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

Would it be a crime to suggest that body fetishes be moved to nsfw?

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
To be fair, cartoon creatives… can Indeed be into weird stuff for real XP

Tom and Jerry is my BDSM relationship goal.

Anyway, regarding the thread- the more specific you try to get people to be with tags and categories when they upload their content, the less successful compliance there is going to be and the more staff intervention will be required.
Which is going to involve a lot of tricky cases, and a lot of weird decisions are going to be made (I've seen what was clearly child porn get approved by moderators on a site that won't be mentioned because the pokémon that the child character was styled as was an 'adult evolution'), and inevitably some users will feel their art has been declared unsuitable unfairly.

In general I think that the ability of users to exclude tags they're not interested in from search results would be the best solution. Basically just because I will be able to say; 'Query: Pony. Exlude: MLP'

Google search, which some people have complained about here, actually has that function already using the '-' operator. So if you wanted to do this on Google it would be 'Pony -MLP'
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
Since it's my 20,000th post I thought I'd post some hardcore kink content.
From the Simpsons.

1LVsasn.jpg


giphy.gif


tenor.gif


Vvf9sx8PUoPR1HWzebVZn-DmlK2qQUTbHk0Xm3Cneyk.jpg



Cartoons airing on tv kinda get a pass for a lot of reasons, but the main reason being that the above stuff is literal amplification of scenarios for the sake of comedy.
Plus, it's not really sexualizing the scenario, just displaying it, which is a major difference.
Except that last one. That last one makes me question one of the artists of the simpsons. >.>;

Anyway, back on topic...

So your problem is more with quantity rather than content per se?

Well, that's kind of putting it "too simply" but, generally speaking yeah.
If it was one out of ten it likely would just be a shrug and bear it kind of deal.
It wouldn't be worth talking about because it wouldn't even show up enough to really be worrysome.
But that's kind of how one would feel about any site. If pornhub began showing content all over youtube for example, people who go to youtube to enjoy quality content might not be so happy with youtube anymore. Though, obviously the great youtube overlords would never allow such things - just an extreme example.
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
Tom and Jerry is my BDSM relationship goal.

Anyway, regarding the thread- the more specific you try to get people to be with tags and categories when they upload their content, the less successful compliance there is going to be and the more staff intervention will be required.

I agree, but the goal isn't to include a mass of arbitrary tags.
It's to include one tag, or perhaps, the ability for members to add tags at all for those who list NSFW art in general categories.
In the end, I personally want sex where sex belongs and wholesome where wholesome belongs so I can happily enjoy both whenever I'm in the mood to do so without the other just scarring my eyes (because when your horny you don't wanna see wholesome shit lol, the same logic applies to when you're just chilling). I feel like this is a pretty simple want, and something clearly quite a few people agree with to some degree based on the like ratio of the OP.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
Cartoons airing on tv kinda get a pass for a lot of reasons, but the main reason being that the above stuff is literal amplification of scenarios for the sake of comedy.
Plus, it's not really sexualizing the scenario, just displaying it, which is a major difference.
Except that last one. That last one makes me question one of the artists of the simpsons. >.>;

Anyway, back on topic...



Well, that's kind of putting it "too simply" but, generally speaking yeah.
If it was one out of ten it likely would just be a shrug and bear it kind of deal.
It wouldn't be worth talking about because it wouldn't even show up enough to really be worrysome.
But that's kind of how one would feel about any site. If pornhub began showing content all over youtube for example, people who go to youtube to enjoy quality content might not be so happy with youtube anymore. Though, obviously the great youtube overlords would never allow such things - just an extreme example.

Well, what I'm pointing out is the ambiguity.

The diapered love-bears on the simpsons aren't fetish content. Except maybe if a furry drew them they would be. But maybe not. But who really knows?

I know. But I'm not telling anybody the answer. It is just my cross to bear in this life.

I agree, but the goal isn't to include a mass of arbitrary tags.
It's to include one tag, or perhaps, the ability for members to add tags at all for those who list NSFW art in general categories.
In the end, I personally want sex where sex belongs and wholesome where wholesome belongs so I can happily enjoy both whenever I'm in the mood to do so without the other just scarring my eyes (because when your horny you don't wanna see wholesome shit lol, the same logic applies to when you're just chilling). I feel like this is a pretty simple want, and something clearly quite a few people agree with to some degree based on the like ratio of the OP.

