# The Furry State Police



## paxil rose (Jun 20, 2009)

Let's elaborate on something I've brought up before.

What's everyone's opinion on those furries that will make repeated attempts to pull anything and everything that is furry related which doesn't stroke the fandoms dong? Flagbombing any videos that is remotely anti-fandom (intelligent rebuttal or flailing dumbfuckery, it makes no difference), submitting false DMCA notices to have videos pulled it flagbombing doesn't work, attempting to hack/dox people who make anti-furry videos, etc and so forth.

Do you consider it a significant problem for the fandoms image in terms of being labeled crybaby losers? Do you believe them to be a very small minority that poses no threat to anything other than themselves? Do you have any experience with some of these people? Are you one of these people yourself? If they're discussed is there a risk of giving them a sense of legitimacy? If ignored is there a risk of letting them grow like a cancer and then becoming an issue.

Discuss.


----------



## Panzermanathod (Jun 20, 2009)

No real discussion here that will be more than repeated ideals. I can't personally say I had experience with these people, though.

Also, Whitenoise will probably be right.


----------



## Xipoid (Jun 20, 2009)

I don't really know, as I'm totally detached here and find furry to be one of the most unimportant topics ever. I guess some people take things a little too seriously.


----------



## Corto (Jun 20, 2009)

Oh boy


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 20, 2009)

Panzermanathod said:


> No real discussion here that will be more than repeated ideals. I can't personally say I had experience with these people, though.



I wouldn't necessarily say this is about "ideals" exactly, as I'm sure not many of the people here will actually champion these kind of shenanigans.  I'm more interested as to what people think the effect these groups have for the community, for better or worse, if they even believe they effect it at all.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 20, 2009)

I was shown a furry video on gay furries, just random clean pics of males cuddling etc. But in the comments there were things like FURRY PRIDE!! and PROUD TO BE FURRY!. that drives me nuts, there is no need to post that shit. 1: it makes us look like immature little furfags. 2: you don't see trekkies yelling shit like that, so why do slot of furries do it?

I only hear about furries flagging trolls and/or video's criticising the fandom, This just add's to the fandom's immature reputation imo. Hell yeah i have seen video's i don't like about the fandom, but i don't go bawwwwing to youtube over them.


----------



## HotActionYiffFur (Jun 20, 2009)

I wonder where furrries get the stereotype of being over defensive. 

Oh right like 95% of the fandom is.


----------



## Arcadium (Jun 20, 2009)

There all really stupid. Anything from "Furry Pride", to, "STOP TROLLING ME", is just pathetic.


Wana find these people? Youtube. I stay clear from it as much as possible.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 20, 2009)

HotActionYiffFur said:


> I wonder where furrries get the stereotype of being over defensive.
> 
> Oh right like 95% of the fandom is.



Exaggeration much?


----------



## MHFC (Jun 20, 2009)

Arcadium said:


> There all really stupid. Anything from "Furry Pride", to, "STOP TROLLING ME", is just pathetic.
> 
> 
> Wana find these people? Youtube. I stay clear from it as much as possible.


Sorry to be a Grammar-Commander but use of the phrase "there all really stupid" is so self-deprecating that I suggest you erase your post and try again with correct spelling.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 20, 2009)

MHFC said:


> Sorry to be a Grammar-Commander but use of the phrase "there all really stupid" is so self-deprecating that I suggest you erase your post and try again with correct spelling.



Not to mention it is also generalizing every furry out there as the same.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 20, 2009)

Arcadium said:


> Wana find these people? Youtube. I stay clear from it as much as possible.



You know I've actually heard it said that the YouTube furry community notorious in the fandom for it's immaturity. I always wondered how much truth was in that, guess now I know.


----------



## Panzermanathod (Jun 20, 2009)

It seems like any (something) Youtube community is rather bad incomparison to the main areas. I mean, I hear the same thing about the Mugen Youtube Community.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 20, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> You know I've actually heard it said that the YouTube furry community notorious in the fandom for it's immaturity. I always wondered how much truth was in that, guess now I know.



Yep, the furry community on youtube has a very bad reputation for it. I even joined the bandwagon on youtube for about a week before i saw sense. Now i don't bother watching furry related video's, either by trolls or furries themselves cause of the stupid comments furries leave. 

To be honest i much prefer to hang out here on FA with the furries and trolls here, then on youtube.

EDIT: Mugen?


----------



## Kanic (Jun 20, 2009)

My main issue with many furries is that they are way too thin skinned. I mean damn! Learn to laugh at yourselves for once. That's usually the people who try to make furry their life instead of just a hobby though.

And by the way. Thanks for the lulz with the WolfeeDarkFang picture. That guy takes butthurt to a whole new level.


----------



## Panzermanathod (Jun 20, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> EDIT: Mugen?


 
A game engine tha allows you to make your own fighing game.

As much drama that goes on, at least it isn't 2 years ago. It puts all the drama I've seen on this forum to shame.


----------



## foxmusk (Jun 20, 2009)

yea, because we definitely need the fandom to be as candy-coated as possible, so it looks like we're all a bunch of ADHD-afflicted thirteen-year-olds who shan't DARE say an ill thing about anyone or anything in the fandom.

let 'em argue, i say.


----------



## MHFC (Jun 20, 2009)

Kanic said:


> My main issue with many furries is that they are way too thin skinned. I mean damn! Learn to laugh at yourselves for once. That's usually the people who try to make furry their life instead of just a hobby though.
> 
> And by the way. Thanks for the lulz with the WolfeeDarkFang picture. That guy takes butthurt to a whole new level.


This. Damn if dressing up as theme park mascots, and drawing erotica of lynx-ladies isn't funny as hell then the world has lost something very special and is becoming a very dark place. And I should know - I do both


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 20, 2009)

Kanic said:


> And by the way. Thanks for the lulz with the WolfeeDarkFang picture. That guy takes butthurt to a whole new level.



Do check out the Encyclopedia Dramatica article on him. That picture barely scratches the surface.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 20, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> You know I've actually heard it said that the YouTube furry community notorious in the fandom for it's immaturity. I always wondered how much truth was in that, guess now I know.



YouTube comments and communities don't give *anyone* a good name.

Edit: Oh, how late to the party I am...


----------



## Tycho (Jun 20, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Exaggeration much?



Not as much of one as you'd hope


----------



## Excitement! (Jun 20, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Do check out the Encyclopedia Dramatica article on him. That picture barely scratches the surface.


So I went on his ED page and tried watching this one Youtube video but "The video is no longer available due to a copyright claim from _*Wolfee Darkfang inc.*_" AWWWWWWWWWEEEESOOOOOME.


----------



## Not A Fox (Jun 20, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> What's everyone's opinion on those furries that will make repeated attempts to pull anything and everything that is furry related which doesn't stroke the fandoms dong?
> 
> Do you consider it a significant problem for the fandoms image in terms of being labeled crybaby losers?



It's as much a problem as the over-abundance of porn, regular and fetish alike.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 20, 2009)

Excitement! said:


> So I went on his ED page and tried watching this one Youtube video but "The video is no longer available due to a copyright claim from _*Wolfee Darkfang inc.*_" AWWWWWWWWWEEEESOOOOOME.




I was right in the middle of changing my sig and noticed this.

Surprise ruined.

Ah well.


----------



## greybrother (Jun 20, 2009)

The most enthusiastic furries tend to be the youngest ones, new to the fandom, and new to having an outlet for sexual feelings, and frankly, some of them are probably far younger than we'd like to imagine, so if they seem immature, it's likely because they simply are immature.

Not to say someone can't be an adult and act appallingly immature, especially in an environment that inadvertently encourages it. 

Anyway, I just try to represent furrydom in terms of what it means to me, and serve as an example of a fur who loves furrydom, but you know.. isn't too overtly ridiculous about it..


----------



## Tycho (Jun 20, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> I was right in the middle of changing my sig and noticed this.
> 
> Surprise ruined.
> 
> Ah well.



Oh WOW.  LOL, the butthurt is palpable even through the hundreds upon hundreds of miles of fiber-optic lines that link me to it.

Wolfee Darkfang Inc., lol.


----------



## Excitement! (Jun 20, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> I was right in the middle of changing my sig and noticed this.
> 
> Surprise ruined.
> 
> Ah well.


evvverry thing is ruiiined 

Someday I want to own a corporation that exists to take down Youtube videos. The commercials would be great.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 20, 2009)

Excitement! said:


> evvverry thing is ruiiined
> 
> Someday I want to own a corporation that exists to take down Youtube videos. The commercials would be great.




Do it anyway. YouTube policy is that if you submit a DMCA for anything, they pull. No questions asked. that why they aren't held accountable should any real copyright infringement occur. Which is why the FSP have since made it a staple of their attack stradigies.


