• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

[@@@ ON HOLD @@@]: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
A new policy has gone into effect called the "Imageshack Behavior" policy. This policy, in essence, affects only those users who use FA as an image dump for anything and everything NOT art related.

Policy: Imageshack Behavior

Short End of the Story: Changes are being made to the maximum number of "personal images" that can be uploaded to FA. Too many users are treating the site like Photobucket/Imageshack, and it's flooding the site with too many random pictures of pets, toys, bugs on the wall, etc.

Long Version: See our wiki entry for the full policy.

If you have any questions or comments feel free to voice your opinion! We're trying to give everybody a heads up as to the change.
 

Hanazawa

Would Like To Play a Game
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

will this "grandfather in" old submissions, or are you going to crack down on already-junk-filled galleries now?
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Hanazawa said:
will this "grandfather in" old submissions, or are you going to crack down on already-junk-filled galleries now?
They're not going to be grandfathered in. We may make exceptions depending on the person.

It's retroactive. If people have a concern about it, or have a good reason for an exception, they can contact me about it and I'll work with them.
 

bengalic

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I do not make art. But I do have pics of my fursuit. So are they allowed?
 

Growly

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

bengalic said:
I do not make art. But I do have pics of my fursuit. So are they allowed?


Reading is good for you.

"Every day life" includes, but is not limited to: pictures of pets, toys, fursuits, people, household items, parties, websites (including Fur Affinity) and Second Life.


Though if you are the creator of the fursuit, you are allowed to post it. :)
 

bengalic

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Growly said:
bengalic said:
I do not make art. But I do have pics of my fursuit. So are they allowed?


Reading is good for you.

"Every day life" includes, but is not limited to: pictures of pets, toys, fursuits, people, household items, parties, websites (including Fur Affinity) and Second Life.


Though if you are the creator of the fursuit, you are allowed to post it. :)

Yeah I read that and as I understand it, you won't be able to post pics of fursuits anymore.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Growly said:
Though if you are the creator of the fursuit, you are allowed to post it. :)
Clarification: If you create or own the fursuit you are allowed to post as many pictures as you want (within reason). The flooding portion applies to all, so if you upload 10 images of your suit hugging random people, we may decide that's flooding and ask you to clean it up.
 

dave hyena

A wonderous moorhen
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

How is this going to be enforced? In the sense of actually going through and doing it all.

For example, Is it envisaged that people might report violations of this rule through trouble tickets or on the violations forum, or that the adminstrators will work through this at their own pace? Perhaps with people searching through and compiling lists to aid in this process etc?:)
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Dave Hyena said:
How is this going to be enforced? In the sense of actually going through and doing it all.

For example, Is it envisaged that people might report violations of this rule through trouble tickets or on the violations forum, or that the adminstrators will work through this at their own pace? Perhaps with people searching through and compiling lists to aid in this process etc?:)
It will be enforced lightly at first, more strict over time. I'd rather users not mass report issues like this, because we don't need rules nazis over-reporting the rule. However, if somebody clearly has two dozen images that are painfully off topic, dropping us a note is fine in my book, but if we're getting lots of reports of people bitching about a user for having SIX off topic images, being one over the limit, we're probably going to roll our eyes.

Admins will send users a note and give them a week to cull down the excess images. As the policy says, if users do not comply, we will begin to remove images. We'll attempt to keep any image based on its apparent importance.
 

Zakassis

Fweee!
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Well, I myself only have one photo-related image in my gallery, which is of my kitten...

I should be fine, right?
 

whitewulfe

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

* "Every day life" includes, but is not limited to: pictures of pets, toys, fursuits, people, household items, parties, websites (including Fur Affinity) and Second Life.
* "Not of artistic merit" includes but is not limited to: image macros, random junk you saw, photos and/or screenshots or a picture of the that thing growing in the back of the fridge that speaks to you when you open the door.

Is it safe to presume that in the near future clearer rules on "of artistic merit" photography will be posted, seeing that the current definitions of every day life and not of artistic merit are very broad? I ask because naturally when one goes about and does things like take sixty pictures and posts only one (or at most two, although my current trend as of late is two), having somewhat clearcut rules makes things a lot easier for those who express their artwork through a lens (even if it's a cameraphone because they can't afford $2k in camera gear atm).

What about things like landscapes, automotive photoshoots, photoshoots of other natures, or of people when you're visiting another country (provided of course you're following traditional photography "rules" like acquiring permission to take pictures and such)?

What if with photoshoots people went about and posted a single pic from the photoshoot, picking their best picture and then posting a link to the rest, would such be considered acceptable, or would such still fall under the five personal pictures rule?

And as well (since it comes to mind), for photography will pictures using only higher end gear (aka at minimum a proper point and shoot camera) be accepted, or will cameraphone pics be accepted as well?

Asking all these questions because I'm wanting to clear things up as to what I need to be keeping in my own personal galleries over at my own website, and what I can post over here on FA.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Zakassis said:
Well, I myself only have one photo-related image in my gallery, which is of my kitten...