Would you be happy with the ability to exclude terms from search results?

You're not going to be able to exclude everything though even if you insist that staff punish people who haven't tagged their art, since there is a legacy of 10 million images on FA.
Some aren't tagged. Some are uploaded by users who don't use the site anymore, or who have died since they uploaded the content.
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
I know. But I'm not telling anybody the answer. It is just my cross to bear in this life.

I appreciate you.

Would you be happy with the ability to exclude terms from search results?

You mean a filter system?
Yes. It would make site navigation as a whole, better imo. Likely wouldn't fix the issue I'm talking about, but it would help navigation which is what FA needs anyway.

if you insist that staff punish people who haven't tagged their art,

Nope. Don't want people punished. Just want art tagged or sorted properly. It's that simple. Whether staff do it via forcefully changing tags or making an account permanently Mature for all its submissions, members do it by adding tags via a system like SoFurry, or artists do it themselves via available means provided to them - depends on what the site allows - but that's out of my hands entirely and I'm not pretending to take responsibility for it, nor do I want to make that argument in the slightest.

Some aren't tagged. Some are uploaded by users who don't use the site anymore, or who have died since they uploaded the content.

Not touching that with a ten foot pole. My opinion has been stated above already, and in other posts. I'm not mad at artists, I just want a cleaner SFW view. Not spotless. Just cleaner. Give me a one NSFW outta ten SFW instead of an eleven NSFW outta three SFW. That's all I'm asking.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
I appreciate you.



You mean a filter system?
Yes. It would make site navigation as a whole, better imo. Likely wouldn't fix the issue I'm talking about, but it would help navigation which is what FA needs anyway.



Nope. Don't want people punished. Just want art tagged or sorted properly. It's that simple. Whether staff do it via forcefully changing tags or making an account permanently Mature for all its submissions, members do it by adding tags via a system like SoFurry, or artists do it themselves via available means provided to them - depends on what the site allows - but that's out of my hands entirely and I'm not pretending to take responsibility for it, nor do I want to make that argument in the slightest.



Not touching that with a ten foot pole. My opinion has been stated above already, and in other posts. I'm not mad at artists, I just want a cleaner SFW view. Not spotless. Just cleaner. Give me a one NSFW outta ten SFW instead of an eleven NSFW outta three SFW. That's all I'm asking.

I don't think anybody has the go-power to correctly re-tag the full library of art on the site. So I think the best that can be hoped for is a reduction in the frequency of coming across content people want to avoid- but you seem happy with that.

I think the peeps who own furaffinity are also probably cool with that, but doing it is hard so I don't know when they will.
I'm sure they will code it at some point.
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
I don't think anybody has the go-power to correctly re-tag the full library of art on the site.

Well it's less of that and more a, if you stumble across it add a tag if you feel like it deal. It wouldn't fix a million pieces, but it would certainly help matters.

So I think the best that can be hoped for is a reduction in the frequency of coming across content people want to avoid- but you seem happy with that.

It's not that i don't want the content to exist I'd just prefer the site have a better sorting system in place - or at least a more reliable SFW feature, - to prevent such things. For example FA has a profile option that doesn't even allow your art to be seen by search engines if you don't want it to be. Would it be difficult to apply this to things like Mature and Adult content so Google doesn't accidentally pull up something for the kiddies?

This is off topic, but just an idea. I'm not a coder, but my guess is if they can prevent an entire profile from being viewed by a massive search engine they can do it for art that's under a certain label.

Or they could put certain labels on profiles based on the type of art they upload but I'm sure that might actually offend members (though I don't know HOW to be honest).

Lastly they could just have a similar system where you could enter specific phrases for a kink and have that just filter out but it wouldn't catch everything. Hopefully it would catch more than whatever the simple SFW filter is catching now.

I'm sure they will code it at some point.

Again, the system has been like this for over ten years. It's only just now gotten a mobile version and it's not exactly the best quality either. I highly doubt the site would code in anything like this within the next five years and if it did, I'd be genuinely flabbergasted. Though I am quite cynical based upon what I've seen of FA and its updates thus far.
 
Last edited:

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
Well it's less of that and more a, if you stumble across it add a tag if you feel like it deal. It wouldn't fix a million pieces, but it would certainly help matters.

You replied before I edited my post. ;^;

I'm going to suggest a work around for now. Use google images- which can access furaffinity results.

