Main Site Issue regarding the new policy update.

[NoahGryphon]

www.furaffinity.net: 4/16/2020 - New Hardware & Policy Updates -- Fender's Journal this one

This does not seem right. There is a lot of cute/normal art out there that just happens to feature one of the groups mentioned. It also is bad because it seems it could be unfairly enforced by admins, by doing stuff like not considering the USSR a hate group but killing any nazi picture. There is so much good art out there that will be destroyed if this rule is enforced. It would kill so many good WW2 arts and make a lot less WW2 art be posted in the future. I and many others just dont see a reason for a rule like this! Twitter and other sites have nazi and communist "problems", but not here! It just feels sad and limits what art you can find on the site.

 

[alphamule]

LOL, in before "Zero tolerance" references. Well, I can already see the trolls using fictional characters as stand-ins. And yes, if it isn't applied evenly to all groups, going to lead to usual things.

 

[quoting_mungo]

The site ultimately has the right to decide what content they want to host. The major issue I see is not “historical art is collateral damage” or even “will this be applied everywhere it should?,” but that it’s trading one area of ambiguity for another.

“Where do we draw the line for what is a fictional/historical/condemning depiction?” instead becomes “where do we draw the line as to what constitutes ‘imagery’ associated with a hate group?” Sadly the example given of “German soldiers” doesn’t clarify much; modern German soldiers or pre-WWII soldiers vs WWII era soldiers is a huge difference, and “not Nazis” could mean “strip them of emblems/iconography” or “WWII Germany is verboten (pun intended), period.”

It’s not really accurate to say FA completely lacks extremist “problems,” though I would expect them to have been significantly reduced by the original introduction of policies restricting identification with hate groups. I don’t really have answers; the most significant effect of this policy change is liable to be a lull in the bitching about “nazis on FA” to staff via other services.

 

[alphamule]

Well, this was Wolfenstein 3D area, yes. In Germany, you can't even have villains depicted as Nazis. I'd not be shocked if Captain America comics or newer Agents of SHIELD episodes are banned that mention Hydra(Their slogan is pretty blatant!). BTW, they replaced PRC with PRoK troops in a certain movie for reasons related to censorship - and it got censored anyways in China. Frankly, I've not seen anything promoting genocide in any gallery. I thought it was already against the rules on most any site? Where did the push for this come from? I mean, it was already bannable offense, right? I'm sooooo glad I'm not a mod right now. It's like invitation for usual suspects to do stupid things.

 

[Giana36]

This is just bullshit. This "combating hate" is nothing more than a ruse to ban and censor certain people from expressing their views freely, thus clamping down on free speech gradually. I don't care what other people's views may be actually, be; I have a right to disagree, but I don't clamor for them to be banned. Oh, and while the 1st amendment doesn't really mention non-government organizations like social media banning you a la the "you are being an asshole" excuse to shut you and other people up, the part about being an asshole is not a valid reason in itself. WHY? because just about ANYTHING can come off as being an "asshole" to different people. Life isn't all about being nice and friendly all the time. This is going out of reasonable bounds.

 

[Attaman]

Twitter and other sites have nazi and communist "problems", but not here!

This site has had users actively advocate the fourteen words, deny the Holocaust, and advertise (individually, not via ad-space thankfully) Telegram channels that make openly cheer for the mass shooter of minority populations.

This is just bullshit. This "combating hate" is nothing more than a ruse to ban and censor certain people from expressing their views freely,

Well yes: People who brazenly express "their views" when their views involve the advocation of genocide of Jews, LGBTQ+ Individuals, ethnic minorities, and so-on (the Nazi imagery) are not welcome in a community that includes Jews, LGBTQ+ Individuals, ethnic minorities, and so-on. People who express "their views" in relation to a literal war flag of a secessionist break-off from a modern nation who engaged in Civil War due to an inextricable desire to treat minorities as chattel slavery (the Confederate Flag, or as it should more properly be referred to the Confederate War Flag seeing as how the flag that people plaster everywhere is very much not even the one used by the Confederacy in general) is not welcome in a community which includes said minorities (and, for that matter, said minorities are among the most well known population with the likes of professional gamers like SonicFox).