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 20, 2009)

I make anti-furry comments/media :T

You cant take many things seriously in this world, and being furry is as non-serious as it gets. If you cant accept people taking digs at things you care about then GTFO.


----------



## MHFC (Jun 20, 2009)

secretfur said:


> I make anti-furry comments/media :T
> 
> You cant take many things seriously in this world, and being furry is as non-serious as it gets. If you cant accept people taking digs at things you care about then GTFO.


Well said Sir.


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 20, 2009)

MHFC said:


> Well said Sir.



Holy hell someone agrees with me  

But seriously, you have to be pretty insecure about stuff like this to let it get to you. It's all for fun after all.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 20, 2009)

He ain't the only one who agrees with ya.  I just didn't want to waste a post saying so.  (onoez someone cares about post counts!)  Aye, insecurities ahoy.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 20, 2009)

secretfur said:


> Holy hell someone agrees with me
> 
> But seriously, you have to be pretty insecure about stuff like this to let it get to you. It's all for fun after all.



I agree with ya also.


----------



## Excitement! (Jun 20, 2009)

secretfur said:


> I make anti-furry comments/media :T
> 
> You cant take many things seriously in this world, and being furry is as non-serious as it gets. If you cant accept people taking digs at things you care about then GTFO.


Unfortunately, said media is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Butthurt Furriez and Son Inc.

esquire.

ltd.

.com


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 20, 2009)

Excitement! said:


> Unfortunately, said media is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Butthurt Furriez and Son Inc.
> 
> esquire.
> 
> ...



Lol, they destroy my freedom as an artist >:C


----------



## Fenra (Jun 20, 2009)

Theres a simple equation I apply to all things like this:

Internet Connection + Anonymous + Opinion = Ass

Applies to both sides, both those who make anti-fur media and those who get infuriated by it, people get far to uptight and pissed off by things these days and the internet gives them the perfect place to vent about it, and certainly in a far more "spirited" fasion than they would in the real world because they can without fear of reprisal (i dont count "flames" as proper reprisal because its just text on a screen) because no one knows who you are beyond a user name.

I personally think the entire thing is rediculous, lighten up and learn to laugh at yourselves and not take things so bloody seriously! People making anti-fur media should give it a rest, so you dont like what they are doing? no one told you to stick your nose in, who lets you pass out judgement on what other people do with thier lives! And furries getting pissed off about it? your just as bad when it comes to baiting them on, i mean for gods sake if you are really "proud to be furry" then it thier opinion should mean f*ck all to you, stop throwing gas on the fire for crying out loud!


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 20, 2009)

Fenra said:


> Theres a simple equation I apply to all things like this:
> 
> Internet Connection + Anonymous + Opinion = Ass
> 
> ...



Couldn't agree more.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Jun 20, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I was shown a furry video on gay furries, just random clean pics of males cuddling etc. But in the comments there were things like FURRY PRIDE!! and PROUD TO BE FURRY!. that drives me nuts, there is no need to post that shit. 1: it makes us look like immature little furfags. 2: you don't see trekkies yelling shit like that, so why do slot of furries do it?


 
I have said this before on YouTube, the whole "furry pride" stuff is really gay pride. It's a crossover from some of the gay community coming into the furry fandom. I don't know why they feel the need to do it, but I assume they view furrydom as part of their sexulity. 



greybrother said:


> The most enthusiastic furries tend to be the youngest ones, new to the fandom, and new to having an outlet for sexual feelings, and frankly, some of them are probably far younger than we'd like to imagine, so if they seem immature, it's likely because they simply are immature.


 
You're absolutely right. It is more of the younger, newfag crowd that does a lot of it, and yes, there are the older ones that never grew up. 



paxil rose said:


> Which is why the FSP have since made it a staple of their attack stradigies.


 
FSP???


----------



## whoadamn (Jun 21, 2009)

We've really dug ourselves into a hole, screwing like rabbits, allowing for such deviation in morality...

Segregation is the key, I vouch for ScrewTube.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 21, 2009)

Fenra said:


> Theres a simple equation I apply to all things like this:
> 
> Internet Connection + Anonymous + Opinion = Ass



Greater Internet Dickwad Theory, though it also goes by a more profane name.


----------



## Excitement! (Jun 21, 2009)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> I have said this before on YouTube, the whole "furry pride" stuff is really gay pride. It's a crossover from some of the gay community coming into the furry fandom. I don't know why they feel the need to do it, but I assume they view furrydom as part of their sexulity.


Leather pride/bear pride are things (with corresponding flags), so furry pride doesn't seem like that much of a stretch. So I'd say you're probably right. See also: that tired gay rights fox picture that everyone on the internet knows about. Not going to post it here cause I'm CLASSY.


----------



## Torinir (Jun 21, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Greater Internet Dickwad Theory, though it also goes by a more profane name.



http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2004/20040319h.jpg

In living colour.


----------



## Mojotaian (Jun 21, 2009)

I agree with most of the stuff on here... Mostly, those "Fur for life" people should learn to give it a brake, eventually it just turns into material that is posted JUST to stir them up and make a commotion, they should lighten up and learn to take a joke...
Though, I do say that you, paxil rose, are doing your fair share in trying to keep the flames alight... Sorry for offering a different opinion! But you seem to just publicise it and "Make it known that this person is doing such"... correct me if I am wrong, but all i've seen YOU do is post to attack this Wolfeedarkfang person... Sure, they're a dick at times most possibly, but you casting threads like this just makes me think you're looking for a pat on the back for being an idiot and that you need the opinions of others (which, sorry if i seem offensive but it passed my mind, that you's all seem like "yes-men") to make you feel that what you're doing is "right"... 



Fenra said:


> Theres a simple equation I apply to all things like this:
> 
> Internet Connection + Anonymous + Opinion = Ass
> 
> Applies to both sides


 
Personally, i think this applies to paxil as well! Who is also, as you described, hiding behind an avatar reading and posting text... How ironic that I am also doing this... But i'm not persistantly attacking anybody...

I am actually getting sick of your never-ending war with this person being publicised on this forum!
As for the rest of you... Meh, you have an opinion yeah, but question that too...


----------



## ThisisGabe (Jun 21, 2009)

Understanding why someone would take down your videos with a fictitious company isn't as important as understanding how to close the loophole in the youtube. There doesn't appear to be anybody regulating whether companies claiming copyright infringement are legitimate, thus giving everyone unlimited ability to delete any video they want.


----------



## Mojotaian (Jun 21, 2009)

ThisisGabe said:


> Understanding why someone would take down your videos with a fictitious company isn't as important as understanding how to close the loophole in the youtube. There doesn't appear to be anybody regulating whether companies claiming copyright infringement are legitimate, thus giving everyone unlimited ability to delete any video they want.


 
"Creates devious plot to destroy the entirety of youtube"


----------



## Shino (Jun 21, 2009)

What? I'm here, what do you---

Oh, wrong topic. Never mind.

Anywho, I really couldn't care less. The internet seems to be thouroughly opposed to quality control anyways. As long as nothing on my favorite list gets bombed, I'm kinda apathetic to the whole thing.
Oh, and Warner Bros, you suck for killing AMV Hell 3.


----------



## Mojotaian (Jun 21, 2009)

Elaborate on that.... and WHAT THE HELL?!


----------



## Kanic (Jun 21, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Do check out the Encyclopedia Dramatica article on him. That picture barely scratches the surface.


 

Oh I don't think that's necessary. I've seen ultraforge, perfectlydunce and all of the other trolls on youtube show just how much of a cry baby he really is.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 21, 2009)

Mojotaian said:


> I agree with most of the stuff on here... Mostly, those "Fur for life" people should learn to give it a brake, eventually it just turns into material that is posted JUST to stir them up and make a commotion, they should lighten up and learn to take a joke...
> Though, I do say that you, paxil rose, are doing your fair share in trying to keep the flames alight... Sorry for offering a different opinion! But you seem to just publicise it and "Make it known that this person is doing such"... correct me if I am wrong, but all i've seen YOU do is post to attack this Wolfeedarkfang person... Sure, they're a dick at times most possibly, but you casting threads like this just makes me think you're looking for a pat on the back for being an idiot and that you need the opinions of others (which, sorry if i seem offensive but it passed my mind, that you's all seem like "yes-men") to make you feel that what you're doing is "right"...
> 
> 
> ...



If you read the OP's first post it does not mention Wolfee Darkfang at all. All paxil did was start a legit thread on the morons on youtube. Although I did suspect Wolfee would be brought up in this thread, took a bit longer than i had expected. 

anyway, imo paxil didn't intentionaly set out to make a thread specificaly targeting wolfee.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jun 21, 2009)

Flag-bombing and false DCMAing is stupid. If you do not like what someone has to say you intelligently discuss it.