Structure your query like this

Query: Furaffinity Pony -MLP


I'm not really up for the idea of users tagging other people's content themselves, because you're going to get nasty people who deliberately use alternative accounts to mis-tag the art of artists they're in financial competition with etc.
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
I'm going to suggest a work around for now. Use google images- which can access furaffinity results.

As said prior google can't access all FA results. Some artists don't allow search engines to pull up their work, and to be frank, I feel that if I need to use Google to look at FA in SFW mode...why am I on FA at all?

I know how to search for things in google, my issue is with FA. I'm fully aware of how to find things I want outside of FA. Been doing it for quite a few years, lol.

You might be thinking, "If you dislike FA why be here?" and that's not the case. I love FA - I just see it's flaws for what they are. I don't think it's right to not talk about them, since that takes away a sense of urgency needed to fix them in the first place and leads to people "defending" them or brushing them off as unimportant or "part of the experience" which to me, is a really dumb way of saying "I got used to it, you should to".

I am unfortunately used to it, however I won't accept it as okay - cuz it isn't. That's why I want change.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
As said prior google can't access all FA results. Some artists don't allow search engines to pull up their work, and to be frank, I feel that if I need to use Google to look at FA in SFW mode...why am I on FA at all? -_-

I know how to search for things in google, my issue is with FA. I'm fully aware of how to find things I want outside of FA. Been doing it for quite a few years, lol.

Yeah I believe I have my gallery set so people can't view it unless they're logged in.
Anyway, I've seen a lot of threads conclude that being able to whitelist or blacklist search terms would be good- and the furaffinity staff always say they're looking at it in the beta.
It's like cold fusion. It's been a few months away for the last 20 years.

Another alternative I'm going to suggest is to curate a list of SFW artists to share with each other. You could have a thread on this forum for that?
Heroes like myself are willing to expose ourselves to the diapered love bears searching out new artists to share if you like.
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
Another alternative I'm going to suggest is to curate a list of SFW artists to share with each other. You could have a thread on this forum for that?
Heroes like myself are willing to expose ourselves to the diapered love bears searching out new artists to share if you like.

While the idea is sweet, it's not necessarily going to fix the problem.
I'd rather just report each "general" listed NSFW thing I see until staff get tired of me and ban me, or they actually do something.
Though that too, would get annoying after awhile.

It's like cold fusion. It's been a few months away for the last 20 years.

I suppose in the end, there's no winning.
Still submitted a ticket for the hell of it.
Maybe it might not lead to much but, hey, never know till ya try.
By technicality most of that stuff is breaking FA rules and policies after all. >.>;
 
Last edited:

quoting_mungo

Well-Known Member
It's not at all that dramatic, staff don't need to read people's minds to be able to know what is and isn't a fetish based on how something is portrayed.
It either is, or it isn't - and staff are very much aware of what is fetishized art as they are mature adults who have likely seen porn before. As are we, I would assume.
Suggesting otherwise is either ignorant or extremely naive. In either case it makes for a poor defense.
I will point out that I used to be on staff. I have seen what people report and their stated reasons why. What one artist draws for titillation, another draws for wholly innocent reasons, or as a silly joke. It is not always possible to discern intent from the artwork alone, and unless the artist has outright stated one way or the other, it is going to be a guessing game.

If FA were to go for an approach of “if you drew it for titillation it needs to be Mature” it would require staff to make calls that involve taking guesses at artists’ intent. That’s what I mean when I say any rule based on artist intent would require staff to be mind readers, and there’s definitely enough gray area content out there that it would be fucking awful to try to get consistent moderation out of it.

If they try to enumerate exactly what is and isn’t considered too fetishized, policy documents would be prohibitively long and clean artists caught up in the mess despite their art never being intended as wank material would likely be (justifiably) hurt and upset.

This is true, but site design can certainly change how often rules are broken or what things are issues to begin with.
How would you change things? As fallow said, some site rules are not abided by very well.
Honestly the number one thing that needs to change if people are ever to get better about following rules is users’ attitudes about reporting content. Reporting violations isn’t snitching. Not reporting content that violates rules means you have no right to bitch about that content. If someone reports your submission that isn’t a personal attack on you. If you are told something is not, in fact, a violation that is not an invitation to kick up a stink on social media. If you have a submission/journal/comment removed for violating rules that’s not anyone (least of all staff) having it in for you, nor is it an invitation to kick up a stink on social media.

