fandom rolled into one. Commission escrow, arbitration, credit card processing, shipping, you name it. If cub artists are excluded from these services, the community stands to lose out on a large scale. Are we going to stand for that? This is an attack on more than just posting naughty pictures. This is a conspiracy to monetarily disenfranchise people based on false premise. THAT, I might mention IS against the law.



This is still the part that bothers me. Trying to compete with those services while STILL offering all that they are seems like a LOT of problems even WORSE than what they have now with the cub porn thing. And the site will be owned by a person who already has a business to take care of. I might be totally off in the woods with this, but I'm gonna hold on to my wallet a little tighter when wandering around that place. And probably wouldn't put anything in there for at LEAST a year AFTER they get the actual site up and running because this whole cub thing seems like a HUGE distraction,something to take your attention away from something else..and for me it's always the money.
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
I do think I recall Varka having used a few red herrings in Bad Dragon PR. I can't recall which ones though, sadly.
KetoArcticWolf
2 years, 2 months ago
Personally, I don't mind them banning cub porn, but I do think FN is just doing some really fuckin' stupid decisions by doing stuff like this.
The site is trying to battle with a handful of other furry sites, so they should really, REALLY focus on pleasing their userbase at this point, rather than dicking them over... let alone by a completely illegitimate poll.
Each site has their restrictions; like FA banning cub porn and IB banning humans, so what people want, is a place without such needless bans. Remember FA in the past? It allowed cub porn, yet very few really made a fuss over it. It wasn't until the ban took place, that the whole shitstorm around cub art began. So FN could easily have gotten away with having cub porn on their site, since majority of cub artists are around here, around IB. Especially if FN made something like a filter to the site that would hide cub art. It's not that hard!
Due to the recent attacks on FA and people migrating over to FN, have they really gotten large enough amount of people to join the site, that they can start screwing people over without a fear of crashing and burning their site? I doubt it.
This whole thing sounds more like something FA would do... and as stated, a lot of people have migrated to FN from FA. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if FN soon enough got the same kinda reputation as FA... which to a starting site like FN, is practically a death sentence. Becoming another failed furry site.
Vladimir
2 years, 2 months ago
Why would I want to see humans if I visit a Furry website ?
I never understood that XD
If I want to see human art then I just go to another website.
SassyRassy
2 years, 2 months ago
If they wanted to prohibit cub art, they should have done that from the start and not this. I wouldn't have had a problem with that.
moyomongoose
2 years, 2 months ago
LegionRed
2 years, 2 months ago
It's too late for this to do anything. They've made their bed. And unlike the consideration they should have given before instating the ban. They'll consider this time, and just sit on it as done for 'the better'. Literally whatever... You show me where to throw my vote, and I definitely will. But I'm not about to have any expectations of them airing on the side of expressive freedom.
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
*smiles and waves his strategist's baton as he pads in* Greetings, comrade. I was crafting my own polemic on this disgusting affair, and I came across this submission via a link on Vivisector (they linked to something else which linked to your item). I was not aware of this and I had not really contemplated the breathtaking rapidity of the voting timetable. This was a very useful item in my crafting process. I hope to finish the journal by midnight.

Everyone should be under no illusions. We are at war. We are at war with our own kind. Our fandom is supposed to be a place of non-conformity and great acceptance of benign sexual expression, but a good portion either despise us or are too fucking cowardly to defend those traits. I am very grateful to Jery/Starling for founding a place we could use as an impregnable redoubt, and to Greenreaper for maintaining the status quo. It seems we have to provide for own welfare in this subculture and act as if we're a separate faction of it, because we have few allies. Of course, we still have cubfurs shooting their own at times, and I'm surprised with my public admissions on Inkbunny I haven't encountered more hostility.
Crassus
2 years, 2 months ago
Well now! I seem to be attracting the attention of the revolutionaries!

I appreciate your passion for the subject, and I can understand how much frustration you might be feeling.

War, though? That's a strong word. There are always wars of idea and thought. This one is nothing new, but that doesn't mean there isn't sufficient room for concern. I've been noticing that it's not so much a war on porn itself but how it's thought of. Remember, it wasn't more than 10-15 years ago that furries often didn't use the word "porn" to describe their work. We said it was "art." It was cub art, not cub porn. Furry art, not furry porn. And I think what's changed is the way we view ourselves as a community. Long ago, it was primarily made of hardcore nerds, geeks and art-appreciation type crowds. We were also an even more socially awkward bunch than many furs I see at conventions today would not want to associate with. We're not on an island, though. I see this happening everywhere from The Nerdist YouTube channel, to Big Bang theory. "Geek" is becoming mainstream, and I think there's a chance that the real hardcore extreme nerds are finding it harder to come in contact with each other in our own fandom. With the growing number of casually-pseudo-geeky persons intermingling with our fandom, and more outgoing cool respected and social furs coming in, this concept of popularity is overriding the previous notion of acceptance of ourselves, regardless of our weirdnesses, fetishes, oddball natures, what have you...