Hacking just because you do not like what someone has to say is also stupid. Furries should not resort to these things.


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 21, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Flag-bombing and false DCMAing is stupid. If you do not like what someone has to say you intelligently discuss it.
> 
> Hacking just because you do not like what someone has to say is also stupid. Furries should not resort to these things.



Unfortunately people are mostly immature asshats. Maybe if this was a better world we could discuss things instead of BAWWWing at each other.

I quote the maxim 'God damn furries...'


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jun 21, 2009)

secretfur said:


> Unfortunately people are mostly immature asshats. Maybe if this was a better world we could discuss things instead of BAWWWing at each other.
> 
> I quote the maxim 'God damn furries...'



That is true. But there are still those who are not asshats. Those are the ones who should take the asshats by the nose, give a firm twist and then slap a shock collar that no one could ever enjoy on them.


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 21, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> That is true. But there are still those who are not asshats. Those are the ones who should take the asshats by the nose, give a firm twist and then slap a shock collar that no one could ever enjoy on them.



They'd probably learn to harness the shocks for more bouts of asshatery. You cant win on the internet, it's ruled by idiots.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Jun 21, 2009)

secretfur said:


> They'd probably learn to harness the shocks for more bouts of asshatery. You cant win on the internet, it's ruled by idiots.



Yes I can. If shock collars fail, than I will train raccoons to be ninjas, and have them run around and castrate with a shock probe the asshats. Removal from gene pool will cut down on ass-hats in the future.


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 21, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Yes I can. If shock collars fail, than I will train raccoons to be ninjas, and have them run around and castrate with a shock probe the asshats. Removal from gene pool will cut down on ass-hats in the future.



Ah, good old-fashioned idiot culls. I like the way you think, but give the ninjacoons rabies before you unleash them


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 21, 2009)

Mojotaian said:


> Though, I do say that you, paxil rose, are doing your fair share in trying to keep the flames alight... Sorry for offering a different opinion! But you seem to just publicise it and "Make it known that this person is doing such"... correct me if I am wrong, but all i've seen YOU do is post to attack this Wolfeedarkfang person



Which is odd, because Wolfee Darkfang was brought up by somebody else entirely and was not once mentioned by me initially...



> Sure, they're a dick at times most possibly


Which is _very_ odd, since I'm only aware of _one person_ that refers to single people plurally...



> but you casting threads like this just makes me think you're looking for a pat on the back for being an idiot and that you need the opinions of others


No, I tell stories about actual events and let the public give their opinion. 
Unlike you, who wanted to spout your mightier than thou bullshit and give nobody a chance for rebuttal;

http://forums.furaffinity.net/showthread.php?t=41902

The man accusing others of being an idiot is going to open a thread bashing others for having an "uncaring" opinion, then can't respect them enough to even let them get a word in edgewise? *Very* hypocritical, good sir.




> (which, sorry if i seem offensive but it passed my mind, that you's all seem like "yes-men")


You know, I've seen a similar accusation against these forums brought up before...on a certain blog, if I'm not mistaken...



> to make you feel that what you're doing is "right"...


What I'm doing? Do tell, what am I doing? I'm telling stories about actual events and parlaying many of them into discussions. Furry related discussion. Seeing as this is a furry board, that's more than acceptable.



> Personally, i think this applies to paxil as well! Who is also, as you described, hiding behind an avatar reading and posting text... How ironic that I am also doing this... *But i'm not persistantly attacking anybody*...


You're an incredibly sheltered young lad if you see these posts as "attacks". Anything I post is based on actual events, and other people here generally attest that the person I attack is very much everything I claim him to be. I would say these are unbiased opinions, but hell, these are the opinions of *other furries*. If I'm half the furry hater said "victim" accuses me of being, they should all hold the same opinions of me as he does. Very few, to none, actually share his view.



As far as further "attacks" go, I think my sig says enough. You can't cry Wolfee's being persecuted any more than he's more than willing to go after others. Only difference, aside the obvious popularity difference, is I'm more than able to give my side of the argument without resorting to perjury, attempted hacking, or generally crying like an indignant child. Sorry that seems so unreasonable to you.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 21, 2009)

Oh, and in before the guest of honor inevitably shows up announcing "OH WELL GEE you think ANYONE that thinks you're wrong is me LOL SILLY TROLL BAN HIM NAO XD!!!", I was pointed out a few members have had the same arguments, random "defense" threads, and ability to butcher grammar to that extent as you.

Many of those people ended up being Wolfee Darkfang.


----------



## Fenra (Jun 21, 2009)

Fenra said:


> Theres a simple equation I apply to all things like this:
> 
> Internet Connection + Anonymous + Opinion = Ass


 


ArielMT said:


> Greater Internet Dickwad Theory, though it also goes by a more profane name.


 


Torinir said:


> http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2004/20040319h.jpg
> 
> In living colour.


 
Huh, well you know that explains a lot, had never seen that image before in my life yet when I would tell people the little equation above they would say I was copying or being unoriginal... it all makes sense now, damn, guess I'm gonna have to start refering to it as a penny arcade quote, sigh, oh well nevermind, will find some other way to be witty and original, f*cked if I know how though...


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 21, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Which is odd, because Wolfee Darkfang was brought up by somebody else entirely and was not once mentioned by me initially...
> 
> Which is _very_ odd, since I'm only aware of _one person_ that refers to single people plurally...
> 
> ...



For once, i agree with ya Pax, I can't remember who mentioned Wolfee first, but i know it wasn't you. And i am feeling to lazy to flick through the posts.


----------



## PaulShepherd (Jun 21, 2009)

Like we say in Germany, the smartest one steps back. And we better step back, because this doesn't make our image any better. Stop it, before we are doomed!


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 21, 2009)

I wouldn'tm be surprised if some of those that yell out the stupid shit like "FURRIES RULE!!!111!!!!" are loners irl. I think the poeple in the youtube furry community fall into one or more of these catagories:

1:  immature little kids that don't know any better.
2:  immature adults that never grew up.
3:  loners irl and seek attention.
4:  just complete morons.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 21, 2009)

Fenra said:


> Huh, well you know that explains a lot, had never seen that image before in my life yet when I would tell people the little equation above they would say I was copying or being unoriginal... it all makes sense now, damn, guess I'm gonna have to start refering to it as a penny arcade quote, sigh, oh well nevermind, will find some other way to be witty and original, f*cked if I know how though...



It's getting harder to be original, witty, and memorable in a good light, it seems.


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 21, 2009)

they're just a bunch of trolls.


----------



## Mojotaian (Jun 22, 2009)

Nope, it's not unreasonable, I'm not actually aware that this person was doing that sort of thing, i tried to make sense of it, sending a PM to him to ask his side of the story, and got no reply which REALLY doesn't help his side of the arguement if he has one... I took the time to read that and fair enough, from your point of view this person is a shithead. Well, i've been wrong before and i can be wrong again. but you post it on here like it's a vandetta or something, it seems that to me...
And even if it wasn't you who started this, you are fair going on with it.
When I mentioned him plurally, i really wasn't aware of the gender, because i swear his avatar was a girl.

(Unlike you, who wanted to spout your mightier than thou bullshit and give nobody a chance for rebuttal

That post WAS for rebuttle, i just wanted the expressed opinion to be in private so i could avoid the trolling and arguements disrupting the thread. I only wanted all sides of the arguement without all the debating bullshit to derail the topic, see...

And yes, I may be a sheltered young man. I only saw these as attacks because you seem to teethe with absolute hostility with everything you type about it, which is fair i guess since you are trying to derail this kid. But when you put it in the way you do, it seems more of a report to make their own decisions... which is in absolute contradiction to my earlier rant.

And also, I see this ENTIRE hatespamattackdeletionrantingslanderous stuff as bullshit... So when I post a thread to find out what the hell is really going on and why, i don't see it as complete bullshit... Yes... I was angry at the time, sure, see when people get angry, they tend to exaggerate a lot and blow things out of proportion, and if people fight, they bite...

But don't worry too much... I now see that you have a fair point in what you're doing, and I stand corrected on it.

So ya, Im sorry 'bout that


----------



## Zaaz (Jun 22, 2009)

What? A fandom comprised of mostly teenagers be considered immature? Bite thy tongue good sir!

Z


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 22, 2009)

Zaaz said:


> What? A fandom comprised of mostly teenagers be considered immature? Bite thy tongue good sir!
> 
> Z



The teenagers really aren't the problem. It's the 30+ year old men living with their mothers that seem to have the bigger attitude issues.


----------



## Brazen (Jun 22, 2009)

Zaaz said:


> What? A fandom comprised of mostly teenagers be considered immature? Bite thy tongue good sir!
> 
> Z


 
According to surveys the average furry age is 24, the age at which it is fair to expect people to know better.