If things don’t get reported, staff likely won’t see them. Other people will see those submissions and assume that they are allowed, then post similar submissions of their own. It propagates, and the portion that does get reported and dealt with gets interpreted as favoritism/a grudge on the part of staff.

I can't agree with this. We need to consider art within the context of FA and the internet in general. Besides, you can get away with things in children's media that you might not be able to in others.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re arguing, here. Something that is rated PG or PG-13 in theaters or on TV should suddenly be rated R (closest equivalent to Mature) because it’s on FA? What is it that you feel is appropriate for children but not for adults? I genuinely am having trouble following your reasoning.

Like Mungo's fat rabbit sitting on a rock hard carrot. I thought that was pornography when I clicked it.
I genuinely can’t tell whether you’re serious. If Cake Wrecks references are being interpreted as pornographic, IMO that just illustrates my point - people can read intent into art that never existed.

In general I think that the ability of users to exclude tags they're not interested in from search results would be the best solution. Basically just because I will be able to say; 'Query: Pony. Exlude: MLP'
You can do that already. Like... you can literally type in “pony !mlp” (without the quotation marks) into the search and get that. I think - works as well but I find the exclamation mark to be less ambiguous. Search is way more customizable than majority of users use it.

Would it be difficult to apply this to things like Mature and Adult content so Google doesn't accidentally pull up something for the kiddies?
Google can’t see Mature/Adult content; it’s just a guest user. IIRC it doesn’t even index more than profile pages (I think that’s what FA’s robots file has been set to for the last like... upwards of five years if not more).
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
I will point out that I used to be on staff. I have seen what people report and their stated reasons why. What one artist draws for titillation, another draws for wholly innocent reasons, or as a silly joke. It is not always possible to discern intent from the artwork alone, and unless the artist has outright stated one way or the other, it is going to be a guessing game.

If FA were to go for an approach of “if you drew it for titillation it needs to be Mature” it would require staff to make calls that involve taking guesses at artists’ intent. That’s what I mean when I say any rule based on artist intent would require staff to be mind readers, and there’s definitely enough gray area content out there that it would be fucking awful to try to get consistent moderation out of it.

If they try to enumerate exactly what is and isn’t considered too fetishized, policy documents would be prohibitively long and clean artists caught up in the mess despite their art never being intended as wank material would likely be (justifiably) hurt and upset.

At that point, staff judgement is necessary to use.
Surely a staff member could decide what is and is not considered mature.
I'm assuming mind reading wouldn't be necessary. It's not about pleasing members - it's about cleaning up.

Google can’t see Mature/Adult content; it’s just a guest user.

That pretty much summarizes my point in an odd way...

Search is way more customizable than majority of users use it.

I didn't even know this.
FA uses a lot of (imo) outdated things and code to get a simple result and most of it is learn as you go.
Which just makes things worse, not better. It also doesn't fix the actual problem of minors being exposed but- I digress.
 

Baalf

Will accept free hugs and tummy rubs.
It's a tough call; not because I'm against the idea of more control over NSFW stuff, but rather as in my case, what exactly gets the NSFW label?

Muscle and fat art are something of a very big grey area. People have no problem reading comics that have characters with Rob Liedfieldian proportions, but the kinds of body horror I've seen in this category could warrant NSFW tags. But how much is really too much? Is a fat woman in a bikini truly too much? I can easily see a naked character getting the label, and a lot of this squashing stuff is certainly not for everyone, but people like me who are "in the middle" of either safe or risque really are in a predicament.

when when it comes to fat characters, I usually try to be cartoonish about them. I try not to go too far with drawings on them. The only exception is an alternate version of one of my characters that is legitimately supposed to look kinda gross, but it's more to appeal to people who like things that are hideous and imposing as well as people who like characters that are plump. I could understand having the put him in the mature art category, but a lot of my characters like the regular version of that character or alot of his friends really should not be put in that category.

Compare this: www.furaffinity.net: The Belly is Mightier Than the Sword! Regular Alt by BennyBunnycorn
To this: www.furaffinity.net: The Belly's Mightier Than The Sword by Earthquake-Warriors

I could understand having a problem with the second one, but what's wrong with the first one? I made the second one specifically for people who like fat Furs and ugly characters, but I Drew The first One for everyone.
 