Likewise again: We've had people in the FA community advocate channels / private discussion venues that literally use Eugenics-era anti-African posters to present such demographics as subhuman scum; We've had people in the FA and FAF community openly mock Jewish users in the aftermath of shootings of synagogues; We've had people in the FA community actively recruit for recognized domestic terrorist groups like the Proud Boys.

FA tamping down on this sort of thing is... kind of to be expected. As even if you're a heartless bastard who has a lump of coal where their heart should be and don't give a rat's ass about anyone's enjoyment or well being in the community about yourself, allowing such content to linger on FA is still detrimental to you as IMVU sure as hell ain't going to want to be known as "That company that hosted Nazi and other Hate Group content", nor advertisers. Meaning "Fuck you got mine" is quickly going to turn into "Fuck, FA's servers are going tits-up and nobody will bail us out."

Unless, of course, one's entire point for using the site is that sort of content. But let's not make presumptions here unless somebody's perfectly willing to give their self enough rope to hang with first.

the part about being an asshole is not a valid reason in itself.

It very much is. Especially for, again, public services based around some semblance of community. Because it turns out a community known for being a den of toxic grogs is antithetical to such things, and in fact why FA's FAF use to be seen as something of a toxic waste dump for everything other than mainsite questions (believe me: I was a FAFer at that time!). Likewise such rule enforcements are often there in part to ensure that people know the rules are neither 100% literal nor a moderator suicide pact, since people invariably find ways to try exploiting them (For example: Somebody posting a bunch of "Hail Hydra!" art while mentioning a user whose grandparents were Holocaust Survivors), and without fail a literal rule interpreter will then try to argue "I did nothing wrong, in fact you said such art is perfectly fine on its own! They should be banned for harassing me with negligent reports!" While making it clear that there's a "Mods will know it when they see it, and other Mods will hold them accountable if they're blatantly trying to grind their own personal axe" clause means people are - by sheer coincidence - less likely to engage in such behavior.

Life isn't all about being nice and friendly all the time. This is going out of reasonable bounds.

"Don't post art or content featuring or endorsing Hate groups" is such a reasonable bounds request that it's literally a ToS in many site rules across the internet. Fuck, it's been a FAF rule for literal years, and I know other forums who've had it for rules stretching back into the 1990's.

 

[NoahGryphon]

This site has had users actively advocate the fourteen words, deny the Holocaust, and advertise (individually, not via ad-space thankfully) Telegram channels that make openly cheer for the mass shooter of minority populations.

Every site has some people like that, but if 99.5% of people have not seen them, they arent a problem! Just because something bad exists somewhere doesnt mean its a real problem. This rule is overkill and is bullying many cool history-buffs

 

[Attaman]

Every site has some people like that, but if 99.5% of people have not seen them, they arent a problem! Just because something bad exists somewhere doesnt mean its a real problem. This rule is overkill and is bullying many cool history-buffs

If you're a "cool history buff" and you literally cannot recognize WWII German military kit and / or uniforms without either explicit Swastikas or other Nazi-specific insignia (like S.S. emblems), you either:
1) Aren't as much a history buff as you think you are. Because, like, 99% of people who go "Cool uniforms" are specifically looking at the Hugo Boss part and not the "Nazi Swastika" part;
2) Probably not actually a history buff.

Same goes for Confederate stuff.

Like, this really isn't that hard. It's similar to people complaining about shit like "But how can I show my minor characters are in love without writing a blatantly explicit sex scene?" You... can write other aspects of a relationship that don't involve having FA host kiddy-porn? You can do a fade to black? You can have them kiss in a manner that clearly isn't meant to be sexualized for a reader's enjoyment? Exact same principle here: If one can't write a story set in WWII European / African Theaters without having to include pro-Nazi rhetoric or blatant Nazi iconography, or draw a picture for that matter, odds are it's not being done for an objective art piece.

