# What the hell were the Burned Furs?



## paxil rose (Dec 24, 2009)

I hear them brought up every so often, and have come to realize nobody really knows anything about these individuals other than "They hated teh yiff and that makes them motherfuckers". I hear contrasting stories from them, from that they didn't want so much porn around, to they actively tried to get rid of said porn, to that they hated everyone and everything for no apparent reason. A choice quote from a self describe "ex Burned Fur";



> I head a concern about yiff and the image problem it was causing, perhaps even more so than I do now and felt it necessary to do everything at any cost to disassociate myself from it. I posted the Burnt Fur badge on my furry websites along with a link to its manifesto. On my Anthropomorphia site I even created a document inspired by the manifesto to make it clear that I do not do yiff. At that time I thought Burnt Fur had good intentions. But then they transformed into what they were infamous for. The witch hunts, the trolling, and stamping out of differing viewpoints. They violated the two virtues of the fandom that most furries hold dear, Acceptance and Tolerance.


Did any of this actually happen, or is this now "I'm still batshit but don't worry it's of the liberal variety and that makes it awesome" person taking the whole _Acceptance and Tolerance_ portion with the most weight and deciding people that weren't thrilled with the idea not being too thrilled with the huge amount of fap material and didn't sugarcoat said opinion with "Well golly gee you guys, I sure do love the fandom and will surely stfu should I displease you with anything I say, but..."? Now I see Burned Fur used as more or less the N-word for the most hardcore of furries, but I doubt they actually know what it means, especially since this special breed of furfag where behind the totally-yiff-supporting-ergo-it's-totally-not-the-same-thing FurryOps debacle.

What the fuck were these guys? Did they actually go apeshit? Did some people just really really hate being called out on their douchebaggery?


----------



## Ikrit (Dec 24, 2009)

http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Burned_Furs


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 24, 2009)

Right, but thing is, the "furry wiki" probably isn't the best place to go for information on a group of people that have eventually become synonymous with "Asshole furryhating trolls in wolves avatars". Especially considering I know WikiFur has a funny little policy of "If someone says you're a troll enough, we'll make sure the page reflects it". I was really more curious if anyone actually had any firsthand experience of the group and what they actually did.


----------



## Toaster (Dec 24, 2009)

Try ED, it has something on it I'm sure.


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 24, 2009)

The ED is funny but doesn't get into any of their "witch hunt" shenanigans.


----------



## JoeStrike (Dec 24, 2009)

The founder of Burned Furs is a friend of mine... but he still likes me anyway, so maybe there's hope for him yet.


----------



## CannonFodder (Dec 24, 2009)

burned furs=people who lifestyled it so hard other lifestyliers made fun of them


----------



## foxmusk (Dec 24, 2009)

people who hated everything sexual about the fandom, more or less. i think they just harassed yiff-crazy people or murrtards like wolfee.


----------



## Senora Kitty (Dec 24, 2009)

So in a nutshell Burnt Furs went the way of PeTA. Started out as a good idea, but then crazy mofos joined in and it all went to hell in a flaming furry hand basket. Gotcha.


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 24, 2009)

CannonFodder said:


> burned furs=people who lifestyled it so hard other lifestyliers made fun of them




Haha, never heard it put that way before.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Dec 24, 2009)

Senora Kitty said:


> So in a nutshell Burnt Furs went the way of PeTA. Started out as a good idea, but then crazy mofos joined in and it all went to hell in a flaming furry hand basket. Gotcha.



PETA started out as a good idea?


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 24, 2009)

Burned Fur started as a good idea.

Its purpose was to try to encourage people and conventions and communities to separate the line between fetish and fandom.  They went about it in a horribly bad way, though, first calling anything and everything a fetish.

You look at mystery novels, for example.  Many mystery novels contain a sex scene or two.  Some contain more.  If there was a Burned Fur counterpart for the mystery genre, they would be going apeshit about it.  And yet, that would have exempted some of the greatest mystery writers of our time.  

See?  That was a stretch of an analogy, but that was the level that they went to.  

And then they started harassing people.  Not just mildly, but some of them were outing people.  At that point, they had irrevocably tied some levels of homosexuality with furry, and were bashing the "coming of age" type stories that inevitably follow.

Now, the legacy of Burned Fur is that the lifestylers have a big boogy man to point at whenever someone suggests some level of control regarding the fetish level of conventions and the overtly sexual nature of the fandom.  

The argument goes something like this:

A: <shits a diaper in the middle of the dealers room>
B: Eww.  Who shit themselves?  Man, we need to have some rules regarding this type of stuff.  Its not right, and it can't be furry.
C: Sure, B, then we'll have the all night fursecution squads.  I bet you're a burned fur!
B: No, I just don't think some things are proper or necessary for Furry.
C: Shut up, you intolerant fuck.  Furry doesn't need assholes like you.

The long term effect of Burned Fur is that the fans will immediately, consistently, and completely lose any argument regarding behavior in this fandom due to a displacement technique like above.

So that's Burned Fur.   A group that went way too far, made too many enemies, and gave up more ground than it gained.


----------



## Senora Kitty (Dec 24, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> PETA started out as a good idea?


The original idea of PeTA started by Pamela Anderson was to stop animal abuse. Then crazy people joined and BOOM you see them as the PeTA they are today. It's sad when a good thing goes wrong.


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 24, 2009)

Senora Kitty said:


> The original idea of PeTA started by Pamela Anderson was to stop animal abuse. Then crazy people joined and BOOM you see them as the PeTA they are today. It's sad when a good thing goes wrong.



Not to hijack too far, but Pamela Anderson did not found PETA.  She was part of the crazy who changed it.


----------



## Senora Kitty (Dec 24, 2009)

GraemeLion said:


> Not to hijack too far, but Pamela Anderson did not found PETA.  She was part of the crazy who changed it.


Nope she was one of the first people who helped found it. You should watch her Celebrity Roast some time. There are some great PeTA jokes in there.

Now can we stop carrying on about it? PeTA is not the point of this thread.


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 24, 2009)

Without going too far into it, Anderson's involvement with PETA was in the 90s.  She was a spokesperson.   PETA was founded in 1980.

Anderson was 13 at the time.


----------



## Ricky (Dec 24, 2009)

People with no sense of humor who take stuff way too seriously.

You'll still see people like that pop up on some sites, today.


----------



## Duality Jack (Dec 24, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> The ED is funny but doesn't get into any of their "witch hunt" shenanigans.


 you ought to fix that my good friend.


EDIT: These burned furs do not seem to terrible I find the prospect amusing.


----------



## chewie (Dec 24, 2009)

beats me x.x


----------



## Taylor325 (Dec 24, 2009)

Who beats you?


----------



## Viva (Dec 24, 2009)

They basically went against what makes being a furry worth it


----------



## Duality Jack (Dec 24, 2009)

Taylor325 said:


> Who beats you?


 his husband :V


----------



## Viva (Dec 24, 2009)

The Drunken Ace said:


> his husband :V


 
*gasp* SCANDALOUSSSS!!!!    anyway...back on topic


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 24, 2009)

adog said:


> They basically went against what makes being a furry worth it



You mean the sex, the pedophilia, the beastiality , and the messy diapers?

That's originally what they were against.  That fetish should be left in the bedroom.