BlackDragonAJ89

Bumbling Everyman
@BennyJackdaw

Honestly I'd argue that when it comes to super stylized or cartoony stuff, where exaggerated proportions of anything non sexual is expected, I wouldn't be as quick to put the Mature rating tag on it. After all, you didn't draw a bunch of folds, grunge, food stains, and whatever else to make this character as disgusting as possible.

I could argue with my two examples, people probably would be more willing to put a mature tag on them.

Compare these:
www.furaffinity.net: Ready The Blast by DarkHorseArtie89
www.furaffinity.net: Helena Revamp by DarkHorseArtie89

To These:
www.furaffinity.net: Different Species, Same Body by DarkHorseArtie89
www.furaffinity.net: Bountiful by DarkHorseArtie89

I'd wager that the last two would probably more likely be pinged for mature since they're more sexual in nature (although I'd suspect many people would just label everything of mine mature because of how it's drawn). Having something that looks more like a character render or an action scene where the character's body isn't the sole focus should be fine.

Which I guess brings us to another point when discussing muscles and fat; what's the context of the picture? A fat guy breaking a sword with his belly probably isn't fetishy so much as it is funny, just as some big strong woman lifting up a whole car so her friend can find her keys would be as well. Meanwhile, some micro character getting sat on or getting squashed between boobs/pecs is certainly a fetish.
 

Illuminaughty

Ring-a-ding-ding, pal.
I think one can be too concerned about this, but I still agree to an extent. I don't think we should be policing things that are at least passably innocent, because there are levels of explicitness, and I think there is room in the SFW category for "suggestive". But I've seen some extremely egregious things fly under the NSFW radar just because they don't involve genitalia, and I don't think that's okay either.

There's nothing wrong with kink or NSFW art, but as with all things, it should be properly tagged so that people don't have to see anything blatantly fetish related when they're browsing what should be SFW art.

Basically, there is a difference between just drawing a character who is fat/muscular, and drawing artwork that is clearly highlighting those assets of the character in a sexual way. The same way there is a difference between drawing a character in underwear, and a character in underwear actively "getting busy" with another character.

It isn't the thing itself that is inherently sexual, because that's not really true of most fetishes- it's the framing and the context.

That said, I don't think this is a huge deal. And I do think it could easily be solved without impeding anyone by simply allowing people to "blacklist" certain tags for their account.
 
Last edited:

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
I could understand having a problem with the second one, but what's wrong with the first one?

I personally have no issue with the first one, as said in a prior post there is a very clear difference between fat - be it cartoonishly or genuine - and "hyper" or fetishized obesity. It's so painfully obvious that I'd probably laugh at anyone who said they couldn't see the difference. -_-
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
I think one can be too concerned about this, but I still agree to an extent. I don't think we should be policing things that are at least passably innocent, because there are levels of explicitness, and I think there is room in the SFW category for "suggestive". But I've seen some extremely egregious things fly under the NSFW radar just because they don't involve genitalia, and I don't think that's okay either.

There's nothing wrong with kink or NSFW art, but as with all things, it should be properly tagged so that people don't have to see anything blatantly fetish related when they're browsing what should be SFW art.

Basically, there is a difference between just drawing a character who is fat/muscular, and drawing artwork that is clearly highlighting those assets of the character in a sexual way. The same way there is a difference between drawing a character in underwear, and a character in underwear actively "getting busy" with another character.

It isn't the thing itself that is inherently sexual, because that's not really true of most fetishes- it's the framing and the context.

That said, I don't think this is a huge deal. And I do think it could easily be solved without impeding anyone by simply allowing people to "blacklist" certain tags for their account.

I agree with this post to a large degree, and I'm not trying to make it out to be a bigger deal than it is - however, I do think that some change is needed for the sake of member usability of the website without being forced to see things they don't want. Most of the time things relative to bodily fluids, or other things that would make the normal person gag upon sighting. Some art can get really, really into it or detailed and as said in my original post...I have a weak stomach, and I'm clearly not the only one. ^^;
 
Last edited:

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
@BennyJackdaw

Honestly I'd argue that when it comes to super stylized or cartoony stuff, where exaggerated proportions of anything non sexual is expected, I wouldn't be as quick to put the Mature rating tag on it. After all, you didn't draw a bunch of folds, grunge, food stains, and whatever else to make this character as disgusting as possible.

I could argue with my two examples, people probably would be more willing to put a mature tag on them.