 

[Giana36]

This site has had users actively advocate the fourteen words, deny the Holocaust, and advertise (individually, not via ad-space thankfully) Telegram channels that make openly cheer for the mass shooter of minority populations.


Well yes: People who brazenly express "their views" when their views involve the advocation of genocide of Jews, LGBTQ+ Individuals, ethnic minorities, and so-on (the Nazi imagery) are not welcome in a community that includes Jews, LGBTQ+ Individuals, ethnic minorities, and so-on. People who express "their views" in relation to a literal war flag of a secessionist break-off from a modern nation who engaged in Civil War due to an inextricable desire to treat minorities as chattel slavery (the Confederate Flag, or as it should more properly be referred to the Confederate War Flag seeing as how the flag that people plaster everywhere is very much not even the one used by the Confederacy in general) is not welcome in a community which includes said minorities (and, for that matter, said minorities are among the most well known population with the likes of professional gamers like SonicFox).

Likewise again: We've had people in the FA community advocate channels / private discussion venues that literally use Eugenics-era anti-African posters to present such demographics as subhuman scum; We've had people in the FA and FAF community openly mock Jewish users in the aftermath of shootings of synagogues; We've had people in the FA community actively recruit for recognized domestic terrorist groups like the Proud Boys.

FA tamping down on this sort of thing is... kind of to be expected. As even if you're a heartless bastard who has a lump of coal where their heart should be and don't give a rat's ass about anyone's enjoyment or well being in the community about yourself, allowing such content to linger on FA is still detrimental to you as IMVU sure as hell ain't going to want to be known as "That company that hosted Nazi and other Hate Group content", nor advertisers. Meaning "Fuck you got mine" is quickly going to turn into "Fuck, FA's servers are going tits-up and nobody will bail us out."

Unless, of course, one's entire point for using the site is that sort of content. But let's not make presumptions here unless somebody's perfectly willing to give their self enough rope to hang with first.

It very much is. Especially for, again, public services based around some semblance of community. Because it turns out a community known for being a den of toxic grogs is antithetical to such things, and in fact why FA's FAF use to be seen as something of a toxic waste dump for everything other than mainsite questions (believe me: I was a FAFer at that time!). Likewise such rule enforcements are often there in part to ensure that people know the rules are neither 100% literal nor a moderator suicide pact, since people invariably find ways to try exploiting them (For example: Somebody posting a bunch of "Hail Hydra!" art while mentioning a user whose grandparents were Holocaust Survivors), and without fail a literal rule interpreter will then try to argue "I did nothing wrong, in fact you said such art is perfectly fine on its own! They should be banned for harassing me with negligent reports!" While making it clear that there's a "Mods will know it when they see it, and other Mods will hold them accountable if they're blatantly trying to grind their own personal axe" clause means people are - by sheer coincidence - less likely to engage in such behavior.

"Don't post art or content featuring or endorsing Hate groups" is such a reasonable bounds request that it's literally a ToS in many site rules across the internet. Fuck, it's been a FAF rule for literal years, and I know other forums who've had it for rules stretching back into the 1990's.

Sure, I see where you aiming for. However, there is quite an amount of space for mods to abuse it in the name of "being progressive". Really, if you are going to ban literal Nazis from this site as you do ISIS and the KKK, then the same ought to be done for far left-leaning goons like Antifa and outright Leninists, Castroists and Maoists. Yes, Its true that their are people who said "Hail Hydra!" while mentioning users whose parents or grandparents who were sent to places like Auschwitz, Sobibor and Treblinka. However, no matter what historical event your parents, grandparents, or ancestors went through, you are neither entitled nor have a birthright to be shielded from any and all criticism. Its obvious to me that Furaffinity is not quite what it was since being bought by IMVU.