----------



## Ozriel (Jun 22, 2009)

Furries should learn to better take criticism, such as the Manboi who acted like a child when people criticized and berated him for posting something publicly. Unfortunately, most will not.


----------



## Carenath (Jun 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Flag-bombing and false DCMAing is stupid. If you do not like what someone has to say you intelligently discuss it.
> 
> Hacking just because you do not like what someone has to say is also stupid. Furries should not resort to these things.


Last I checked, its also illegal to issue a false DMCA Take-down notice.. but in order to hide in the safe-harbour... Youtube and other similar sites.. shoot first, ask questions later.

If enough people could prove that Wolfee Darkfang was lying to get videos that criticised him/furries removed... you could (try to) get his account closed.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 22, 2009)

Carenath said:


> Last I checked, its also illegal to issue a false DMCA Take-down notice.. but in order to hide in the safe-harbour... Youtube and other similar sites.. shoot first, ask questions later.
> 
> If enough people could prove that Wolfee Darkfang was lying to get videos that criticised him/furries removed... you could (try to) get his account closed.




When his account got phished last September all pitched in and had the account flagged and suspended. After pleading to YouTube for a bit, it was eventually re-opened like nothing had ever happened. If he was tossed for false DMCA's he would more likely than not have his friends attempt the same "hackers took it and did all that stuff" defense.

I did see where VenomfangX was one made to post an apology video after being reprimanded for DMCA abuse and was curious as to how they went about making him do that. Hopefully it was something other than guilt or fear, because the people that are doing this shit (admittedly, it's more than just Wolfee, though he does it *much* more often) are _at best_ shameless, and at worst genuinely believe and have even tried arguing if they do these things, these "troll"-like attacks, that they shouldn't be penalized, as they did them for, and I swear to God, for the good of the Furry Fandom.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

I don't know where I'm at but I know what's going on.

Wolfee lied to me since about three years ago. I was a stupid furry idiot to believe such a liar! I didn't knew he spied on me when I started talking to people like Paxil Rose. And now, Wolfee is trying to be desperate to rid people he doesn't like. I heard his false DMCA drama before. I mean, what the fuck guys?

Wolfee, if you're reading this, let me ask you this. Don't you realize that half of the furries here on the forums hate you? This isn't no troll lie. I've seen the shit you've done wrong and yet you go on! I heard you wanted to get rid of Pax off of this forums but he's not doing anything wrong. Go ahead and lie to the furries to defend you but remember, you can't really "silence the trolls" since after all, they're people with different opinions just like how furries have different opinions of you.

Thanks for fucking things up Wolfee!

And Pax, if you're reading this, wish you luck. =)


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Flagbombing any videos that is remotely anti-fandom (intelligent rebuttal or flailing dumbfuckery, it makes no difference), submitting false DMCA notices to have videos pulled it flagbombing doesn't work, attempting to hack/dox people who make anti-furry videos, etc and so forth.



If people have done this before and it "works" for them, they will do this again. Maura told me that people like Wolfee do not care about our freedom and rights even though they're given to us by law. As long Wolfee gets HIS freedom and rights and everything he wants, he doesn't care about us. He'll continue to attempt to hack and dox us as well as filing false DMCA claims.

Pax, remember, Wolfee is a despereate furry and he will do ANYTHING to get what he wants even if it means to hack an administrator account on YouTube to get rid of trolls including you or possibly me.

This, is an act of a desperate individual who can't take criticisms or have problems with himself. He'll continue to do this until the day he dies. Very pathetic on one who thinks they can get rid of trolls by bitching to people on the Internet to help get rid of trolls only to find their own Black Op forums hacked by a troll to expose their dirty secrets. Wolfee, could, simply ignore the troll and not do anything stupid in the first place.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> If people have done this before and it "works" for them, they will do this again. Maura told me that people like Wolfee do not care about our freedom and rights even though they're given to us by law. As long Wolfee gets HIS freedom and rights and everything he wants, he doesn't care about us. He'll continue to attempt to hack and dox us as well as filing false DMCA claims.
> 
> Pax, remember, Wolfee is a despereate furry and he will do ANYTHING to get what he wants even if it means to hack an administrator account on YouTube to get rid of trolls including you or possibly me.
> 
> This, is an act of a desperate individual who can't take criticisms or have problems with himself. He'll continue to do this until the day he dies. Very pathetic on one who thinks they can get rid of trolls by bitching to people on the Internet to help get rid of trolls only to find their own Black Op forums hacked by a troll to expose their dirty secrets. Wolfee, could, simply ignore the troll and not do anything stupid in the first place.



Someone taking it personally much? 

1: If wolfee has "hacked" troll accounts, just remember the time trolls hacked his, which to me just makes you all as bad as each other.

2: Trolls can't drop it either, again imo this makes you all as bad as each other.

3: As for DMCA, or fals DMCA's, if trolls choose to use a piece of wolfee's art in their video's or anything else, and wolfee has it copyrighted, then it is the troll's fault for useing said material.

It appears to sir that you only made an account to come on her and slag wolfee off. Which to me is rather childish. We have had discussions on Wolfee before. I also think saying "Half the forum goers here hate you" is an exaggeration, most people here just don't give two shits or don't know what the fuck we are talking about. This thread isn't about "Wolfee". If you have a problem with wolfee either PM him, or keep it to youtube i don't expect to come onto the forum to find a child posting in a thread yelling about Wolfee.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 23, 2009)

I'm curious about the newcomer, too.



RandyDarkshade said:


> 3: As for DMCA, or fals DMCA's, if trolls choose to use a piece of wolfee's art in their video's or anything else, and wolfee has it copyrighted, then it is the troll's fault for useing said material.



Fair use much?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 23, 2009)

To put it simply, don't use copyrighted material.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> I don't know where I'm at but I know what's going on.
> 
> Wolfee lied to me since about three years ago. I was a stupid furry idiot to believe such a liar! I didn't knew he spied on me when I started talking to people like Paxil Rose. And now, Wolfee is trying to be desperate to rid people he doesn't like. I heard his false DMCA drama before. I mean, what the fuck guys?
> 
> ...



*goes back and do a data check*
actually only the 5-10% of furs that active here hate Wolfee...the rest dont give a flying fuck. Good day and leave cause I know you just made that account to bash Wolfee even though this whole topic isnt about Wolfee


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 23, 2009)

Okay.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 23, 2009)

*The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.*

Exert from your link. Which is what i was basicaly saying. 

If however the material was used to make valid points, yes, i'd agree that should be fair use. What i was saying is pretty much what the exert i took from the link says.


----------



## cpam (Jun 23, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Fair use much?



There are guidelines to what is and isn't considered fair use.  Simply put,  you can use a snippet from a copyrighted work as part of a report or a review; that's considered a fair use.  But if you use copyrighted work in a production piece without permission, that's considered infringement.  In fact, you are creating a derivative artwork, and that right belongs to the original artist.


----------



## south syde dobe (Jun 23, 2009)

Sometimes I wish I didn't have an interest in anthro animals so I can leave this god forsaken fandom :|


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 23, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> Fair use much?


 
In this case, it would certianly fall under fair use.  The problem is, that proving fair use is the burdon of the defense in the event of a civil lawsuit.  Not that any furry would actually file a suit.

But there is something very important about the DMCA that people should note.  DMCA takedowns are not absolute.  If the persom who files the DMCA complaint does NOT file law suit within two weeks, the material can be reposted agian.  It might take YouTube a few weeks longer than that to 'get the gears turning', but you could inform YouTube that the person that complained did not file a suit in the specified two week grace period and get your stuff put back up.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Someone taking it personally much?
> 
> 1: If wolfee has "hacked" troll accounts, just remember the time trolls hacked his, which to me just makes you all as bad as each other.
> 
> ...



Randy, I never took part of the hacking at all. I can't believe you would say I'm bad as the trolls when Wolfee spied on me three years ago the minute I started talking casually with Paxil. Again, there's no use of you defending Wolfee. Also, I was reading a certain stub off from Wiki Fur and it said that fursonas used "*or identification or commentary of the character*" are subject to Fair Use and this includes my fursona too like everybody else's fursona.

To check when a certain material is copyrighted, you have to look up the copyright database. I looked up the American Copyright Database and there isn't anyone who owns a Wolfee Darkfang. Pretty much, like any other fursonas, Wolfee is subject to Fair Use.

Remember, Fair Use is created under national law not by company!

And for those who likes to parodize my fursona's hearty appetite for food (look at my profile pic not my avatar), feel free to draw my fursona fat as part of parody under Fair Use. XD (Of course, not freaking obese and disgusting. Just fat where the belly touches down to the paws and I'm fine enough.)