I should be fine, right?
Yep!
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

whitewulfe said:
Is it safe to presume that in the near future clearer rules on "of artistic merit" photography will be posted, seeing that the current definitions of every day life and not of artistic merit are very broad? I ask because naturally when one goes about and does things like take sixty pictures and posts only one (or at most two, although my current trend as of late is two), having somewhat clearcut rules makes things a lot easier for those who express their artwork through a lens (even if it's a cameraphone because they can't afford $2k in camera gear atm).
It's hard to define more clear limits without putting ourselves into a rut where we over-define things. I'll attempt to add a bit more clarity to the rules later.

If you ever have questions as to what's legitimate or not you can always post links to me in a note and I'll let you know. It's a bit vague on purpose. Sometimes it's only until you see an image that you know what category it fits into.

whitewulfe said:
What about things like landscapes, automotive photoshoots, photoshoots of other natures, or of people when you're visiting another country (provided of course you're following traditional photography "rules" like acquiring permission to take pictures and such)?
Professional photography will not be touched. If somebody is taking professional, quality pictures we understand and respect that, and won't won't remove 'em.

whitewulfe said:
What if with photoshoots people went about and posted a single pic from the photoshoot, picking their best picture and then posting a link to the rest, would such be considered acceptable, or would such still fall under the five personal pictures rule?
You can provide all the links you want to so long as the content on the pages are legal (no warez!). So, you can post a picture and then a link to more images.

Camera phone images probably won't apply unless they maintain a certain level of quality.
 

Vitae

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Question:
Seeing as "pets" are lumped into the "no" category, how about fish? I'm not talking about posting pictures of "bob the goldfish" I mean like, my guppies for example.
I selectively breed guppies for their tail length/shape/quality and color.

I consider this art, and I plan on posting pictures of my new batch of offspring which are getting their colors in. It's something that I didn't quite "create" I didn't "fertilize the eggs" but I selected a breed of guppy to mate with selected females for specific traits. That takes a lot of work.
 

whitewulfe

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Dragoneer said:
It's hard to define more clear limits without putting ourselves into a rut where we over-define things. I'll attempt to add a bit more clarity to the rules later.

If you ever have questions as to what's legitimate or not you can always post links to me in a note and I'll let you know. It's a bit vague on purpose. Sometimes it's only until you see an image that you know what category it fits into.

Good to know.

Dragoneer said:
Professional photography will not be touched. If somebody is taking professional, quality pictures we understand and respect that, and won't won't remove 'em.

Makes sense, just wanted to make sure.

Dragoneer said:
You can provide all the links you want to so long as the content on the pages are legal (no warez!). So, you can post a picture and then a link to more images.

Camera phone images probably won't apply unless they maintain a certain level of quality.

Highly doubtful I'd be putting warez on my website, I'd have Rabbit or one of my other host's admins on my ass pretty quick, and not in the good way...

And with cameraphones, guess I'm best get that second job so I can afford that Digital Rebel XTi ^_^

Thanks a bunch for all the clarifications, and even more so for the quick reply.:D
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

whitewulfe said:
Thanks a bunch for all the clarifications, and even more so for the quick reply.:D
We appreciate it, and I apologize for the inconvenience... I really do. Unfortunately, things just got out of hand with certain users and we had to define a set standard, while still leaving people a bit of wiggle-room.
 

sneakcoyote

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Darn. Now I'm gonna have to do a few things to bring my gallery into compliance. Well pictures from the zoo are definately out. And then I'll have to remove some of my plushie photos. And my pets. And the spider in the garage will have to go. There might be other stuff in my galley I will have questions about.
 
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I'm glad you guys are cracking down on this. FA isn't a photoblog or a Livejournal or a MySpace or any of those other services. There's more appropriate places for those kinds of journalish random pictures than an art site.
 

Rouge2

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I hope there won't be a size limit to how much you can upload.
 

Kata'lina

Ceo of the IBKC
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Thank you! Oh Gods Thank you! I mean I do have 2 or 3 regular pictures, artistcaly done yes, but picuturs none the less, but nothing irks me more, than watching a good artist, and when there is a submission of thiers, my box is filled with like 15 or more Photos of this that or the other thing...that had nothing to do with art.

Thank you for this rule.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Rouge2 said:
I hope there won't be a size limit to how much you can upload.
There is. I suggest you read the rule so you understand the limits in place.
 

Rouge2

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Dragoneer said:
Rouge2 said:
I hope there won't be a size limit to how much you can upload.
There is. I suggest you read the rule so you understand the limits in place.

I meant about how much you can upload on an account.
 

whitewulfe

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Dragoneer said:
We appreciate it, and I apologize for the inconvenience... I really do. Unfortunately, things just got out of hand with certain users and we had to define a set standard, while still leaving people a bit of wiggle-room.

Not a problem, it just gives me the motivation to save up for my camera instaed of buying more vinyl, and of course to keep improving on taking even better pictures... ^_^
 

AishaDracoGryph

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I have seen people using the site for what they could be using photobucket or imageshack for, but I also see people posting up stuff they just want to share with their friends on FA.

I for one have a bunch of pic of my dog because I like the ability to have people comment of them and such. I also have a bunch of pics of some snowmen I made.

The dog pics might be seen as personal pics but what about my snowmen? I made them myself and many would argue that that is art. They sure are original to me. Do my snowmen also count as personal pics?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top