 

[Mambi]

If you're a "cool history buff" and you literally cannot recognize WWII German military kit and / or uniforms without either explicit Swastikas or other Nazi-specific insignia (like S.S. emblems), you either:
1) Aren't as much a history buff as you think you are. Because, like, 99% of people who go "Cool uniforms" are specifically looking at the Hugo Boss part and not the "Nazi Swastika" part;
2) Probably not actually a history buff.

Same goes for Confederate stuff.

Like, this really isn't that hard. It's similar to people complaining about shit like "But how can I show my minor characters are in love without writing a blatantly explicit sex scene?" You... can write other aspects of a relationship that don't involve having FA host kiddy-porn? You can do a fade to black? You can have them kiss in a manner that clearly isn't meant to be sexualized for a reader's enjoyment? Exact same principle here: If one can't write a story set in WWII European / African Theaters without having to include pro-Nazi rhetoric or blatant Nazi iconography, or draw a picture for that matter, odds are it's not being done for an objective art piece.

Oh thank you, I thought I was going nuts here! <laughs> Seriously, I was wondering why people would feel they have to draw Nazi or other provocative imagery without some other motive? It's like fighting for the right to say the "N" word in America...I don't care if your logic is right or wrong, ask yourself what hole in your life is filled by the need to say it at all under ANY context, freedom to do so be damned? Same with the art...as a general rule of thumb, if your art needs to be explained why it isn't racist rather than your selfless historical motives being obvious, then you simply did it wrong and should draw something slightly different. Maybe something not do damn obviously racist! <shakes head in disbelief that this has to be explained...>

 

[Giana36]

If you're a "cool history buff" and you literally cannot recognize WWII German military kit and / or uniforms without either explicit Swastikas or other Nazi-specific insignia (like S.S. emblems), you either:
1) Aren't as much a history buff as you think you are. Because, like, 99% of people who go "Cool uniforms" are specifically looking at the Hugo Boss part and not the "Nazi Swastika" part;
2) Probably not actually a history buff.

Same goes for Confederate stuff.

Like, this really isn't that hard. It's similar to people complaining about shit like "But how can I show my minor characters are in love without writing a blatantly explicit sex scene?" You... can write other aspects of a relationship that don't involve having FA host kiddy-porn? You can do a fade to black? You can have them kiss in a manner that clearly isn't meant to be sexualized for a reader's enjoyment? Exact same principle here: If one can't write a story set in WWII European / African Theaters without having to include pro-Nazi rhetoric or blatant Nazi iconography, or draw a picture for that matter, odds are it's not being done for an objective art piece.

Not everyone who posts such stuff is a simple troll thats for sure. However, blocking out Nazi iconography regardless if whether or not its a work of FUCKING FICTION is stupid. Really, don't be so dense so as to be unable to tell the context in a drawing.

 

[Fallowfox]

The only real argument here would be that the policy forbids featuring symbols to denounce hate groups- so I imagine that people with alt-right sympathies will relish the opportunity to report people who draw people putting swastikas in trash bins, for example.


It's a bit unfortunate that there are people arguing 'well what about banning the leninists too then?' or defending their right to be an 'asshole' to other people by posting swastikas.

If there weren't self-proclaimed buttholes who behaved like that, there probably wouldn't need to be rules about these symbols, would there?
But ho-hum.

 

[Giana36]

Oh thank you, I thought I was going nuts here! <laughs> Seriously, I was wondering why people would feel they have to draw Nazi or other provocative imagery without some other motive? It's like fighting for the right to say the "N" word in America...I don't care if your logic is right or wrong, ask yourself what hole in your life is filled by the need to say it at all under ANY context, freedom to do so be damned? Same with the art...as a general rule of thumb, if your art needs to be explained why it isn't racist rather than your selfless historical motives being obvious, then you simply did it wrong and should draw something slightly different. Maybe something not do damn obviously racist! <shakes head in disbelief that this has to be explained...>

AKA "Don't draw what offends me or hurts my ass"
Its just a fucking drawing. If you don't like it, press the back button or, if it does indeed violate the rules, report it.