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 23, 2009)

Also, this;



> *10.    Rights you licence *
> 
> *      10.1    When you upload or post a User Submission to YouTube, you grant: *
> 
> ...


http://www.youtube.com/t/terms?gl=GB&hl=en-GB

Once he puts it on YouTube, it's up for grabs. The very first video on this other new account was a clip from an AmazingAtheist video that pretty much says what I do is kosher. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtdM4QzpYms&feature=channel_page

Being a huge AA fan, I had hoped this would give him some understanding of what is and is not a fair takedown. He has never acknowledged this video.

This quote from someone that isn't Wolfee is pretty much the best indicator of how they all believe a DMCA works.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> In this case, it would certianly fall under fair use.  The problem is, that proving fair use is the burdon of the defense in the event of a civil lawsuit.  Not that any furry would actually file a suit.
> 
> But there is something very important about the DMCA that people should note.  DMCA takedowns are not absolute.  If the persom who files the DMCA complaint does NOT file law suit within two weeks, the material can be reposted agian.  It might take YouTube a few weeks longer than that to 'get the gears turning', but you could inform YouTube that the person that complained did not file a suit in the specified two week grace period and get your stuff put back up.



Strange, then how come not all the evidence videos of Wolfee aren't showing up? Is it because he filed and threatened lawsuit against someone to get that person banned on YouTube? People need to know what Fair Use is. In fact, I think EVERY art site including Deviant Art and Fur Affinity need to post a section about Fair Use in their Terms of Service so that people who just registered for a new account don't whine about "people stealing their art" and crap.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 23, 2009)

I'd also appreciate it if we could keep this civil so this discussion can remain open and that certain elements can't "Dur hur everything you say is slander and gets closed!".


----------



## cpam (Jun 23, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> In this case, it would certianly fall under fair use.  The problem is, that proving fair use is the burdon of the defense in the event of a civil lawsuit.  Not that any furry would actually file a suit.



Don't ever take that for granted.  Some furries _would _and _do _in fact file lawsuits to protect their copyrights.  One furry is not only notorious for it, but actually has a lawyer on retainer.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Strange, then how come not all the evidence videos of Wolfee aren't showing up? Is it because he filed and threatened lawsuit against someone to get that person banned on YouTube? People need to know what Fair Use is. In fact, I think EVERY art site including Deviant Art and Fur Affinity need to post a section about Fair Use in their Terms of Service so that people who just registered for a new account don't whine about "people stealing their art" and crap.




DA's Terms of Service isn't the same as YouTube. 



> *4. Copyright*
> deviantART is, unless otherwise stated, the owner of all copyright and data rights in the Service and its contents. Individuals who have posted works to deviantART are either the copyright owners of the component parts of that work or are posting the work under license from a copyright owner or his or her agent or otherwise as permitted by law. *You may not reproduce, distribute, publicly display or perform, or prepare derivative works based on any of the Content including any such works without the express, written consent of deviantART or the appropriate owner of copyright in such works.* deviantART does not claim ownership rights in your works or other materials posted by you to deviantART (Your Content). You agree not to distribute any part of the Service other than Your Content in any medium other than as permitted in these Terms of Service or by use of functions on the Service provided by us. You agree not to alter or modify any part of the Service unless expressly permitted to do so by us or by use of functions on the Service provided by us.


http://about.deviantart.com/policy/service/


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Oh, and in before the guest of honor inevitably shows up announcing "OH WELL GEE you think ANYONE that thinks you're wrong is me LOL SILLY TROLL BAN HIM NAO XD!!!", I was pointed out a few members have had the same arguments, random "defense" threads, and ability to butcher grammar to that extent as you.
> 
> Many of those people ended up being Wolfee Darkfang.



Then my concern is what if "many of those people" create secret "anti troll" forums like Wolfee?

I might as well say that I'm fucked now. Because those people like Wolfee will try to get furries to not talk to trolls and stuff if you remember. This means that those people are probably watching me and are spying on me as I talk to you because they see you as a troll.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> DA's Terms of Service isn't the same as YouTube.
> 
> http://about.deviantart.com/policy/service/



That's my concern. What if DA puts Fair Use in their TOS? Because if Fair Use is a law, shouldn't every art site MUST have the Fair Use section in their TOS?


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Then my concern is what if "many of those people" create secret "anti troll" forums like Wolfee?
> 
> I might as well say that I'm fucked now. Because those people like Wolfee will try to get furries to not talk to trolls and stuff if you remember. This means that those people are probably watching me and are spying on me as I talk to you because they see you as a troll.




I think you should probably take this to a Rants and Raves thread. You'll probably get this locked at this rate.



Chuong Cho Soi said:


> That's my concern. What if DA puts Fair Use in their TOS? Because if Fair Use is a law, shouldn't every art site MUST have the Fair Use section in their TOS?


I wouldn't know, I'm just working with the terms of service of the websites I use.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> Don't ever take that for granted.  Some furries _would _and _do _in fact file lawsuits to protect their copyrights.  One furry is not only notorious for it, but actually has a lawyer on retainer.



It would depends on the situation and the case. In Wolfee's case, the lawyer would end up laughing at Wolfee as Wolfee whines about Internet trolls and talks in details of the "trolls harassing him and ruining his reputation". Paxil would tell you why this case would be hilarious. It's a long story but I'm sure he can shorten it for you to understand.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> I think you should probably take this to a Rants and Raves thread. You'll probably get this locked at this rate.



I thought they lock forums if someone starts arguing and BAWWWW at each other. It wouldn't be fair to lock forums just because it's "slander". After all, I'm just expressing my feelings without trying to cause drama.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> I thought they lock forums if someone starts arguing and BAWWWW at each other. It wouldn't be fair to lock forums just because it's "slander". After all, I'm just expressing my feelings without trying to cause drama.



Still though, you're hinging on a tangent, which would be best suited in  R&R.


----------



## cpam (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> To check when a certain material is copyrighted, you have to look up the copyright database. I looked up the American Copyright Database and there isn't anyone who owns a Wolfee Darkfang. Pretty much, like any other fursonas, Wolfee is subject to Fair Use.



Some clarification here: First off, a work is automatically copyrighted upon completion.  You don't have to file or register it anywhere in order for that to happen.  Secondly, a character or a 'fursona' is not copyrightable.  Only a work of art, such as an drawing or a photograph, or a written work like a story or a song, can be copyrighted.  A character's likeness can be trademarked, which is a different matter altogether.  Thirdly, anything that is copyrightable is subject to Fair Use -- but Fair Use does _not _mean an _indiscriminate _use of a copyrighted work.



Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Remember, Fair Use is created under national law not by company!



Under international law, actually.  Through the Berne Conventions.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 23, 2009)

Actually, he already has.

BTW, welcome to FAF!

Anyway, paxil's right about this thread needing to keep within sight of the original topic.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> Some clarification here: First off, a work is automatically copyrighted upon completion.  You don't have to file or register it anywhere in order for that to happen.  Secondly, a character or a 'fursona' is not copyrightable.  Only a work of art, such as an drawing or a photograph, or a written work like a story or a song, can be copyrighted.  A character's likeness can be trademarked, which is a different matter altogether.  Thirdly, anything that is copyrightable is subject to Fair Use -- but Fair Use does _not _mean an _indiscriminate _use of a copyrighted work.
> 
> 
> 
> Under international law, actually.  Through the Berne Conventions.



I know that the rules doesn't mean an indiscriminate use of the work. But what I'm trying to say is that fursonas can't be copyrighted. Wolfee claims to have copyright over his fursona even though fursonas are used for personal identification.

Now that you told me about copyrighted works, can you explain what trademark means? I don't think I've heard that before.

(English isn't my first language even though I understand most of English. I might misunderstand but I try my best to understand.)


----------



## cpam (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> It would depends on the situation and the case.



Agreed.  All I'm saying is that it isn't wise to think it could _never _happen.  There's some strange belief among many that the matter is somehow too small for any furry to ever go far enough to take such a serious step, and that just isn't true.

It may not be very _likely_, but it's _not _impossible.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> Agreed.  All I'm saying is that it isn't wise to think it could _never _happen.  There's some strange belief among many that the matter is somehow too small for any furry to ever go far enough to take such a serious step, and that just isn't true.
> 
> It may not be very _likely_, but it's _not _impossible.



I never said this is impossible. lol


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> I thought they lock forums if someone starts arguing and BAWWWW at each other. It wouldn't be fair to lock forums just because it's "slander". After all, I'm just expressing my feelings without trying to cause drama.



First, i offer my appoligies, wasn't aiming the hacking at you, just the trolls that were involved. It is my poor wording and the way i speak irl sometimes gets in my way. anyway, I agree with Paxil, if you want to rant about a certain someone then start an R+R thread. Otherwise it will run the risk of threadlock here. Unfortunately we don't make the rules


----------



## cpam (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Now that you told me about copyrighted works, can you explain what trademark means? I don't think I've heard that before.