Compare these:
www.furaffinity.net: Ready The Blast by DarkHorseArtie89
www.furaffinity.net: Helena Revamp by DarkHorseArtie89

To These:
www.furaffinity.net: Different Species, Same Body by DarkHorseArtie89
www.furaffinity.net: Bountiful by DarkHorseArtie89

I'd wager that the last two would probably more likely be pinged for mature since they're more sexual in nature (although I'd suspect many people would just label everything of mine mature because of how it's drawn). Having something that looks more like a character render or an action scene where the character's body isn't the sole focus should be fine.

Which I guess brings us to another point when discussing muscles and fat; what's the context of the picture? A fat guy breaking a sword with his belly probably isn't fetishy so much as it is funny, just as some big strong woman lifting up a whole car so her friend can find her keys would be as well. Meanwhile, some micro character getting sat on or getting squashed between boobs/pecs is certainly a fetish.

Perfectly stated.
 

quoting_mungo

Well-Known Member
At that point, staff judgement is necessary to use.
Surely a staff member could decide what is and is not considered mature.
I'm assuming mind reading wouldn't be necessary. It's not about pleasing members - it's about cleaning up.
“Moderator discretion” is not how you get consistent moderation, though. Inconsistent moderation due to different staff members making different calls in borderline cases, if widespread, ends up hurting the community as a whole in the end, and creates insecurity in artists. The goal of policy writing should be to avoid this.

Again, if you make rules focusing on intent, you are literally asking staff to know the artist’s mind. If you don’t focus on intent, but essentially “is this wank material for someone?” you are instead telling artists with no intent of creating anything fetishy that they’re now fetish artists, which is associated with stigma, and could be very hurtful. Doubly so if those artists are minors, as it would mean their work would get taken down (as minors may not have Mature/Adult content in their galleries).

I’m not certain why you feel it’s not about pleasing members, when you’ve repeatedly said part of the issue to you is that users should be able to avoid seeing what you consider fetish art if they don’t want to. That sounds like pleasing members to me. Maybe not the same set of members/users, but still, ultimately, it’s about pleasing some set of users.

Most of the time things relative to bodily fluids, or other things that would be the normal person gag upon sighting.
Depending on what you include in “bodily fluids” you already have much of what you want in that regard. The “Other” section of the AUP General rating guidelines:
Free of sexual fluids, bodily waste, or forced involuntary drug use. Minimal blood presented in a comedic manner or mild, non-violent injury is permitted.
I can’t say what exactly the “excessive fetish themes” mentioned in the section on sexual content includes, as I didn’t personally work AUP when I was on staff and even if I had it’s been two and a half years since I resigned so internal policy may have been revised. I’d even forgotten that clause was even in there, tbh, as it’s never really been relevant to me. If you want more details on where that line is drawn I’d say hit up the “Question About Site Policy” ticket category on mainsite.

I didn't even know this.
FA uses a lot of (imo) outdated things and code to get a simple result and most of it is learn as you go.
It’s information that’s been available on the Search page approximately since search was reopened in full. (I’ve certainly never seen the page without it.)
 

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
Inconsistent moderation due to different staff members making different calls in borderline cases, if widespread, ends up hurting the community as a whole in the end, and creates insecurity in artists.

Fair point. At this point though, we've gone from a forum filter debate to a forum staff debate and I'm not really interested in talking about a position on a website I've never worked for. I've been a staff member (of varying roles) on other sites - but never an art site, - so we'll leave it here as far as my feelings towards a staff's capabilities as a staff member. I literally have almost no opinion on it other than, "A fetish is a fetish and staff are smart people."

But yes, that is vague and people can get their feelings hurt sometimes, unfortunately.

I’m not certain why you feel it’s not about pleasing members, when you’ve repeatedly said part of the issue to you is that users should be able to avoid seeing what you consider fetish art if they don’t want to. That sounds like pleasing members to me. Maybe not the same set of members/users, but still, ultimately, it’s about pleasing some set of users.

Allow me to word it this way, then: Whilst the overall goal of the site should be to design it in a way that makes it easy and fun for overall member use, sometimes a staff member has to make a decision about a submission or a certain functionality of the site (something along those lines) that might make one or a group of members upset. An example of this is when the update made it to where artists couldn't spam-post advertisements all day. There was that huge thread where on one side, artists complained that they would lose money and on the other side, members/commissioners/other artists argued that branching out was apart of being a commission based worker. I'm not saying that the overall goal isn't member happiness and member usage, but I am saying that every decision isn't about pleasing members - aka, "all members" - there will be unfortunate cases where such a goal is not only unrealistic generally speaking, but completely impossible. This is an obvious statement when being a staff member on any website, including an art based one, so at the very least with this I can speak from some level of experience. I can only assume as a former staff member of FA, you'd be able to understand this logic to a particular degree.