But, instead of focusing on the message of what they thought we should do, they focused on what we shouldn't.   It's harder to achieve a negative goal than a positive one.  If they started a publishing house, printed their kind of ideas in stories, built artwork around a common theme of just "being about the animals and being a fan", endorsed movies, and had constructive benefit, they would have been fine.

Instead, they went around "trolling" all they disliked.  There was no end goal.  There was nothing they were shooting for.   Even the "manifesto," which clearly had goals listed in it, was completely ignored in favor of just being asses.


----------



## Viva (Dec 24, 2009)

GraemeLion said:


> You mean the sex, the *pedophilia*, the beastiality , and the *messy diapers*?
> 
> That's originally what they were against. That fetish should be left in the bedroom.
> 
> ...


 
those are gross.  and yes.  its hard to do something when you are only given what you should not do.  its a good thing they are [mostly] gone.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Dec 24, 2009)

ok so back off topic, are you guys saying Pamela Anderson is the founder of PETA the way Jenny McCarthy is the founder of autism awareness?


----------



## icecold24 (Dec 24, 2009)

Twelve years ago, burned furs tried to stop the fandom from what it would eventually become twelve years later.

Evidently, they failed miserably.


----------



## Felicia Mertallis (Dec 24, 2009)

A recipe in the vore lovers cookbook of course.


----------



## RailRide (Dec 25, 2009)

Heh, the "manifesto" was never supposed to be released. "Burned Fur" was a term coined within a rant meant to be viewed only by a few friends of the author, but it was leaked to the alt.fan.furry newsgroup, which at the time was the central online messageboard for the fandom. In the midst of the resulting brouhaha (they didn't call it "alt.flame.furry" for nothing), a bunch of people rallied behind the cause, and Burned Fur was born, quite by accident.

A much more moderate-sounding "statement of purpose" was drafted once it became clear that "the Manifesto" was becoming a lightning rod, but people kept pointing to the manifesto as the only guiding principle of the group. BF was actually more moderate than it's detractors would have you believe--they weren't against porn in the fandom (mostly that it should be discreetly covered when sold at conventions), and homosexuality by itself was declared by one of the principal movers-and-shakers, to be off the radar as far as the group was concerned.

But as with furry itself, one of BF's fatal flaws is that it couldn't control who declared themselves to be part of the group, and some folks who possessed more extreme opinions used BF as a platform for their personal vendettas. Which pretty much doomed any chances of redemption. The group fractured and disbanded out of frustration with it's inability to prevent things like the _Vanity Fair_ fiasco and a few other things.

---PCJ


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 25, 2009)

RailRide said:


> Heh, the "manifesto" was never supposed to be released. "Burned Fur" was a term coined within a rant meant to be viewed only by a few friends of the author, but it was leaked to the alt.fan.furry newsgroup, which at the time was the central online messageboard for the fandom. In the midst of the resulting brouhaha (they didn't call it "alt.flame.furry" for nothing), a bunch of people rallied behind the cause, and Burned Fur was born, quite by accident.
> 
> A much more moderate-sounding "statement of purpose" was drafted once it became clear that "the Manifesto" was becoming a lightning rod, but people kept pointing to the manifesto as the only guiding principle of the group. BF was actually more moderate than it's detractors would have you believe--they weren't against porn in the fandom (mostly that it should be discreetly covered when sold at conventions), and homosexuality by itself was declared by one of the principal movers-and-shakers, to be off the radar as far as the group was concerned.
> 
> ...



Well, perhaps so.. but I have a friend who was listed on the Burned Fur page without his consent.. and there are people who were listed on that page who were the "extremists" you refer to.

So, why list them on the webpage if they weren't speaking for BF?  And further, why did the statement of purpose never get on the main webpage?  (And I know it didn't, because I was a Burned Fur at the start   My friend who was not had to threaten with legal action to get his name removed)

No, they weren't as moderate as you'd like us to believe, sorry.   And what doomed them quite simply was the fact that when you are attempting to take the moral high ground, you have to have people who are capable of taking it.

That and there really was no point to a group that just yelled about everything.

For what it's worth, I left BF when Hangdog made his homophobic rant, and NOT ONE OTHER BF SAID A DAMN THING AGAINST HIM.


----------



## wulfe_luer (Dec 26, 2009)

So...burned furs started off benignly enough, but then turned into some sort of crusader-trolls, to the point of becoming furry's answer to those idiots that cheer at soldiers' funerals.  Damn.  

I ain't gonna lie, I have a code of conduct, but its MY code, not everyone else's.  I'll fight to keep myself within my boundaries, hard enough that I made an old friend very angry at me, but I will not go GRARG YOU'RE GONNA BURN IN HELL GET THE HELL OFF THE SITE YOU FREAK!  Honestly, you jsut keep doing your thing and don't try to make me do it and I'll just keep doing my thing and not push it on you guys.  

This is my agenda:  hang with da other furries and maybe find a nice she-nerd if I'm lucky.


----------



## RailRide (Dec 26, 2009)

GraemeLion said:


> No, they weren't as moderate as you'd like us to believe, sorry.   And what doomed them quite simply was the fact that when you are attempting to take the moral high ground, you have to have people who are capable of taking it.



That reference was more in comparison with what it's detractors were saying on AFF--that it was an attempt to Disney-fy the fandom. I wasn't _in_ BF--just an observer who knew some of the principal characters well enough to have access to their insider discussions. (and who videotaped Hangdog and Blumrich buying the burnefdur.com domain while at Anthrocon). I won't deny that the group handled itself poorly--it wasn't supposed to _be_ one in the first place (which was the main point of my statement), which kind of doomed it from the start.

I forget where HD made that rant. Was it in the SKORCH mailing list or AFF?


----------



## Ben (Dec 26, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Right, but thing is, the "furry wiki" probably isn't the best place to go for information on a group of people that have eventually become synonymous with "Asshole furryhating trolls in wolves avatars."



I'd actually have to disagree, considering that the guy who runs Wikifur is a member of Encyclopedia Dramatica. As such, he's not terribly prone to having a pro-furry bias, and will usually try and make sure the articles are fair and balanced. However, I haven't read the article (since I already get the jist of Burned Furs), so I can't say for certain if this is the case. :V


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 26, 2009)

RailRide said:


> That reference was more in comparison with what it's detractors were saying on AFF--that it was an attempt to Disney-fy the fandom. I wasn't _in_ BF--just an observer who knew some of the principal characters well enough to have access to their insider discussions. (and who videotaped Hangdog and Blumrich buying the burnefdur.com domain while at Anthrocon). I won't deny that the group handled itself poorly--it wasn't supposed to _be_ one in the first place (which was the main point of my statement), which kind of doomed it from the start.
> 
> I forget where HD made that rant. Was it in the SKORCH mailing list or AFF?



Both.

It was more defended on Skorch, but it was primarily on AFF.  

There were also the t-shirts that said "I don't have a lifestyle, I have a life" , and the whole Blumrich / Squee Rat "Throw the fucking fuckers out"  campaign.

There wasn't a moderate BF, ever.  They were usually pretty far reaching and .. well.. stupid sounding.  Never made any plans.  Just aimed to start trouble everywhere and scream a lot.