A trademark is a specialized design, logo, or even a series of words that identify a product.  Using the character, Superman, as an example, you can't copyright or trademark the name because it's a common word.  It has a specific meaning dating back at least as far as the philosopher, Nietzsche, who coined the term in late 19th century.  DC Comics, the publisher of the popular superhero, can't _own _the name.  But they can and do own his stylistic logo and familiar shield-insignia.  They protect this ownership by applying for a Registered Trademark and paying an annual fee for it.  They also have trademarks on his costume, his distinctive appearance, and even some of his catch phrases, such as "Up, up and away!"  Through these steps, and by owning the copyrights on the artwork and stories that are published, they effectively own the character.

That's a simplified explanation, but there's more here on trademarks in general.


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 23, 2009)

I dont like Wolfee.... 
and if anyone decided to use any of my works in something that doesnt produce more than $2000 or equivalent in monetary value, then go ahead and use it.
more free publicity for me.


----------



## Shino (Jun 23, 2009)

Ok, after doing a little more research, I think I may have a suggestion that may resolve this. (Apologies if this has already been suggested, I'm too ADD to read through all the posts.)

Take a look here: http://www.youtube.com/t/dmca_policy, specifically at the counter-notice section. Basically, if somebody illegally claims DMCA violation, _they_ are responsible for damages to the original party.

I would attack this twofold: contact the YouTube legal department directly (and specify that he's making false DMCA claims), and in the meantime, repost all of your lost videos. If he tries to copyright them the second time around, he'll be burning himself. YouTube generally forgives first violations, but doing it a second time, and he'll probably be banned from YouTube. Granted, he might try the sockpuppet route, but YouTube can lock videos.

I agree that one cannot copyright a fursona, and it's obvious it's not trademarked, so he doesn't have a legal leg to stand on. (That, and (as said) why kill free publicity for yourself?)

In refrence to my earier post, there's currently a counter-DMCA claim in progress on the AMV Hell 3 video on YouTube. Warner Bros killed the video for copyright infringement on one of their songs (which they've been doing all over the site), but the clip was less than 20 secs and _clearly_ under the fair use clause.

Ok, I'm going to stop now before this becomes tl;dr.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> A trademark is a specialized design, logo, or even a series of words that identify a product.  Using the character, Superman, as an example, you can't copyright or trademark the name because it's a common word.  It has a specific meaning dating back at least as far as the philosopher, Nietzsche, who coined the term in late 19th century.  DC Comics, the publisher of the popular superhero, can't _own _the name.  But they can and do own his stylistic logo and familiar shield-insignia.  They protect this ownership by applying for a Registered Trademark and paying an annual fee for it.  They also have trademarks on his costume, his distinctive appearance, and even some of his catch phrases, such as "Up, up and away!"  Through these steps, and by owning the copyrights on the artwork and stories that are published, they effectively own the character.
> 
> That's a simplified explanation, but there's more here on trademarks in general.



So fursonas can't be trademarked nor copyrighted I assume then. Doesn't Wolfee get this by now?


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

Zrcalo said:


> I dont like Wolfee....
> and if anyone decided to use any of my works in something that doesnt produce more than $2000 or equivalent in monetary value, then go ahead and use it.
> more free publicity for me.



Nah... I'm not going o do anything stupid with you. A lot of furries like you are cool so don't worry. 

And yeah... I don't like Wolfee much either.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> So fursonas can't be trademarked nor copyrighted I assume then. Doesn't Wolfee get this by now?



He may not be able to copyright/trademark his actual fursona, but his art of his fursona CAN be copyrighted. 

If it were me though i would just be ignoreing anything a troll did. 

Some friendly advice dude, use the multiquote button , Makes life easier.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> He may not be able to copyright/trademark his actual fursona, but his art of his fursona CAN be copyrighted.



Ah I see. So a few art of people's fursona's on Deviant Art set up to be sold as prints is an example that the art of a fursona can be copyrighted even though the fursona itself can't be copyrighted.

Now I'm getting this.


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Nah... I'm not going o do anything stupid with you. A lot of furries like you are cool so don't worry.
> 
> And yeah... I don't like Wolfee much either.




^^ aw... :3 thanks for calling me "cool" 
I think you're cool too. 

*sigh* my ex used to be one of those paranoid little art hoarders... her art wasnt even all that good (at the time) and she was soooo scared that someone would "steal" it. so she put like.. a billion watermarks and signatures .. etc... it looked so rediculus. 

I mean... c'mon... my fursona is a bloody white wolf.. imagine every time I got mad if someone "stole my character" ... *facepalm*


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 23, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Ah I see. So a few art of people's fursona's on Deviant Art set up to be sold as prints is an example that the art of a fursona can be copyrighted even though the fursona itself can't be copyrighted.
> 
> Now I'm getting this.



Exactly. I can't copyright my fursona, but i can copyright any artwork i draw of it.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 23, 2009)

greybrother said:


> The most enthusiastic furries tend to be the youngest ones, new to the fandom, and new to having an outlet for sexual feelings, and frankly, some of them are probably far younger than we'd like to imagine, so if they seem immature, it's likely because they simply are immature.
> 
> Not to say someone can't be an adult and act appallingly immature, especially in an environment that inadvertently encourages it.
> 
> Anyway, I just try to represent furrydom in terms of what it means to me, and serve as an example of a fur who loves furrydom, but you know.. isn't too overtly ridiculous about it..



I'm a young furry and I dislike yiff even before I joined the fandom and I still dislike yiff up to this day. Furry art is fine but yiff needs to be cut back so this fandom can be more enjoyable.


----------



## cpam (Jun 23, 2009)

Zrcalo said:


> *sigh* my ex used to be one of those paranoid little art hoarders... her art wasnt even all that good (at the time) and she was soooo scared that someone would "steal" it. so she put like.. a billion watermarks and signatures .. etc... it looked so rediculus.



It's not an unjustified concern.  And it's both unfair _and _unkind to belittle her as a 'hoarder' simply because she cared enough about her art to want to protect it.  If there wasn't such a confluence of incidence of illegal repostings and similar casual art theft, she wouldn't have _needed _watermarks.


----------



## Mojotaian (Jun 24, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> So fursonas can't be trademarked nor copyrighted I assume then. Doesn't Wolfee get this by now?


 
Not PARTICULARLY true... In my case, my fursona would... or should be able to be trademarked as it is my own idea, having invented their characteristics (not just looks) and behaviour, capabilities, their nature... all of that...

Meaning to say, OBVIOUS fursonas (such as your white wolf or your house fly (yeah, who uses that?)) They can't be trademarked...

For the record, Wolfee can't trademark it, otherwise he aughta start sueing many... many... people...


----------



## Mojotaian (Jun 24, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> I'm a young furry and I dislike yiff even before I joined the fandom and I still dislike yiff up to this day. Furry art is fine but yiff needs to be cut back so this fandom can be more enjoyable.


 
That's a matter of personal opinion. And it's not up to other people to cut it down so you can find this fandom more enjoyable, you need to just censor your searches... 

Now, I DO believe that you were talking about this event!!!


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 24, 2009)

Mojotaian said:


> Not PARTICULARLY true... In my case, my fursona would... or should be able to be trademarked as it is my own idea, having invented their characteristics (not just looks) and behaviour, capabilities, their nature... all of that...
> 
> Meaning to say, OBVIOUS fursonas (such as your white wolf or your house fly (yeah, who uses that?)) They can't be trademarked...
> 
> For the record, Wolfee can't trademark it, otherwise he aughta start sueing many... many... people...



He couldn't trademark it?, not eventhough his fursona is purple? Although it is still a wolf, so i guess not. What if someone's fursona was like i dunno three animals in one?


----------



## cpam (Jun 24, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> He couldn't trademark it?, not eventhough his fursona is purple? Although it is still a wolf, so i guess not. What if someone's fursona was like i dunno three animals in one?



He _could _trademark if he wanted to go to the trouble and expense.  But there are conditions it would have to meet.  It would have to be a distinct and unique design -- it couldn't be _just _a picture of a wolf.  It couldn't resemble any other trademarked design.  (In fact, he would probably have to make a search through trademark journals to be sure he wasn't infringing upon anyone else's trademark.)  There would be a stiff fee for acquiring the trademark, and it would only be for a set period -- he would have to renew it and pay a renewal fee every so often (I'm not sure of the period, but I _think _it's five years).  Furthermore, he has to actively use it during that period.  That is, through publication; it can't be just through posting on online forums.


----------



## Kanic (Jun 24, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> So fursonas can't be trademarked nor copyrighted I assume then. Doesn't Wolfee get this by now?


 
I think furries are more geared towards preventing other furries from gaining any type of fame within the fandom by means of using their fursonas.