I can’t say what exactly the “excessive fetish themes” mentioned in the section on sexual content includes, as I didn’t personally work AUP when I was on staff and even if I had it’s been two and a half years since I resigned so internal policy may have been revised. I’d even forgotten that clause was even in there, tbh, as it’s never really been relevant to me. If you want more details on where that line is drawn I’d say hit up the “Question About Site Policy” ticket category on mainsite.

I read the policies and TOS and made a ticket in response to them. Currently, I'm waiting on what le staffers say. Mostly out of curiosity, but also because I want light shed onto what I and apparently sixteen (and counting!) members see as an inconvenience at best and an actual problem at worst. I appreciate what little insight you can offer as a former staff, as well as the fact that you know where you cannot offer insight - instead of the usual behavior of an online individual where they go, "Well I was former staff so I'm right and I know everything!" gods that gets old fast, haha.

It’s information that’s been available on the Search page approximately since search was reopened in full. (I’ve certainly never seen the page without it.)

Available information and information that's easily spottable are two different things, then again, I'm extremely near-sighted and hardly pay attention to the small text unless I'm already looking for it so...take that with a grain of salt. Should I have read it? Probably. Am I going to bother reading something that's at best inconvenient and at worst painful? Nah. I'd rather just torture myself with fetish art I didn't ask for on SFW mode or ask for a more updated system, which to be fair, is something FA has been needing for over ten years...but this is all opinion, and off topic opinion at that, so once again take that with a grain of salt.
 

oappo

Well-Known Member
I’m not sure I understand what you’re arguing, here.
What I was saying was you can put adult jokes, fetishy stuff and other such things into children's shows because it goes right over their heads.

Honestly the number one thing that needs to change if people are ever to get better about following rules is users’ attitudes about reporting content.
If things don’t get reported, staff likely won’t see them. Other people will see those submissions and assume that they are allowed, then post similar submissions of their own.
This is partially why I advocate for allowing more customization/exclusion. reporting can turn into a catch-22 situation; people stop reporting things for one reason or another, which only encourages others to violate the rules as it becomes the norm, which only makes reporting even more pointless. I'd say FA design is a bit problematic as far as reporting goes; having to go open up a scroll-down menu and open a ticket to report something every time is relatively cumbersome and obscure. It's a really minor thing, but having the report button be visible on the offending page and streamlining the process itself can make a huge difference
 
Last edited:

Raever

Chaotic Neutral Wreckage
FA design is a bit problematic as far as reporting goes; having to go open up a scroll-down menu and open a ticket to report something every time is relatively cumbersome and obscure. It's a really minor thing, but having the report button be visible on the offending page and streamlining the process itself can make a huge difference

Can agree there. There is no report button for a submission. Instead you have to link the submission in a ticket in a different window. While it might not seem like a lot for one submission, if you have people or staff members such as mods trying to bring attention to several things for higher staff members it can be quite cumbersome and open far too many tickets.
 

hara-surya

Deviated Prevert
I completely agree that non-explicit kinks need to be identified and filtered as adult. The problem is, though, where to draw the line. It falls into the problem with obscenity of "I know it when I see it."

Just as an example: Fan-art of the Austin Powers character Fat Bastard. Or, a 1970s "Mr. Universe" Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both could push up against limits of any reasonable test you could create.

But, there already is a spot in the submissions to add what kind of kink a submission appeals to and I think giving the user the option to filter content based on those tags would be the easiest fix. FurAffinity is little more than a database containing media files and its related metadata. Let users chose which metadata they want to see.
 

hara-surya

Deviated Prevert
Can agree there. There is no report button for a submission. Instead you have to link the submission in a ticket in a different window. While it might not seem like a lot for one submission, if you have people or staff members such as mods trying to bring attention to several things for higher staff members it can be quite cumbersome and open far too many tickets.

About a week ago a new user was spamming real life nude photos and it was a pain in the butt to report even one, much less all of them. I can see a problem with abusing a reporting function - DeviantArt has a massive problem with people reporting tasteful pinups as obscene to the point talents artists are leaving - but it's a start.
 
Top