I think a good chunk of us old-timers are forgetting what it was like to be able to be free and safe in our own little nook of the Internet. We're also much more suceptible to anonymous hate campaigns than we once were. People are living in fear. We're afraid to be proud of anything without finding ourselves being targeted by groups on chan boards for our oddities or controversial opinions. So people put their shells on and just pretend they didn't remember the free and open environment we once had. You can't have a flourishing community of fun, free accepting people if everyone's locking their doors and keeping quiet.

Before you declare war on something, make sure you're not going to end up in a foxhole all by yourself for a cause no one understands or agrees upon. Personally I really think it's an important time to build up the community spirit and pride that we have, and perhaps remind those who do care and agree with these sentiments that they still do have a home, and that we can still be anything we want to be. We have to be proud, not ashamed, and don't give into hate or ostracism. We're all still around. Maybe we just need a little friendly kick in the tail to be proud to use the word "yiff" again.
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
I wasn't aware there was this effort at self-bullshitting in furrydom years ago. While I've been a furry in some capacity for half my existence, I haven't meaningfully interacted with the subculture until within the last few years. I generally like to use the term 'erotic' or 'erotica', because of the etymology of 'porn'. I have little patience for those who insist on misclassifying what they like or do. If you draw erotic artwork, fucking call it that. Notions of shame over it are irrational.

Ultimately, the core of the problem is people want to be accepted, and are not willing to fully exert themselves to guarantee their own safety and comfort. The reality is society inferior and run by an inferior species, and liberation will only come when we disregard to the greatest degree possible both society and the general aim of popularity. I don't care whether I'm not accepted by 90% of people, or by you, or by any of these other people you speak of which are apparently overrunning our fandom. Long ago I disentangled myself from any people and organizations which were causing me harm or thwarting my efforts. The sooner people stop fucking caring about popularity, the sooner they will find happiness.

And, you apparently just want to hold hands with these people and sing Kumbaya or whatever that song is, rather than take the action necessary for us to actually feel free and uninhibited within our own enclaves. No, screw diplomacy! If you want to return to the good old days, you rally with likeminded people, build an enclave and a figurative system of fortifications, and neither intrude in any other factions' business nor permit corruption of what you have. You do not reason with these people who are blithely altering our space. You either eject them or go somewhere else where you can keep them out.

I have far more than a foxhole to retreat to if I'm the only one in this war we're talking about. I have seen to it that I need minimal support from other people to have a secure space where my professed friends are truly friends, and where enemies cannot succeed at anything substantial. I would personally love it if likeminded furry lifestylers would also take up the colors and do something about this, but I am more than prepared to call myself a furry while saying you and most of the others are not the sort I feel kinship with. I prefer defensive solitude to exhausting interaction with lessers any time.
DefyConvention
2 years, 2 months ago
I'm with you, Roketsune.

The furry community, and the internet as a whole has changed, and I don't like it.

This whole entire network used to be filled with interesting, free minded people, but then Facebook type sites came around, and everyone and their mom took over the internet.

Everyone is afraid to speak their mind. They're afraid to reject conformity.
They don't want to stand out in any meaningful way, because they're all terrified some malicious authority like the NSA or their bestest Facebook friends would judge them.

FurryNetwork is saying things like "A law in some lands equals a law in the world wide web", as if we really were ruled by some one world government, a government that has decided to censor whatever art they don't approve of.

There have always been two main facets used to control people.

Government and society. Governments use violence to forcefully enforce laws, and society uses psychological manipulation techniques to force obedience onto us, obedience that feels willing. Of course banning questionable art seems like the right thing to do. "Think of the children!" It feels RIGHTEOUS to ban cub art, because if it was real, it would be a truly horrible crime.

And of course, people can't publicly SUPPORT it. If you dare support cub art and have your real name attached, you'd better hope you're already rich or working as a cub artist, because you'll never be able to get a job again as long as employers care to google your name, not to mention potential dates or whoever else might want information on you.