I don't see the point in trying to trademark one's fursona anyway. A fursona is simply an anthropomorphic character a furry has thought up to give them a "face" in the crowd. Trademarking something is designed to prevent others from monetarily gaining by using your symbol, design, etc. In this case, one's fursona. 

If they're trying to make their fursona make money for them, then I wish them the best of luck on that one.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 24, 2009)

The main issues is that, even with all the loopholes and fees, the people in question have done none of them, since for months they went on and one about how they had legally copyrighted their character through the Government and that's why they could DMCA, only to find out no, you can't actually do that. Then it's said you can't copyright it but trademark the name, and so the individual then claims he's copyrighted and trademarked the fursona, seemingly giving the illusion of double protection despite having been informed the typed of copyright he claims to have can't actually exist, and the fact that a trademark costs more than this individual claims to have made over the course of 7 years.

Some calling this nitpicking, I call it kicking the hell out of a *very* bad case somebody has been presenting to commit perjury repeated over the course of several months.



Kanic said:


> If they're trying to make their fursona make money for them, then I wish them the best of luck on that one.



The argument is that because he has a vendor in Second Life, it's the same thing. While admittedly knowing nothing about Second Life, something about "I made an avatar and that avatar sells digital pants therefore this is a perfectly legitimate conglomerate" doesn't sound right.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 24, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> The main issues is that, even with all the loopholes and fees, the people in question have done none of them, since for months they went on and one about how they had legally copyrighted their character through the Government and that's why they could DMCA, only to find out no, you can't actually do that. Then it's said you can't copyright it but trademark the name, and so the individual then claims he's copyrighted and trademarked the fursona, seemingly giving the illusion of double protection despite having been informed the typed of copyright he claims to have can't actually exist, and the fact that a trademark costs more than this individual claims to have made over the course of 7 years.
> 
> Some calling this nitpicking, I call it kicking the hell out of a *very* bad case somebody has been presenting to commit perjury repeated over the course of several months.
> 
> ...



As the other furries have said before you, there are criteria and requirements to obtain a copyright and/or trademark. It's obvious that there isn't a trademark or a copyright of Wolfee Darkfang. I'm not a Second Life user but anyone can just open a vendor and sell furry stuff which is too easy.

Since Wolfee has committed perjury for like two years now if I'm right, how can he get away? Because that is the question that I've always been wondering. How can someone who files a crapload of false DMCA claims can get away like this? Is it more than just lying your arse off until you don't believe in yourself no more?


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 24, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Since Wolfee has committed perjury for like two years now if I'm right, how can he get away? Because that is the question that I've always been wondering. How can someone who files a crapload of false DMCA claims can get away like this? Is it more than just lying your arse off until you don't believe in yourself no more?



Nobody cared enough to counter the DMCA's, and other times he was able to get enough in a row to have the account pulled almost instantly, like with mt few accounts. However I send in a few counters recently, so we'll see how that works.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 24, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Nobody cared enough to counter the DMCA's, and other times he was able to get enough in a row to have the account pulled almost instantly, like with mt few accounts. However I send in a few counters recently, so we'll see how that works.



How long would the counter claims take before confirmation?


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 24, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> How long would the counter claims take before confirmation?




The form says 2 weeks, different people have stated it may be anywhere from 2 to 8 weeks.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 24, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> The form says 2 weeks, different people have stated it may be anywhere from 2 to 8 weeks.



8 weeks is too long but that wouldn't surprise me in this case.


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 24, 2009)

cpam said:


> It's not an unjustified concern.  And it's both unfair _and _unkind to belittle her as a 'hoarder' simply because she cared enough about her art to want to protect it.  If there wasn't such a confluence of incidence of illegal repostings and similar casual art theft, she wouldn't have _needed _watermarks.




If one is to become a well-known artist one cannot and should not charge people for publicity.

that is how it works.

oh god. wolfee's art is awful.


----------



## cpam (Jun 25, 2009)

Zrcalo said:


> If one is to become a well-known artist one cannot and should not charge people for publicity.
> 
> One does not charge for publicity.  One charges for the worth of the art.
> 
> If one wants to become well-known, then one must publicize -- but it is not for others to make the presumption of choosing the manner of publicity; that is for the artist to decide.


----------



## gray_foxor (Jun 25, 2009)

This wolfee guy sounds really gay. He's probably a douche in real life. Which sucks since he's a douche on the Internet too.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 25, 2009)

gray_foxor said:


> This wolfee guy sounds really gay. He's probably a douche in real life. Which sucks since he's a douche on the Internet too.



Not to mention he spied on me and my friends because we were forming a group of anti-yiff and anti-zoophile furries. He did a lot of things that pissed me off but I prefer not to talk about it because it's a long story so it's going to end up TL;DR.


----------



## Brazen (Jun 25, 2009)

gray_foxor said:


> This wolfee guy sounds really gay. He's probably a douche in real life. Which sucks since he's a douche on the Internet too.


 

There are already 2 huge-ass threads on the guy floating around somewhere one the forum. They're a great read.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Jun 25, 2009)

Mojotaian said:


> That's a matter of personal opinion. And it's not up to other people to cut it down so you can find this fandom more enjoyable, you need to just censor your searches...


 
Censor your searches? How about it shouldn't be that available to begin so people shouldn't have to avoid it? I know what it really is about. You just want to have a *wide* access to yiff so you can fap.

People who draw yiff only do it so they and others can fap to it. 

This is fap
http://us-p.vclart.net/vcl/Artists/Blotch/Caught-Between-a-Hippo-and-a-Hardon.jpg

This is art
http://www.amsterdam-artgallery.com/imgf/3/inet/023.jpg

YOU CAN'T DEFINE ART!!!
People who draw, paint, and sculpt a nude man or woman can do so because they respect and are comfortable with the human body, and can view a painting of a man and woman embracing eachother naked and not think of fapping, but interpret as a message of whatever. Yiff only reminds you to get some more lotion and to clean up. Ewwwww...

But anyway, yes, furries seem to abuse the DMCA law more than others. As for the DA copyright thing, I do believe you* have *to pay for copyright like everyone else.


----------



## cpam (Jun 25, 2009)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> But anyway, yes, furries seem to abuse the DMCA law more than others.



How do we know that?



Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> As for the DA copyright thing, I do believe you* have *to pay for copyright like everyone else.



No, a copyright is free and automatic.  You _can _pay for a _registered copyright_, if you want; they're not too expensive and that way your work is officially recorded in the Library of Congress.  But you don't _have _to.


----------



## Shadow (Jun 25, 2009)

gray_foxor said:


> This wolfee guy sounds really gay. He's probably a douche in real life. Which sucks since he's a douche on the Internet too.



I've chatted many times with him, even in group chats, and at none of those times did he act like a douche.


----------



## Attaman (Jun 25, 2009)

In regards to OP:  Idiots and crybabies always pose a problem for a group's image.  I'm a 40Ker, and while there's some good people in the shop usually there's one notable /b/tard who'll insult a novice's paintjob, make constant -chan references, etc.  Needless to say, it doesn't sit well with either us in the shop or others who are interested in starting the hobby.

The Anti-critique attitude many members have is one of the most notable problems I see amongst crazies - right next to "FUCK YOU I'M A DRAGON!"-ism and "HYOOMANS SUK BAWWW!".  None of those work very well for the fandom's image, unless you looking for other people who think the same way.  And the problem with the first bit is anti-critique people drawing more anti-critique people means you eventually start gathering large numbers of pricks who learn that - in sufficient numbers and loud enough - they can make _any_ problem go away by bitching loud enough.


Shadow said:


> I've chatted many times with him, even in group chats, and at none of those times did he act like a douche.



Not to detract from the OP, but... did you ever once mention something even slightly negative about the Furry community?  I mean, arguing "He's not that bad" for a Warsie doesn't entirely work if you never say anything bad about SW around him.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 25, 2009)

40ker?


----------



## Brazen (Jun 25, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> 40ker?


 

He means Warhammer.


----------



## Shadow (Jun 25, 2009)

Attaman said:


> In regards to OP:  Idiots and crybabies always pose a problem for a group's image.  I'm a 40Ker, and while there's some good people in the shop usually there's one notable /b/tard who'll insult a novice's paintjob, make constant -chan references, etc.  Needless to say, it doesn't sit well with either us in the shop or others who are interested in starting the hobby.
> 
> The Anti-critique attitude many members have is one of the most notable problems I see amongst crazies - right next to "FUCK YOU I'M A DRAGON!"-ism and "HYOOMANS SUK BAWWW!".  None of those work very well for the fandom's image, unless you looking for other people who think the same way.  And the problem with the first bit is anti-critique people drawing more anti-critique people means you eventually start gathering large numbers of pricks who learn that - in sufficient numbers and loud enough - they can make _any_ problem go away by bitching loud enough.
> 
> ...