 

[Giana36]

The only real argument here would be that the policy forbids featuring symbols to denounce hate groups- so I imagine that people with alt-right sympathies will relish the opportunity to report people who draw people putting swastikas in trash bins, for example.


It's a bit unfortunate that there are people arguing 'well what about banning the leninists too then?' or defending their right to be an 'asshole' to other people by posting swastikas.

If there weren't self-proclaimed buttholes who behaved like that, there probably wouldn't need to be rules about these symbols, would there?
But ho-hum.

>Leninists and Maoists good because they preach about MUH EQUALITY!
Yeah, blind equality, that is. Lenin butchered not only the Czar and his family but also, along with the Cheka, anyone so much as suspected of being "counterrevolutionary". Stalin continued the bloodbath via not only the purges of the 1930s and 1940s via the NKVD, but also through an artifical famine aimed at the people of Ukraine aka the "Holodomor". Even in the 1970s and 1980s, Soviet police(such as the KGB) were known to violently break up protesting crowds for doing things the government did not want them to do. Ditto for Mainland China under Mao and his so-called "great leap forward".

 

[Mambi]

AKA "Don't draw what offends me or hurts my ass"
Its just a fucking drawing. If you don't like it, press the back button or, if it does indeed violate the rules, report it.

<giggle> It's not about me, it's not even about you. Just think about what you're defending and even how you're defending it!
It's about the idea of wanting to draw something that makes people angry on purpose. That desire to offend and the pleasure it's bringing. That joy of being an asshole, on purpose, for literally no reason, but defending the right to be an asshole by screaming that it's your right and it's the view's fault for not ignoring you.

Is this really the battle motives you are going into this with, silly? <snicker> If so, you've already lost the moral high ground and showed why freedom of speech has limits.

Basically you're defending your right to use freedom of speech to show the picture, and they're using their freedom of speech to tell you that imagery and attitude is ruing the mood of the site. Works both ways you know...and since they own the site...they win! Just accept it, not everyone wants to accidentally come across hate ideology stuff when browsing a furry site, and only an asshole would demand they be forced to sift through the pics. Remember, they hit the back button AFTER they see it traditionally and any damage would be done as their choice not to see it has just been removed, or they put trigger warnings first and you'd complain about the judgment of the flags to "warn" people as they should choose for themselves, right? <lol>

You can't win this...your logic is flawed and coming from the wrong place. It's not worth fighting for...

 

[Fallowfox]

>Leninists and Maoists good because they preach about MUH EQUALITY!
Yeah, blind equality, that is. Lenin butchered not only the Czar and his family but also, along with the Cheka, anyone so much as suspected of being "counterrevolutionary". Stalin continued the bloodbath via not only the purges of the 1930s and 1940s via the NKVD, but also through an artifical famine aimed at the people of Ukraine aka the "Holodomor". Even in the 1970s and 1980s, Soviet police(such as the KGB) were known to violently break up protesting crowds for doing things the government did not want them to do. Ditto for Mainland China under Mao and his so-called "great leap forward".

The problem is that it's like arguing that it's wrong to ban paedophiles if you don't also ban scammers.

Even if somebody liked scammers, it wouldn't make them wrong that paedophiles are bad. So it's just super weird to make this argument.

 

[Dinocanid]

I'm just gonna leave this here, the fact that this rule is even seen as a huge issue kinda justifies why the change was made imo. Some of yall have earned a nice block from me

 

[Bababooey]

My only real concern with this is the possibility that making fan art of fictional serial killers like the ones in Dead by Daylight is going to be bannable. I mean, the policy said that fictional hate groups like Hydra was fine, but it never specified if fictional serial killers were. This worries me because I like Ghostface and Jason. :/

 

[Giana36]

<giggle> It's not about me, it's not even about you. Just think about what you're defending and even how you're defending it!
It's about the idea of wanting to draw something that makes people angry on purpose. That desire to offend and the pleasure it's bringing. That joy of being an asshole, on purpose, for literally no reason, but defending the right to be an asshole by screaming that it's your right and it's the view's fault for not ignoring you.