I still remember Squee's "Are you a lifestyler, try Suicide" hand out at Albany.  Oh, that went over well.


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 26, 2009)

Ben said:


> I'd actually have to disagree, considering that the guy who runs Wikifur is a member of Encyclopedia Dramatica. As such, he's not terribly prone to having a pro-furry bias, and will usually try and make sure the articles are fair and balanced. However, I haven't read the article (since I already get the jist of Burned Furs), so I can't say for certain if this is the case. :V



He's just on there to add WikiFur links to the articles
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.co...&target=GreenReaper&namespace=&year=&month=-1

Other than that he doesn't do much of anything. I do know, however, that when I made a WikiFur article for myself (for a joke that never quite took off, don't ask) he's made a point to add "Is liek ttly a troll!" almost every time.


----------



## Ben (Dec 26, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> He's just on there to add WikiFur links to the articles
> http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=GreenReaper&namespace=&year=&month=-1
> 
> Other than that he doesn't do much of anything. I do know, however, that when I made a WikiFur article for myself (for a joke that never quite took off, don't ask) he's made a point to add "Is liek ttly a troll!" almost every time.



I dunno, when I went back through the edit history for your article, it seems that all he did was include the troll aspect one time in the opening paragraph, and again in the "Criticism" section. 

Also, if you go deeper into his ED history, it shows that he made more substantial contributions beyond those fifty. 

In addition, the fact that he actively made sure that the "Controversy" section of TORA's article remained intact definitely shows that he's not adverse to showcasing the negative aspects of the furry fandom. :V


----------



## Darkfoxsniper (Dec 26, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> PETA started out as a good idea?



PETA=People Eating Tender Animals lol


----------



## Ben (Dec 26, 2009)

Darkfoxsniper said:


> PETA=People Eating Tender Animals lol



Thank you for your brilliant insight on this most pressing manner.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Dec 26, 2009)

I don't have intimate knowledge of the group. What I find of the group though suggests to me that originally they had some good ideas but it fell apart in practice.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Dec 26, 2009)

Ben said:


> Also, if you go deeper into his ED history, it shows that he made more substantial contributions beyond those fifty.


 
Only because he knows ED will ban his ass if he doesn't, and those "substantial contributions" are probably not substantial contributions as you say they are. 



> In addition, the fact that he actively made sure that the "Controversy" section of TORA's article remained intact *definitely shows that he's not adverse to showcasing the negative aspects of the furry fandom*. :V


 
Only because the guy was a pedo and was oust by other furries and because Dragoneer's was part of it. Greenreaper is not too keen on criticizing the fandom, although he does pick up a pitchfork and torch time to time, it's only because it makes him look good. In other words, he just gets on these furry, mob bandwagons when it's convenient. He's just like every other furry that sweeps the dirty side of the fandom under the rug. On Wikipedia he removed the VCL link in favor for FA. I believe he said FA represents the Fandom better. But we all know why. FA has a porn filter and VCL does not. 

Also, Paxilrose, Burned Furs is a funny, funny group that pisses people off that can't stop fapping to yiff pics.


----------



## Morroke (Dec 26, 2009)

They were virgins.


----------



## GreenReaper (Dec 27, 2009)

VCL had become increasingly irrelevant, as demonstrated well by its sagging Alexa ranking. I previously added Yiffstar, which had no filter either. The removals were requested by other editors, in accordance with Wikipedia policy on fansites.

What I would _like_ there is coverage of all sorts of furry websites, and I added that as a section (scroll down to end of green at right), but it was removed by others. Wikipedia is quite strict about external links - and about not linking to illegal sources of copyrighted material, which is why e621 or Fchan will never show up there. I did add a link to the adult furry links section of the Open Directory Project, which includes the VCL.

I was on ED to fixup some links after our server move. I am not a major contributor to ED. I am unsure how this can be construed as a bad thing. I have better things to do with my life, and so do you.

The presence of our article on TORA has nothing to do with FA or its administration. They were mentioned incidentally as a source, but it was the actual content of the messages that was in the public interest.

I am glad for WikiFur to document and report on the more controversial aspects of the furry fandom, as demonstrated best by WikiFur News articles such as _AAE bans Softpaw from Further Confusion 2008 over legal fears_, _Museum of Sex exhibits modified plush toys_ and _Australian fur creates yiff chart_. Indeed, I was the author or a significant contributor to each of these articles. What we try not to do is criticize or praise them. That'd be opinion, not news reporting.

Does opinion have no place? Of course not. But a lot of it just isn't very good - it's overly personal, poorly written, and/or relies on fear-mongering over facts. If critics wish to be taken seriously, they need to raise their standards of discourse.

To get back on topic: WikiFur's Burned Furs article has been edited by numerous people, including those on both "sides" of the issue. It contains a certain amount of drama, but appears to be an accurate reflection of the topic. Some take it quite seriously, but to me it's more of a historical curiosity with limited long-term impact. Feel free to read the referenced sources and links to form your own opinion.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 27, 2009)

I neither no nor care. Burned furrs was way before I entered the fandom.


----------



## Geek (Dec 27, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I neither no nor care. Burned furrs was way before I entered the fandom.



So do i.


----------



## xydexx (Dec 27, 2009)

GraemeLion said:


> Both.
> 
> It was more defended on Skorch, but it was primarily on AFF.
> 
> ...



Pretty much this.

Burned Fur was a group that claimed they were opposed to bad behavior in the fandom, but their solution was to act like shit-flinging howler monkeys themselves. The Manifesto (considered a "must read" for anyone who wanted to join) was the main thing that turned most people off, and they refused to distance themselves from it no matter how bad it made it them look. Rants rarely make good mission statements. It only served as a magnet for all the batshit members of the fandom to join. It was basically the tried-and-failed Take Back The Fandom movement with more vitriol.

Today, they're an embarrassing footnote in fandom's history. Being a Burned Fur is a huge liability and only the most clueless diehards continue to support them.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 27, 2009)

xydexx said:


> Pretty much this.
> 
> Burned Fur was a group that claimed they were opposed to bad behavior in the fandom, but their solution was to act like shit-flinging howler monkeys themselves. The Manifesto (considered a "must read" for anyone who wanted to join) was the main thing that turned most people off, and they refused to distance themselves from it no matter how bad it made it them look. Rants rarely make good mission statements. It only served as a magnet for all the batshit members of the fandom to join. It was basically the tried-and-failed Take Back The Fandom movement with more vitriol.
> 
> Today, they're an embarrassing footnote in fandom's history. Being a Burned Fur is a huge liability and only the most clueless diehards continue to support them.



I heard all this about them. It makes me glad I was not part of the fandom when they were active.


----------



## Summercat (Dec 27, 2009)

Another year, another person looking into the burned furs.

You know, I agree with the Burned Furs on their basic judgement and assessment of the Furry Fandom: There's too much porn, and the Fandom is overly oriented towards it.

My CONCLUSIONS are different. 

While it's all anecdotal evidence, I've been observing the Art Shows at several conventions (Califur, FC mainly) for 'adult' to 'clean' ratios. Art sold and art presented, clean was a much higher ratio than adult - including in total dollar sales.

The majority of submissions to FA are non-pornographic material. I forget what the ratio was, but I was slightly amazed at that fact when Dragoneer posted it (a year or so ago).