Well, I won't go on the subject of him for a negative, but I find those who constantly flaunt their "furry-ness," idiotic and very annoying.


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 25, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Not to mention he spied on me and my friends because we were forming a group of anti-yiff and anti-zoophile furries. He did a lot of things that pissed me off but I prefer not to talk about it because it's a long story so it's going to end up TL;DR.




wolfee is a girl...

or.. so I thought?


----------



## Ozriel (Jun 25, 2009)

Zrcalo said:


> wolfee is a girl...
> 
> or.. so I thought?



Wolfee Darkfang(IRL) has a pecker.

His character has the vagoo.



Shadow said:


> Well, I won't go on the subject of him for a negative, but I find those who constantly flaunt their "furry-ness," idiotic and very annoying.



Some furries forget that the Fandom is a fanclub consisting of people who have an interest in Anthro animals. They should be happy they have a hobby, but the pride and flaunting it gets old and annoying very quickly.

Same Beef I have with furries who think that the fandom is a race and share the same hardships of other real moments in history.


----------



## Zrcalo (Jun 25, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Wolfee Darkfang(IRL) has a pecker.
> 
> His character has the vagoo.



aha. it all makes sense now.





Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Same Beef I have with furries who think that the fandom is a race and share the same hardships of other real moments in history.




I get really annoying and pissed at these people... it's them that make me hate the furry fandom originally and prevented me from joining...


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 25, 2009)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Censor your searches? How about it shouldn't be that available to begin so people shouldn't have to avoid it? I know what it really is about. You just want to have a *wide* access to yiff so you can fap.
> 
> People who draw yiff only do it so they and others can fap to it.
> 
> ...



You are dead center on the bull's eye correct about the difference between art and fap! Some furries claim yiff is art which I find that bullshit! Art like you say, involves respect. Art does not involve fap! But may furverts don't fucking get it! They even claim that yiff is part of freedom of speech when it's intrepreted to "whoring yourself to the world so we can troll you!".

When you said most furries abuse the DMCA law more than others, then my question is how do they get away like that when they should be fined and charged for perjury. On DA, you have to pay for copyright. Most people who pay for copyright also pay for a subscription or usually that's the case. I don't have a subcription knowing that I just draw for the fun of it. And for you furverts reading this, sorry but I don't draw yiff!


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 25, 2009)

Brazen said:


> There are already 2 huge-ass threads on the guy floating around somewhere one the forum. They're a great read.



Didn't they get locked already?


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 25, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Wolfee Darkfang(IRL) has a pecker.
> 
> His character has the vagoo.



No no, it's a genderless character now. In response to trolls making fun of him for pretending to be a girl all day on the internet.

I mean, of all the things the trolls have to make fun or him, pretending to be a girl dog isn't really that major anymore, but oh well.


----------



## Ricky (Jun 25, 2009)

Not A Fox said:


> It's as much a problem as the over-abundance of whining about porn, regular and fetish alike.



fix'd


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 25, 2009)

Brazen said:


> He means Warhammer.



Oh right. Not something i am into, but it looks good nonetheless.



Chuong Cho Soi said:


> You are dead center on the bull's eye correct about the difference between art and fap! Some furries claim yiff is art which I find that bullshit! Art like you say, involves respect. Art does not involve fap! But may furverts don't fucking get it! They even claim that yiff is part of freedom of speech when it's intrepreted to "whoring yourself to the world so we can troll you!".
> 
> When you said most furries abuse the DMCA law more than others, then my question is how do they get away like that when they should be fined and charged for perjury. On DA, you have to pay for copyright. Most people who pay for copyright also pay for a subscription or usually that's the case. I don't have a subcription knowing that I just draw for the fun of it. And for you furverts reading this, sorry but I don't draw yiff!



Umm......Nope, nothing to add to this, except that i agree with you here.



paxil rose said:


> No no, it's a genderless character now. In response to trolls making fun of him for pretending to be a girl all day on the internet.
> 
> I mean, of all the things the trolls have to make fun or him, pretending to be a girl dog isn't really that major anymore, but oh well.



I knew he had modded his avatar but i didn't know it had become genderless now. Each to their own i suppose.


----------



## russetwolf13 (Jun 25, 2009)

I like to go the opposite direction and be critical of really weird furries. 

If we don't do it ourselves someone else will.


----------



## gray_foxor (Jun 25, 2009)

This thread just seems like a bunch of drama now.


----------



## paxil rose (Jun 26, 2009)

Then it looks like I'll have to reiterate my original topic, as so our lock-happy mods are spared one more chore for the time being;



What's everyone's opinion on those furries that will make repeated attempts to pull anything and everything that is furry related which doesn't stroke the fandoms dong? Flagbombing any videos that is remotely anti-fandom (intelligent rebuttal or flailing dumbfuckery, it makes no difference), submitting false DMCA notices to have videos pulled it flagbombing doesn't work, attempting to hack/dox people who make anti-furry videos, etc and so forth.

Do you consider it a significant problem for the fandoms image in terms of being labeled crybaby losers? Do you believe them to be a very small minority that poses no threat to anything other than themselves? Do you have any experience with some of these people? Are you one of these people yourself? If they're discussed is there a risk of giving them a sense of legitimacy? If ignored is there a risk of letting them grow like a cancer and then becoming an issue.

Discuss.


----------



## Attaman (Jun 26, 2009)

Me said:
			
		

> In regards to OP: Idiots and crybabies always pose a problem for a group's image. I'm a 40Ker, and while there's some good people in the shop usually there's one notable /b/tard who'll insult a novice's paintjob, make constant -chan references, etc. Needless to say, it doesn't sit well with either us in the shop or others who are interested in starting the hobby.
> 
> The Anti-critique attitude many members have is one of the most notable problems I see amongst crazies - right next to "FUCK YOU I'M A DRAGON!"-ism and "HYOOMANS SUK BAWWW!". None of those work very well for the fandom's image, unless you looking for other people who think the same way. And the problem with the first bit is anti-critique people drawing more anti-critique people means you eventually start gathering large numbers of pricks who learn that - in sufficient numbers and loud enough - they can make any problem go away by bitching loud enough.


.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 26, 2009)

It didn't help that a bunch of people on here completely derailed the topic in the other thread. what was it?, some band they were talking about.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 26, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> When you said most furries abuse the DMCA law more than others, then my question is how do they get away like that when they should be fined and charged for perjury.



My understanding is that the party wronged must sue to recover damages, including parties wronged by repeated DMCA abuses/perjuries.



Chuong Cho Soi said:


> On DA, you have to pay for copyright.



This is news to me.  I was unable to find it when searching DA's help.  Where is this documented?


----------



## Shadow (Jun 26, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Didn't they get locked already?



There is an "Edit" button for a reason, Chuong. Don't multi-post.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 26, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> My understanding is that the party wronged must sue to recover damages, including parties wronged by repeated DMCA abuses/perjuries.
> 
> 
> 
> This is news to me.  I was unable to find it when searching DA's help.  Where is this documented?



Same here to my understanding.

I don't know but I was told that even though copyright is only obtained from the government. Most DA users with subscriptions own copyright content. I gotta do my research carefully... *sighs*



Shadow said:


> There is an "Edit" button for a reason, Chuong. Don't multi-post.



Oh I see thanks! ^^;

This is my first time on being a forum so I'm getting used to it. ^^;


----------



## Shadow (Jun 26, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Oh I see thanks! ^^;
> 
> This is my first time on being a forum so I'm getting used to it. ^^;



Just be sure to remember for future reference. |D


----------



## cpam (Jun 26, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> You are dead center on the bull's eye correct about the difference between art and fap! Some furries claim yiff is art which I find that bullshit! Art like you say, involves respect. Art does not involve fap! But may furverts don't fucking get it! They even claim that yiff is part of freedom of speech when it's intrepreted to "whoring yourself to the world so we can troll you!".



Just to play the Devil's Advocate here for a moment, I have to point out that art does not involve respect at all.  It can _garner _it, but it has nothing to do with its creation or application.  Art is simply an interpretive medium, and you convey ideas and emotion through it.

Pornography has a different agenda: to titillate and excite through the depiction of fornication, to excess.  It has no other purpose.

That doesn't mean that a pornographic artwork has no art to it, or that it can't be done artistically, but artistry is neither its goal nor purpose.

And it should be added that not all depictions of sex are necessarily pornographic either.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Jun 26, 2009)

Everything slides in the fandom.


----------



## applegoose (Jul 11, 2009)

I hope they keep doing it, that shit keeps me so entertained for DAYS


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 11, 2009)

applegoose said:


> I hope they keep doing it, that shit keeps me so entertained for DAYS



yeesh i wish people wouldn't KEEP digging up necro threads.


----------



## Ratte (Jul 11, 2009)

Necro, etc...


----------