Is this really the battle motives you are going into this with, silly? <snicker> If so, you've already lost the moral high ground and showed why freedom of speech has limits.

Basically you're defending your right to use freedom of speech to show the picture, and they're using their freedom of speech to tell you that imagery and attitude is ruing the mood of the site. Works both ways you know...and since they own the site...they win! Just accept it, not everyone wants to accidentally come across hate ideology stuff when browsing a furry site, and only an asshole would demand they be forced to sift through the pics. Remember, they hit the back button AFTER they see it traditionally and any damage would be done as their choice not to see it has just been removed, or they put trigger warnings first and you'd complain about the judgment of the flags to "warn" people as they should choose for themselves, right? <lol>

You can't win this...your logic is flawed and coming from the wrong place. It's not worth fighting for...

>Freedom of speech has limits
Yes it can, and it varies by country. Also, trolls will be trolls, overall, not just on here. Yeah, feeling "safe " and "valid" are so much more important than one's liberties/s. You can be offended all you want at whatever thing that may be. Yes freedom of speech has limits, but being an "asshole" means different things to different people. in Iran, Syria, Turkey, and Afghanistan, the thumbs up is taboo, while in Russia the "ok" hand sign refers to the butthole, and in France it means the number 0. Sure, at the very least they could make a warning of some sort.

 

[NoahGryphon]

You are all being too political about this. The biggest problem is that alot of good older art that features WW2 stuff are going to be removed! Future artists just need to avoid drawing swastikas (which is annoying but whatever), but lots of important historical older art wont have the chance to be saved.

 

[Giana36]

The problem is that it's like arguing that it's wrong to ban paedophiles if you don't also ban scammers.

Even if somebody liked scammers, it wouldn't make them wrong that paedophiles are bad. So it's just super weird to make this argument.

To you, sure. But this isn't about Scammers or pedos. The mods should be impartial above all else.

 

[Dinocanid]

My only real concern with this is the possibility that making fan art of fictional serial killers like the ones in Dead by Daylight is going to be bannable. I mean, the policy said that fictional hate groups like Hydra was fine, but it never specified if fictional serial killers were. This worries me because I like Ghostface and Jason. :/

The new rule only says real serial killers, so fictional ones like Jason would still be ok

 

[Bababooey]

The new rule only says real serial killers, so fictional ones like Jason would still be ok

It only said real terrorist organizations and hate groups. It did not say real serial killers anywhere. The policy isn't clear in that regard.

 

[Dinocanid]

It only said real terrorist organizations and hate groups. It did not say real serial killers anywhere. The policy isn't clear in that regard.

Section 2.7 Do Not Identify With or Promote Real Hate, Terrorist Organizations, Mass Murderers, Serial Killers and Their Ideologies
A hate group is one that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a designated sector of society (e.g. Nazism, ISIS, KKK) that are reflected in the real world. Users who identify with or promote real hate or terrorist organizations and their ideologies may be permanently banned from Fur Affinity without warning
-----
The "real" extends to all things listed in that statement. It's a common and more efficient way of writing it than "Real hate, Real terrorist organizations, Real mass murderers, Real serial killers, and Real ideologies"

 

[Fallowfox]

To you, sure. But this isn't about Scammers or pedos. The mods should be impartial above all else.

This is such a weird perspective.
Cracking down on nazis somehow means the mods are being nice to lenninists?
Le what?

If there was any criticism of this policy, it would be that art denouncing hate can be powerful.
I guess I'm not sure whether a furry art site full of yiff is the right place for art like that anyway?

It's weird that you're making this strange argument about the mods favouring lenninists instead.