The fandom, as a whole, thinks it's more obsessed with porn than it is. In addition to that, I feel that the ratio of porn to clean is too high.

So far, same as the Burned Furs. My action, though, is different.

Accidentally until about 3 years ago, I have only commissioned and/or requested adult art once, and nothing happened with that one exception. About 3 years ago, I decided to continue that policy, of not requesting or commissioning porn. This doesn't mean I dislike it, or that I don't want it - or that I'll tell people when I ask them to draw me 'something' that it has to be clean - but rather, when I put my money down, I'm wanting something I could show to anyone and everyone.

Yeah, sure, there are a few adult peices in my gallery. However, the most 'adult' ones I've paid for were tasteful nudes, rather than porn. And even then, the bits were added accidentally (I had asked for them not to be drawn).

So yes. I've always felt that instead of trying to tear down those I disagree with, I should try to convince them by example. 

I'm a furry lifestyler. I've got furry art posted in my room, I wear tails, and sometimes a fursuit, I sometimes use the word 'paw' instead of 'hand' in phrases ("On the other paw..."), and I live in a house of furries.  Go ahead and mock me for it, it's my life, I'm not being a drain on society, and who knows, someday I might even contribute to it beyond the furry fandom.

Hopefully *laugh*


----------



## Geek (Dec 27, 2009)

I can understand that your love the fandom, because you gain money out of it.

Porn sells.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 27, 2009)

Summercat said:


> Another year, another person looking into the burned furs.



Well even though some of us get tired of repeating ourselves, newcomers to the fandom will hear of these things and enquire about them.



> You know, I agree with the Burned Furs on their basic judgement and assessment of the Furry Fandom: There's too much porn, and the Fandom is overly oriented towards it.



Yes, there is a hell of a lot of pornographic material within the fandom as a whole. But I don't think the burned furrs would ever convince those who draw it, not to draw it. 




> While it's all anecdotal evidence, I've been observing the Art Shows at several conventions (Califur, FC mainly) for 'adult' to 'clean' ratios. Art sold and art presented, clean was a much higher ratio than adult - including in total dollar sales.



This is a good thing right?



> The majority of submissions to FA are non-pornographic material. I forget what the ratio was, but I was slightly amazed at that fact when Dragoneer posted it (a year or so ago).



This is also a good thing for FA right?



> The fandom, as a whole, thinks it's more obsessed with porn than it is. In addition to that, I feel that the ratio of porn to clean is too high.



Unfortunately, people love to see boobs, vaginas and penis, so porn will always be around. I don't know about anyone else in the fandom, but I consider furry girls to be a modified female human. A female human with some "extra bits and a few changes" I mean when we look at a typical anthro, they have the typical hour glass body shape (as per human female) They have breasts (as per human female) They have arms and legs often shaped like those of a human, but with paws on the ends. Thinking about it, anthro's are often depicted to have more human traits in them than animal traits. Which is why I see them as a just a modified human.




> Accidentally until about 3 years ago, I have only commissioned and/or requested adult art once, and nothing happened with that one exception. About 3 years ago, I decided to continue that policy, of not requesting or commissioning porn. This doesn't mean I dislike it, or that I don't want it - or that I'll tell people when I ask them to draw me 'something' that it has to be clean - but rather, when I put my money down, I'm wanting something I could show to anyone and everyone.



When I am able to afford a commision it will be a clean one, I do not want my sona depicted in any sexual scene, Unless it is with his wife. That is the only exception, and it has to be tastefull.



> Yeah, sure, there are a few adult peices in my gallery. However, the most 'adult' ones I've paid for were tasteful nudes, rather than porn. And even then, the bits were added accidentally (I had asked for them not to be drawn).



Got to be tasteful nudes for me too.



> So yes. I've always felt that instead of trying to tear down those I disagree with, I should try to convince them by example.



Setting an example can and does work, although setting an example will not change everyone's views out there.



> I'm a furry lifestyler. I've got furry art posted in my room, I wear tails, and sometimes a fursuit, I sometimes use the word 'paw' instead of 'hand' in phrases ("On the other paw..."), and I live in a house of furries.  Go ahead and mock me for it, it's my life, I'm not being a drain on society, and who knows, someday I might even contribute to it beyond the furry fandom.
> 
> Hopefully *laugh*



That sort of furry lifestyle I can live with, it is the ones that take it that extra mile further by claiming to have animal spirits, or clazim to be an animal on the inside that bug me. Also it is the ones that, imo, act stupid (especially YT furry users) by yelling out FURRY PRIDE! and shit that really bug me.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 27, 2009)

Geek said:


> I can understand that your love the fandom, because you gain money out of it.
> 
> Porn sells.



Porn will always sell. We humans love looking at naked people.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Dec 27, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Porn will always sell. We humans love looking at naked people. sonic characters



at least 1 characters.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 27, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> at least 1 characters.


I can't stand sonic characters in the nude. That don't look that good in a cartoon imo. Love the shows, didn't like how sonic looked.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Dec 27, 2009)

GreenReaper said:


> VCL had become increasingly irrelevant, as demonstrated well by its sagging Alexa ranking. I previously added Yiffstar, which had no filter either. The removals were requested by other editors, in accordance with Wikipedia policy on fansites.


 
Irrelevant? Could you elaborate a little bit better. Also, how does FA provide more useful information than the other sites?



> What I would _like_ there is coverage of all sorts of furry websites, and I added that as a section (scroll down to end of green at right), but it was removed by others. Wikipedia is quite strict about external links - and about not linking to illegal sources of copyrighted material, which is why e621 or Fchan will never show up there. I did add a link to the adult furry links section of the Open Directory Project, which includes the VCL


 
But it does not directly link you to a specific site, unlike the FA link. Most people only do quick scans of Wiki articles, and when they click on stuff like the "General audience" link it turns them off because it's telling them they have to keep clicking, so in their opinion it's a waste of time and they don't care that much to follow another link.


----------



## Geek (Dec 27, 2009)

Is the destruction of a furry worth spending a very long time locked up in a jail cell with a guy named Bubba force you to play Drop the Soap?


----------



## InfernalTobias (Dec 27, 2009)

Having looked into the philosophy of Burned Furs and Improved Anthropommorphics. I have a question for anyone who is/was a member of either group or knows their ideals and philosophy well enough to answer this question.

What is the reason for the idea that if those who enjoy yiff are more discreet about it, that it will improve the public opinion of the fandom, and what leads you to believe the damage is not already done. Especially in regard to the mass media, which has the greatest influence on public opinion and is driven by a ratings system. Add on top of that, the fact that the mass media as a hole is more interested in reporting what they say is the truth and what gets them higher ratings, rather then the actual truth.
Now which of these would get do you think would generate higher ratings.

" We would like to publicly apologize for are past miss representations of the Furry Fandom"

"The furies are at it again."


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 28, 2009)

Well, at the time, it might have done good for the conventions to restrict minors from buying porn and having sex in adult's rooms.  But I agree, now, the damage is indeed done.  

As for the media, I have not seen the media ONCE report anything outside of what a furry told them.  And everything I've EVER seen has been truthful. 

One day, we're going to learn to start banning these idiots who talk to the media for us, instead of applauding them.