It might be said "FurryNetwork is a corporate company; they exist for profit, so they have the right, and even the expectation, to ban questionable content."

So then we know why the community is dead, or has at least become so conformist, so tamed, that they will happily approve censorship without putting up any real fight.

If not the governments of the world making laws in such a way that one country's pro-censorship laws ruins it for everyone world wide, if not society's ostracizing of anyone who defends certain genres of art, it's people who use their pre-existing fame or money, such as Tartii, who might have good intentions, or Varka, who might have an eye for money, who end up making censorship of certain genres normal.

By having one BIG website do it, and then ANOTHER big website do it, such as FA and then FN, it sets a precedent that cub art just can't be allowed, which makes any future furry art community website also expected to censor whatever porn some parts of the community can't deal with.

I don't care about Tartii on a personal level. All I know of him/her is that they are self-righteous. I do not care about self-righteous people. I do not care how personal their crusade is to them. If they don't like certain types of art, they shouldn't look at it. InkBunny has solid, logical philosophies about this. They use words like "Deal with it", "Chill out", "Respect".

They understand that not everyone likes the same things, but that doesn't mean they have to censor art because of it.

FN did the wrong thing, and the vote manipulation, the insipid name calling just because someone is anti-censorship regarding questionable art, and the entire "It's not a personal crusade, but it's a personal crusade" thing I keep hearing: It's over.

This war isn't a war fought on a battlefield. This war is for our hearts and minds.

I call for a deviation. The furry fandom is splitting between tamed furries and us, true furries that can handle a bit of art, no matter how lewd. I demand that we stop tolerating the ostracizing of people for the art they enjoy. I demand we stop tolerating the censorship not only of art within the furry fandom, but also free speech and free expression on the internet as a whole.

We are strong.

What must one do to alert you to the fact that you must wake up and look around at what your life is, and wonder if that is all it will ever be?

Wake up.



We are not tamed.
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
*salutes and smiles* Oh, hey, it seems there's an actual ally here. Someone who is actually like-minded. And someone who types a lot, too!

Everyone is afraid to speak their mind. They're afraid to reject conformity.
They don't want to stand out in any meaningful way, because they're all terrified some malicious authority like the NSA or their bestest Facebook friends would judge them.


People in general are notoriously cowardly and socially incompetent. They have all these 'friends' who aren't really friends at all, and use that as a justification to cower in fear. I can count the number of friends I have on one paw. The rest are acquaintances or enemies, and most of them are inconsequential to me. Why the fuck should I care if someone dislikes my masturbation to cub porn or fantasies of RL children? I am more rational now than they will ever be if they outlived me by 100 years and I perished today. Screw them!

The furry fandom is splitting between tamed furries and us, true furries that can handle a bit of art, no matter how lewd.

It's not just that. There aren't many furries with any real pride in general. I heard years ago about these mythical creatures called "furry lifestylers", people who would be openly furry whenever possible and not give a damn about what hostile mundanes think. Do you know how many local furries who will wear a tail and other furry accessories to an average outing? Usually it's just me, maybe another one that comes to mind. Multiple times I have been to a furry restaurant gathering, and I and maybe one other was wearing any significant accessory, including an FWA event the day before FWA, led by the fucking chairman. Being openly furry at only furry cons is not real furry pride. It's cowardice and shame.

And, holy shit, our femboys are even worse. They are terrified of being themselves even in furry gatherings. One time, at an FWA event at their OWN HQ, this femboy insisted on wearing feminine clothes only UNDER his regular masculine clothes. FWA joins the LGBT pride parade every year and furrydom even now is rabidly pro-LGBT. He's a fucking staff member for FWA. I even question whether he's really a femboy, since he is so seldom one openly. This is what I have to deal with locally. I have virtually ceased attending furmeets, because they are not my kin. They are more often mere imitators.

In contrast, I dress like I'm a gay furry pride parade all year around. I'm always a raccoon femboy in some capacity. I actually get many compliments for the way I dress from mundanes. Less than 10% react negatively, probably less than 5%. I'm sure some furries see me as an embarrassment. I had one so-called furry basically tell me I deserved the gender discrimination I incurred from the former landlady. Of course, I used the fucker for target practice and will always remember the name Twizler because of that.

It might be said "FurryNetwork is a corporate company; they exist for profit, so they have the right, and even the expectation, to ban questionable content."

That is another concern I have. I don't know whether Varka has such plans for it, but he is the one who has made a fair amount of money from a business of his, and they wanted to facilitate commerce on the site. I do not want our fandom commercialized like that. It sets a bad precedent and opens us up further to outside assault.