----------



## MaxCoyote (Dec 28, 2009)

BF failed because Blumrich became a psychopathic fuckjob.  Honestly, if it was run by someone with some brains ( and a lil sanity wouldn't of hurt), then I'm sure it'd be pretty big. 

That and the fact if you were a BF, it would pretty much alienate you from most other furries, and it was a time where unity was much more important then morality, unfortunatly.  Plus, furry wasn't really in the spotlight at the time.  No one really KNEW what a furry was, so no one cared.   They SHOULD of showed up after that episode of NCIS. That's kinda what really got it going. That, and the MTV thing. 

It used to be that if you said "I'm Furry" they'd be like..."uh..wtf you talking about?" now, if you say that they will RIGHT AWAY know what you're taking about and beat the shit outta ya in the parking lot (No, that's not based on personal experiance)


----------



## Ozriel (Dec 28, 2009)

What I could recall, they had some good ideas to seperate the Explicit and the clean before it became something PETA-esque in it's line of thinking.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Dec 28, 2009)

MaxCoyote said:


> BF failed because Blumrich became a psychopathic fuckjob.  Honestly, if it was run by someone with some brains ( and a lil sanity wouldn't of hurt), then I'm sure it'd be pretty big.
> 
> That and the fact if you were a BF, it would pretty much alienate you from most other furries, and it was a time where unity was much more important then morality, unfortunatly.  Plus, furry wasn't really in the spotlight at the time.  No one really KNEW what a furry was, so no one cared.   They SHOULD of showed up after that episode of NCIS. That's kinda what really got it going. That, and the MTV thing.
> 
> It used to be that if you said "I'm Furry" they'd be like..."uh..wtf you talking about?" now, if you say that they will RIGHT AWAY know what you're taking about and beat the shit outta ya in the parking lot (No, that's not based on personal experiance)



Unity as more important that Morality...The furry fandom could learn a great deal from the Roman Catholic Church. I know it sounds odd but it's really true. Looking at the history of the group gives you some good ideas on what not to do.

A good example: Look at what the big wigs do when priests are caught molesting children? They do what we did when Allen Panda did his thing. Swept it under the rug to protect reputation. That's pretty messed up.

There are other good examples too but I don't feel like typing up a big tl;dr.


----------



## OhBloodyHell (Dec 28, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> What I could recall, they had some good ideas to seperate the Explicit and the clean before it became something PETA-esque in it's line of thinking.


 
QFT

And I do hate it when I see a really good FA gallery with nice, cute pics then suddenly some image of a bear with big tits and dick nipples and shitting into nappies comes up when I'm in the middle of an art lesson! 
Keep that shit seperate please.


----------



## Ozriel (Dec 28, 2009)

OhBloodyHell said:


> QFT
> 
> And I do hate it when I see a really good FA gallery with nice, cute pics then suddenly some image of a bear with big tits and dick nipples and shitting into nappies comes up when I'm in the middle of an art lesson!
> Keep that shit seperate please.



lol


----------



## OhBloodyHell (Dec 28, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> lol


 
When doing an anthro proect in art at college I have to be so careful when doing artist research XD
You don't know what to expect


----------



## Ben (Dec 28, 2009)

OhBloodyHell said:


> When doing an anthro proect in art at college I have to be so careful when doing artist research XD
> You don't know what to expect



You can also turn off the adult filter while at school, or not log in at all. Fancy that!


----------



## OhBloodyHell (Dec 28, 2009)

Ben said:


> You can also turn off the adult filter while at school, or not log in at all. Fancy that!


 
I mean when I'm on google and I type in vague searches like "furry artists", I know it is a big mistake, I should be more specific like put the word clean before it. But whatever.


----------



## GraemeLion (Dec 28, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> A good example: Look at what the big wigs do when priests are caught molesting children? They do what we did when Allen Panda did his thing. Swept it under the rug to protect reputation. That's pretty messed up.



I take exception to that greatly.

The Babyfur community told others about Allan for a long time, and when he did what he did, he was immediately banned from babyfur things.  He was kicked off websites, banned off FA, etc.

Now, you want an example of it being covered up, look at Frank Gembeck.  He's what happens when someone big in the furry world gets caught.  A nice solid coverup right up until he went to prison.


----------



## MaxCoyote (Dec 28, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Unity as more important that Morality...The furry fandom could learn a great deal from the Roman Catholic Church. I know it sounds odd but it's really true. Looking at the history of the group gives you some good ideas on what not to do.
> 
> A good example: Look at what the big wigs do when priests are caught molesting children? They do what we did when Allen Panda did his thing. Swept it under the rug to protect reputation. That's pretty messed up.
> 
> There are other good examples too but I don't feel like typing up a big tl;dr.



Ya, it's sad, but those were the facts of the times.  Furry would not of survived a civil war.  It would of torn us all apart.


----------



## Ben (Dec 28, 2009)

OhBloodyHell said:


> I mean when I'm on google and I type in vague searches like "furry artists", I know it is a big mistake, I should be more specific like put the word clean before it. But whatever.



Saaaaaafe seaaaaarch. It can be your best friend in public places, believe me.


----------



## RoqsWolf (Dec 28, 2009)

Interesting subject.  Always new there was a group out there that hated yiff, but I never heard of this group.  Great find.


----------



## MaxCoyote (Dec 28, 2009)

RoqsWolf said:


> Interesting subject.  Always new there was a group out there that hated yiff, but I never heard of this group.  Great find.



You must of just started being furry, huh?


----------



## Vintage (Dec 28, 2009)

MaxCoyote said:


> Ya, it's sad, but those were the facts of the times.  Furry would not of survived a civil war.  It would of torn us all apart.



how dramatic of you.


----------



## JoeStrike (Dec 29, 2009)

> Originally Posted by *MaxCoyote*
> 
> 
> _Furry would not of survived a civil war.  It would of torn us all apart._



_*"Can't you see this barnyard noise guessing game is tearing us apart?"*
_-Marge Simpson, "Bart's Comet" (episode 2F11)


----------



## Trpdwarf (Dec 29, 2009)

GraemeLion said:


> I take exception to that greatly.
> 
> The Babyfur community told others about Allan for a long time, and when he did what he did, he was immediately banned from babyfur things.  He was kicked off websites, banned off FA, etc.
> 
> Now, you want an example of it being covered up, look at Frank Gembeck.  He's what happens when someone big in the furry world gets caught.  A nice solid coverup right up until he went to prison.



Yeah and guess what people like Uncle Kage tried to tell people right before AC when that shit went down? To deny he is even a furry or part of the fandom.

Kage has done some great things for the fandom but telling people to lie for the sake of rep is not one of them. Look what happened when the Tyra Banks show went down. What were furries trying to say? A good deal were yelling "She's not furry! Niether is her boyfriend!".

The point I am making here is that it's damn stupid and bad PR to do internal changes but then lie to the public. If you are honest with the public it'll actually foster more trust than mistrust. To know that we own up to our fuck-ups and we deal with them too. You are right though that the thing with Gembeck is a better example.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Dec 29, 2009)

GraemeLion said:


> I take exception to that greatly.
> 
> The Babyfur community told others about Allan for a long time, and when he did what he did, he was immediately banned from babyfur things. He was kicked off websites, banned off FA, etc.
> 
> Now, you want an example of it being covered up, look at Frank Gembeck. He's what happens when someone big in the furry world gets caught. A nice solid coverup right up until he went to prison.


 


Trpdwarf said:


> Yeah and guess what people like Uncle Kage tried to tell people right before AC when that shit went down? To deny he is even a furry or part of the fandom.
> 
> Kage has done some great things for the fandom but telling people to lie for the sake of rep is not one of them. Look what happened when the Tyra Banks show went down. What were furries trying to say? A good deal were yelling "She's not furry! Niether is her boyfriend!".
> 
> The point I am making here is that it's damn stupid and bad PR to do internal changes but then lie to the public. If you are honest with the public it'll actually foster more trust than mistrust. To know that we own up to our fuck-ups and we deal with them too. You are right though that the thing with Gembeck is a better example.


 
Frank Gembeck?


----------



## MaxCoyote (Dec 29, 2009)

Vintage said:


> how dramatic of you.



Sorry, I'll tone it down a bit:
*
A climatic event which would cause every molecule in the universe to explode and the fabric of time and space would rip in two!*


----------



## Dahguns (Dec 29, 2009)

lol so these dudes are like...the radical, liberal furries


----------



## GreenReaper (Dec 29, 2009)

You can't enforce a code of morality that a significant proportion of a population disagrees with. If you try, you'll just end up disappointed, and demonized by those who oppose you.

Unfortunately for the Burned Furs, their code required them to "boil the ocean", while those who disagreed only had to preserve their own oasis in order to succeed.


----------



## WatchfulStorm (Dec 29, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Right, but thing is, the "furry wiki" probably isn't the best place to go for information on a group of people that have eventually become synonymous with "Asshole furryhating trolls in wolves avatars". Especially considering I know WikiFur has a funny little policy of "If someone says you're a troll enough, we'll make sure the page reflects it". I was really more curious if anyone actually had any firsthand experience of the group and what they actually did.



maybe we should look on ED then?


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 29, 2009)

WatchfulStorm said:


> maybe we should look on ED then?



They're saying what everyone else is saying, they were crazy 'tards that tried smacking furry porn out of peoples hands and went batshit when they just went and got more porn. I was really curious if anyone had any first hand information about them since people always say things like "Well I heard..." when discussing them. That, and the fact that the people who are around when they where seem to be just as batshit left-leaning versions of them.


----------



## Whitenoise (Dec 29, 2009)

The whole thing went down long before anyone or anything of value existed in the fandom so I think someone who cares enough to really know about this shit will be nearly impossible to come by. From what I gather some pompous furfags wanted to make the fandom into something other than a sleazy little internet fetish community. Naturally they failed because the fandom is a fetish community and that's all it will ever be. Lots of furfags on both sides pitched a fit, spewed asspie drama all over the internet, and then went back to whacking off to dog dicks and forgot all about it. Why are you so curious about this Paxil :V ?


----------



## Ozriel (Dec 29, 2009)

OhBloodyHell said:


> When doing an anthro proect in art at college I have to be so careful when doing artist research XD
> You don't know what to expect



I can agree with you on that.


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 29, 2009)

Whitenoise said:


> Why are you so curious about this Paxil :V ?



I've just heard it used as a derogatory for so long I wanted to know the backstory behind it.


----------



## Zrcalo (Dec 29, 2009)

they were fursuiters who got too close to candles.


----------



## LoinRockerForever (Dec 30, 2009)

* Is a Burnt Fur, because I agree that the original fandom got fucking steamrolled with too much sex. ( I mean there is a fucking limit... )


----------



## CombatRaccoon (Dec 31, 2009)

guess this makes me a "burned fur"


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 31, 2009)

CombatRaccoon said:


> guess this makes me a "burned fur"



I am currently in a discussion with a friend who has told me about a new group on DA called "Anti-furverts" My friend has already been attacked by one of the members. utterly pathetic IMO.


----------



## Shadow (Dec 31, 2009)

Supremacies are funny.


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 31, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I am currently in a discussion with a friend who has told me about a new group on DA called "Anti-furverts" My friend has already been attacked by one of the members. utterly pathetic IMO.



It's Cho isn't it.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Dec 31, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> It's Cho isn't it.



I was told Cho is the one leading it.

EDIT: Damn is there anything you don't know in the fandom? lol

Well, Cho will learn the hard way, it wont work.


----------



## Shadow (Dec 31, 2009)

He has his sources...I know...


----------



## paxil rose (Dec 31, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I was told Cho is the one leading it.
> 
> EDIT: Damn is there anything you don't know in the fandom? lol
> 
> Well, Cho will learn the hard way, it wont work.



Cho is a strange boy. He probably knows full well it won't work, but he's going to enjoy doing it.


----------



## ShadowEon (Dec 31, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> It's Cho isn't it.



He drew for me, he's cool. =< Well,if you mean that one. He draws adult work though, so...not sure we are thinking the same fellow here.


----------



## Shadow (Dec 31, 2009)

ShadowEon said:


> He drew for me, he's cool. =< Well,if you mean that one. He draws adult work though, so...not sure we are thinking the same fellow here.



ChuongChoSoi ring a bell?


----------



## ShadowEon (Dec 31, 2009)

Shadow said:


> ChuongChoSoi ring a bell?



It does sound familiar but the guy I mean actually has the username "Cho".


----------



## Muskie (Jan 1, 2010)

before I start, i'm as much of a furvert as you guys. But to be completely honest, I agreed with most of the original "burned fur" manifesto for furry stuff. Keep the yiffing in your bedroom or in private online unless it's sanctioned. Keep the porn out of general public view. Have (large) adults only sections at cons, with Age verification wristbands (say, yellow for Adult, green for under-18 ) to allow access. Public Sexual displays by attendees are not allowed (fine, have a snugglepile, but the second someone starts humping seriously, yer out! and good gawd, I'm perfectly fine with babyfurs who are actually intelligent enough to realise what's okay, but if you're gonna soil yourself in public, you're not doing it here!). Age Gating  (or at least warning intersitals) for Websites with adult art (something I am VERY glad Sofurry did!). Stuff like that.

I am more than happy to have adult stuff, and i'm also happy to have Any content whatsoever. But it must be properly tagged. I don't want kids accidentally downloading my stories or adult colorings.

...bleh. i'm ranting. but I think you get the gist of it..


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 1, 2010)

Muskie said:


> before I start, i'm as much of a furvert as you guys. But to be completely honest, I agreed with most of the original "burned fur" manifesto for furry stuff. Keep the yiffing in your bedroom or in private online unless it's sanctioned. Keep the porn out of general public view. Have (large) adults only sections at cons, with Age verification wristbands (say, yellow for Adult, green for under-18 ) to allow access. Public Sexual displays by attendees are not allowed (fine, have a snugglepile, but the second someone starts humping seriously, yer out! and good gawd, I'm perfectly fine with babyfurs who are actually intelligent enough to realise what's okay, but if you're gonna soil yourself in public, you're not doing it here!). Age Gating  (or at least warning intersitals) for Websites with adult art (something I am VERY glad Sofurry did!). Stuff like that.
> 
> I am more than happy to have adult stuff, and i'm also happy to have Any content whatsoever. But it must be properly tagged. I don't want kids accidentally downloading my stories or adult colorings.
> 
> ...bleh. i'm ranting. but I think you get the gist of it..