I don't care about Tartii on a personal level. All I know of him/her is that they are self-righteous. I do not care about self-righteous people.

Being self-righteous is great when you are actually right. If you are wrong, it makes you a pompous and obnoxious douchebag. I am legendary for being self-righteous to an extreme, but I am right and Tartii is wrong.

This war isn't a war fought on a battlefield. This war is for our hearts and minds.

Too bad Crassus would have us adopt the Care Bear method of victory. Ask the Czechs and Poles how that worked out in 1938 and 1939.
DefyConvention
2 years, 2 months ago
Don't make an enemy of Crassus please! He's on our side.

We might have different tactics, but wars can't be fought only with footmen. There's a lot more to war than just marching towards the enemy. So far, he's gathered a lot of intelligence, and made a large post about it, allowing us all to rally.
That sort of action can be a lot more powerful than just marching into battle, relying on strength alone.

As far as righteousness goes, I think self-righteousness is a separate tangent from actual righteousness. It's freedom vs security all over again. And we all know that trying to ensure security in a world like this one is doing nothing more than taking freedom away while offering very little actual security. No matter Tartii's reasons, be it she gets triggered because of a tragic past, or she's just a ruthless liar and psychological manipulator who has an agenda to fulfill, she ended up doing the reverse of Crassus: She gave people a rally point upon which to ban art.

Cub art still exists, it's now just forcefully hidden from view. Of course, it would have been hidden anyways, because of the nature of blacklists, but I guess that's why the NSA or TSA goes to such invasive measures as well. It's not enough to just use metal detectors, now they gotta scan you so they see your naked body.

They just keep pushing it, and I see no reason that FN or Tartii-type people wouldn't do the same.
It's apparently profitable for art sites to censor art, so why shouldn't they kick out whatever other kinks squick them?

It really does remind me of the end of Animal Farm, where the pigs slowly turn more and more human, until they're no longer furry: They're just ordinary humans who have pushed out or oppressed every true animal, and don't care about furry at all, except for the profit margin.

Unacceptable.

Even so, we must now plot: How can we fight back? I get the feeling that unless someone at FN has a change of heart on a personal level, no vote or rational reason will undo their enforcement of censorship.

I don't think we can waste very much time on FN, unless we just wanted to organize a small skirmish just for the purpose of gaining new soldiers who understand our cause, or just soiling the name of FN, to prevent more from joining it. The more people that join FN, the more that will be exposed to pro-censorship propaganda.  

FA was already disgraced, due to their weak network security, and FN just got disgraced by becoming nothing more than a slightly more fancy clone of FA, and then enacting censorship of art. So what do we do now?

You seem to be one hell of a fighter, so perhaps you have some ideas that I don't have. Go for it.
I trust you.

As far as femboys and tails go, I'll private message you. ;3
DefyConvention
2 years, 2 months ago
https://inkbunny.net/submissionview.php?id=1109441

Participate in an online anti-censorship protest!
TheFurryKing1
2 years, 2 months ago
de todos modos existirá otra pagina, en la que si sea permitido
RayZ
2 years, 2 months ago
If the public were allowed to vote, they would outright ban furry porn altogether.  Think about that when you deiced to vote to ban a minority of a minorities fetish.
Roketsune
2 years, 2 months ago
I have compiled and interpreted various pieces of evidence and information. This journal explains in great detail the circumstances of the vote and sudden upsurge in opposition to cub porn, concluding this was primarily the efforts of a small faction who conducted a blitzkrieg offensive that was precipitated by a mass migration from FA due to their severe hacking. That journal also describes why the banning of cub porn is always wrong.

The second one describes the roles three people/entities played in the FN and the secondary InkedFur matter which Tartii and another had made a relevant component to this (Sangie spoke on it and updated a paragraph in the InkedFur announcement), raised some very concerning matters with regards to the leadership of FN and their ability to operate it as envisioned, and laid out a counteroffensive plan to be followed.

The third journal details America's obscenity laws and various generally applicable concepts and realities.

I plan on making two more journals. A fourth will contain additional findings on various things pertaining to FN's vulnerabilities and leadership inclinations and decisions, reinforcing or weakening my several major concerns about FN and the cadre who oversee it. The fifth will be an unflinching review of Inkbunny's place in furrydom and why various factors make the insult Pedobunny largely true and also insulating, and whether we as the Inkbunny community should even want to be the primary site if FN and FA both implode.
New Comment:
Move reply box to top
Log in or create an account to comment.