If you go on FA's main site there is the option when you upload a picture to set the picture as general viewer or PG, or adult. to which a warning appears beside the picture. There is also a filter on FA, people should use it and stop complaining, Yes the filter lets some adult material sneak through but nothing is perfect. The only place I have ever seen anyone yiff is in private areas of the internet, I know this cause I have not ever seen it done in a public area on the internet. Prime example of a private area is on Xat.com on a furry chat box I frequent. it is kept private so it will not show in Xat's search feature, also you have to be a member to read/type.

As for cons, never been to one so I can only go by what I hear on the internet.


----------



## xydexx (Jan 1, 2010)

Muskie said:


> Keep the yiffing in your bedroom or in private online unless it's sanctioned. Keep the porn out of general public view. Have (large) adults only sections at cons, with Age verification wristbands (say, yellow for Adult, green for under-18 ) to allow access. Public Sexual displays by attendees are not allowed (fine, have a snugglepile, but the second someone starts humping seriously, yer out! and good gawd, I'm perfectly fine with babyfurs who are actually intelligent enough to realise what's okay, but if you're gonna soil yourself in public, you're not doing it here!). Age Gating  (or at least warning intersitals) for Websites with adult art (something I am VERY glad Sofurry did!). Stuff like that.
> 
> I am more than happy to have adult stuff, and i'm also happy to have Any content whatsoever. But it must be properly tagged. I don't want kids accidentally downloading my stories or adult colorings.



Absolutely. I'm a well-behaved pervert myself, and agree with all of this.

The difference is that I _didn't support_ Burned Fur, because they _weren't about _responsible display of adult artwork or responsible behavior in public. It was a "kick the perverts out" movement, according to their founder, not a "let's behave ourselves" movement. The fact that the most vocal Burned Furs behaved worse than the folks they were railing against should make that obvious.


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 1, 2010)

Doesn anyone actually have said manifesto readily available?


----------



## xydexx (Jan 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I am currently in a discussion with a friend who has told me about a new group on DA called "Anti-furverts"



Well, you know what they say about those who fail to learn from history... 

Gee. If these guys spent their time creating things they wanted to see instead of useless infighting they probably wouldn't have anything to complain about. It's just easier to whine about things they don't like rather than create things they do.

(Prediction: Two or three years from now, they'll throw up their hands in frustration and "leave the fandom" because they'll have alienated themselves from everyone and think the fandom is doomed. And everyone else will keep on keeping on and having a good time like we always have. How do I know this? _Because that's what always happens._) :-D


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jan 1, 2010)

Muskie said:


> before I start, i'm as much of a furvert as you guys. But to be completely honest, I agreed with most of the original "burned fur" manifesto for furry stuff. Keep the yiffing in your bedroom or in private online unless it's sanctioned. Keep the porn out of general public view. Have (large) adults only sections at cons, with Age verification wristbands (say, yellow for Adult, green for under-18 ) to allow access. Public Sexual displays by attendees are not allowed (fine, have a snugglepile, but the second someone starts humping seriously, yer out! and good gawd, I'm perfectly fine with babyfurs who are actually intelligent enough to realise what's okay, but if you're gonna soil yourself in public, you're not doing it here!). Age Gating  (or at least warning intersitals) for Websites with adult art (something I am VERY glad Sofurry did!). Stuff like that.
> 
> I am more than happy to have adult stuff, and i'm also happy to have Any content whatsoever. But it must be properly tagged. I don't want kids accidentally downloading my stories or adult colorings.
> 
> ...bleh. i'm ranting. but I think you get the gist of it..



I am not a "Furvert" or a "pervert" in any way shape or form. But I have no problem with perverse adult stuff as long as it stays where it belongs. I do agree with your sentiments. People should be more responsible when it comes to the "Adult" stuff. Thats not just a furry thing. That's with people in general, sub-cultures in general.

I will say though that on one hand people who look at the stuff can choose to be more responsible. On the other hand people can choose to stop being enablers, and to report things when they can. A good example is, for instance if you go to a furry convention and people are showing off porn in the large gathering area (such as Anthrocon's Zoo) report it. Go to the staff and report it. If the staff you talk to won't do anything find someone who will.

When you the smut slip through the cracks of a filter, often it is an accident. A person forgot to put the right rating/label. You can subtly suggest they edit the submission to put the correct tab and if they refuse than contact a mod.

When you are in a group and they are not behaving appropriately, sit them down and tell them that it is not appropriate and is not going to be tolerated. We've had very few instances in the meet group I go to that people act perverse in ways that is not appropriate in public. The result is a good talking to and they stopped.

Another thing if you see older furs hitting on jailbait, tell them it's not appropriate. You get that in furmeets and fur cons just as you do at anime fan-clubs and anime cons.If a 40 year old is hitting on the youngest member who is still in high school, don't turn another cheek. Make sure you make it obvious as a collective no means no. That sort of a pro-active approach helps create a collective responsibility. Be responsible yourself, and push others to be responsible too. It also doesn't involve witch-hunts or stuff like that.

You don't attack people simply because they have a perverse side. You don't expect them to get rid of it for the most part. That's where the Burned Furs to my understanding went wrong. You create comprimise by supporting personal responsibility. If miniature collectives of furs in different areas were to take this more correct approach you can actually create positive change that benefits the fandom and it's general reputation.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 1, 2010)

Trpdwarf said:


> I am not a "Furvert" or a "pervert" in any way shape or form. But I have no problem with perverse adult stuff as long as it stays where it belongs. I do agree with your sentiments. People should be more responsible when it comes to the "Adult" stuff. Thats not just a furry thing. That's with people in general, sub-cultures in general.
> 
> I will say though that on one hand people who look at the stuff can choose to be more responsible. On the other hand people can choose to stop being enablers, and to report things when they can. A good example is, for instance if you go to a furry convention and people are showing off porn in the large gathering area (such as Anthrocon's Zoo) report it. Go to the staff and report it. If the staff you talk to won't do anything find someone who will.
> 
> ...



Or as I would say "Set an example and hope others will follow that example"


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jan 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Or as I would say "Set an example and hope others will follow that example"



That too.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 1, 2010)

Trpdwarf said:


> That too.



People should do what you said and set that as the example then hope that others will follow suit.


----------



## xydexx (Jan 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Or as I would say "Set an example and hope others will follow that example"


_
"Leaving in disgust is not the answer. Whining is not the answer. Playing petty politics against people you don't like or agree with is not the answer. The answer is to create the things you want to see in fandom. Support like-minded people. Refuse to play the ruiners' game, and finally, remember the most important rule of furry fandom: *Have Fun*."_ â€”Jim Doolittle


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 1, 2010)

xydexx said:


> _
> "Leaving in disgust is not the answer. Whining is not the answer. Playing petty politics against people you don't like or agree with is not the answer. The answer is to create the things you want to see in fandom. Support like-minded people. Refuse to play the ruiners' game, and finally, remember the most important rule of furry fandom: *Have Fun*."_ â€”Jim Doolittle



Exactly.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jan 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> People should do what you said and set that as the example then hope that others will follow suit.



I've seen it work. Online at least. Not dealing with smut though.

When the whole Youtube war broke out there was this lesser known "war" on Gaia-Online. Trolls flooded the place trolling furries, targeting them, and making BS threads. You couldn't have fun, or enjoy yourself. If you had an animal item on your avatar you were flagged as a furfag and targeted. I remember people flooding my profile comment box with porn as a petty attempt to troll. I remember a bunch of shitty hate filled messages spamming up my inbox. But the worst part was that no matter how many times you reported the people and the accounts banned, they just kept coming.

Whats really bad....is that many furries were taking the bait making the whole situation worse. I started to try to do something and some others did too. We kept up on the places where the trolls were popping up with their threads, getting them shut down by getting mods involved, and also when people brought up legitimate stuff, actual real issues we met it out civily.

Other furries took a look and did a complete turn-around with their behavior emulating the better behavior. In time the trolls were getting less "lulz"....and actual non furs were taking our side. They got tired of the senseless trolling. Several people who hated furs because of some things actually took a neutral stance after hearing what the civil ones had to say. They still "hated" certain aspects of the fandom but they no longer hated the entire group for a few bad eggs.

Lead by example can work. It's more complicated when it comes to smut. You get all these variables that you have to find a way to deal with. People used to consider sex sacred and now people seek to desacrify it. Caught up in the middle is smut material, porn, fetish's, ect. It's a huge can of worms.


----------



## LoinRockerForever (Jan 2, 2010)

CombatRaccoon said:


> guess this makes me a "burned fur"


Meh its the only reason I brand the name on myself. But heck, its the reason behind this Screen Name, I wonder how many noticed it. âŒ_âŒ but I digress, I mean its okay to have the porn around every so often, but I agree with _Stypes_ Rant a while ago he had about people only drawing porn.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 2, 2010)

LoinRockerForever said:


> Meh its the only reason I brand the name on myself. But heck, its the reason behind this Screen Name, I wonder how many noticed it. âŒ_âŒ but I digress, I mean its okay to have the porn around every so often, but I agree with _Stypes_ Rant a while ago he had about people only drawing porn.



The artists I watch on FA draw both and it is tastfull. I don't see why people get the arse ache over it. People record people having sex irl why the fuck should drawing it be any different? people have a rightb to draw what ever the fuck they want and you nor anyone else will ever change that.


----------



## FoxyAreku (Jan 2, 2010)

HarleyParanoia said:


> or murrtards like wolfee.



There's nothing wrong with wolfee. He's a nice guy.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 2, 2010)

FoxyAreku said:


> There's nothing wrong with wolfee. He's a nice guy.



Agreed.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jan 2, 2010)

FoxyAreku said:


> There's nothing wrong with wolfee. He's a nice guy.



Somehow I fail to see a guy who lies to consistently lie to himself, his friends, and e-people in general as a nice guy. There is plenty wrong with him beyond that. But I guess I'm just a troll for seeing his other side.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 2, 2010)

Trpdwarf said:


> Somehow I fail to see a guy who lies to consistently lie to himself, his friends, and e-people in general as a nice guy. There is plenty wrong with him beyond that. But I guess I'm just a troll for seeing his other side.



He has never lied to me directly. Besides trolls lie so why are trolls any different?

EDIT: Why are we discussing wolfee anyway?


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 2, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> He has never lied to me directly. Besides trolls lie so why are trolls any different?
> 
> EDIT: Why are we discussing wolfee anyway?



I can point out a few direct lies, though I think I prefer to point out that you more or less put him on the same level as "the trolls" with that remark.

Also I don't know.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 2, 2010)

paxil rose said:


> I can point out a few direct lies, though I think I prefer to point out that you more or less put him on the same level as "the trolls" with that remark.
> 
> Also I don't know.



My point was Wolfee is not the only person on the big place we call internet to lie about things.

I am sure there is a large number of people out there who have lied about something while online.


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 2, 2010)

Fair enough. Just sayin'.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jan 2, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> My point was Wolfee is not the only person on the big place we call internet to lie about things.
> 
> I am sure there is a large number of people out there who have lied about something while online.



That does not absolve him of what he has done just because he's not the only one. You said he was nice to you? Awesome. Just because he was nice to you and a few others does not make a nice guy. His actions alone and his history makes him pretty scummy.

You are right though lots of people lie. Fair point. But someone randomly out of nowhere name-dropped him calling him a nice guy and that's why the discussion turned up.


----------



## footfoe (Jan 3, 2010)

I don't know but they sound cool to me meow


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 3, 2010)

footfoe said:


> I don't know but they sound cool to me meow



In one thread you say you like furry because you like porn and in this thread you think burrned furrs are "cool" because they hated porn and similar stuff. WTF?

Do read a thread before posting.


----------



## Duality Jack (Jan 3, 2010)

The group sounds like a giant lolcow...

... and trolls are having an easy time making furries rage I can't imagine how much fun it would be to troll burned furs, merely joking about yiffing them may get them to flame.


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 3, 2010)

You guys the trolls deleted mah page ; ___ ;

http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Talk:Paxil_rose


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 3, 2010)

paxil rose said:


> You guys the trolls deleted mah page ; ___ ;
> 
> http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Talk:Paxil_rose



First time I knew about this.


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 3, 2010)

Those paxil haters.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jan 3, 2010)

I think ED would of been a better place for such an article. Going by what was said in your link.


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 3, 2010)

That was just paxil hating lies spread by anti-paxils.


----------



## Attaman (Jan 3, 2010)

paxil rose said:


> You guys the trolls deleted mah page ; ___ ;
> 
> http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Talk:Paxil_rose


Y'know, if that's not deemed relevant to the fandom, perhaps you could make an article on FurryOps?  I mean, it was a site specifically ran by furries with furry interest in mind.  If that's not relevant to WikiFur, what is?

I mean, what exactly are they going to get you on?  Hell, if you could get a mirror running, what would there not be to run on?


----------



## paxil rose (Jan 3, 2010)

Attaman said:


> Y'know, if that's not deemed relevant to the fandom, perhaps you could make an article on FurryOps?  I mean, it was a site specifically ran by furries with furry interest in mind.  If that's not relevant to WikiFur, what is?
> 
> I mean, what exactly are they going to get you on?  Hell, if you could get a mirror running, what would there not be to run on?



Nah. Even before they actually pulled that they were raising all kinds of hell about DUR HUR OBSESSED LOLS, apparently only certain people are allowed to be called out on examples of raging douchebaggery. Anything I do is going to get pulled instantly (because not matter if an incident is mentioned previously or not, I'm totally "not a furry" and just out to get people), though I guess I could format an article and have one of the other fine editors add it. Though given how apparently my posts here are being watched, I highly doubt it.


----------



## Attaman (Jan 3, 2010)

paxil rose said:


> Nah. Even before they actually pulled that they were raising all kinds of hell about DUR HUR OBSESSED LOLS, apparently only certain people are allowed to be called out on examples of raging douchebaggery. Anything I do is going to get pulled instantly (because not matter if an incident is mentioned previously or not, I'm totally "not a furry" and just out to get people), though I guess I could format an article and have one of the other fine editors add it. Though given how apparently my posts here are being watched, I highly doubt it.



I'd still suggest you do it.  Not doing it leaves the venue wasted.  If you can get that article up even for just a few hours, hopefully some people would listen.


----------

