# A "stay of execution" on Photography submissions?



## Saellyn (Nov 23, 2012)

So basically I got annoyed with people using FA as a Facebook/Photobucket account and dumped a bunch of links in a ticket because making a hundred (literally) TTs is a totally retarded waste of time and got this response:







Am I missing something or was there no announcement on this latest "policy review"? This non-communicating with the users is nothing new, I suppose, but it's still fucking annoying.

So can some badmin explain this new "policy review", please?


"Also, non-furry photography is /not/ getting banned."
Well... shit. One can always hope, I suppose.


----------



## Fallowfox (Nov 23, 2012)

...I thought photography was discussed in the townhall meeting?


----------



## Teal (Nov 23, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> ...I thought photography was discussed in the townhall meeting?


 It was.


@ OP They are changing the policy on it, just give them some time.
Also isn't hundreds of links in one TT a little much?


----------



## Mayonnaise (Nov 23, 2012)

Yeah, they're changing their stance on it. 



> One of the things that we really want to change is basically how  photography is uploaded.  One of the big problems that we have are  people taking pictures of cars, people taking pictures of pets, copies  of Halo 4 that they bought, a bunch of other things, and for the longest  time we've tried to fight that, to basically say, "Look, FA is an art  site, art is what we focus on.  If you want to upload your copy of Halo  4, if you want to upload your picture of your car, do it over here!"
> 
> Unfortunately, the internet itself has sort of changed, and I think that  trying to fight that is sort of ridiculous.  What we're looking at  doing more is allowing uploads of those to be submit to the site,  provided that they meet certain requirements.  So if you want to upload a  picture of your desk that has your entire collection of toys on it,  your computer, you can do that it just can't go in your main  gallery.  To be able to upload, when folders come out, you can upload it  to whatever folders you want or your scraps folder.  Scraps will  probably be renamed to "miscellaneous" or something of that nature.  Not  quite sure on that yet.  We want to allow photography better, but not  punish it.  So it's sort of a mix on why we've been doing what we've  been doing.  I don't think it works.  We've had our reasons for doing  what we do, but over time I feel like it's more punishing against our  users for how they want FA to be.  I think in that regards, that FA  needs to change a bit to give back more to the users for what they want.



^^^  What was said in the townhall recording if you don't have time to listen to it.


----------



## Garuru_Wolf (Nov 23, 2012)

What? So basically they're going to let FA turn into DA? For the love of god, if they decide to allow people to upload photos of random crap, figure out some way to make it a special upload that you can choose not to watch. I really don't give a crap about seeing people's brag pictures of their $5000 computers or $2000 drawing tablets or disturbingly large collection of plushies/inflatable toys and other random nonsense. 

Maybe it's because I'm half asleep right now, but the above statement from the townhall meeting basically says to me "eh, people are going to do it anyway so we might as well just let them", which sounds really lazy to me.


----------



## Verin Asper (Nov 24, 2012)

Mayonnaise said:


> Yeah, they're changing their stance on it.
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^  What was said in the townhall recording if you don't have time to listen to it.


...So FA is being SoFurry on that kind of stuff...


----------



## Fallowfox (Nov 24, 2012)

Garuru_Wolf said:


> What? So basically they're going to let FA turn into DA? For the love of god, if they decide to allow people to upload photos of random crap, figure out some way to make it a special upload that you can choose not to watch. I really don't give a crap about seeing people's brag pictures of their $5000 computers or $2000 drawing tablets or disturbingly large collection of plushies/inflatable toys and other random nonsense.
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm half asleep right now, but the above statement from the townhall meeting basically says to me "eh, people are going to do it anyway so we might as well just let them", which sounds really lazy to me.



I suspect it will make almost no difference to a large number of people, including those you watch if you watch people who are preoccupied with distributing their art.


----------



## Saellyn (Nov 24, 2012)

Mayonnaise said:


> Yeah, they're changing their stance on it.
> 
> ^^^  What was said in the townhall recording if you don't have time to listen to it.



So I had to listen to a god-only-knows how long video (that wont even load properly for me because Live Stream is a piece of shit) just to know these things?
Since the admins/Dragoneer don't seem to inclined to do it: Anyone wanna sum up the entire video for people who can't or don't have the time to view it.



> One of the things that we really want to change is basically how  photography is uploaded.  One of the big problems that we have are  people taking pictures of cars, people taking pictures of pets, copies  of Halo 4 that they bought, a bunch of other things, and for the longest  time we've tried to fight that, to basically say, "Look, FA is an art  site, art is what we focus on.  If you want to upload your copy of Halo  4, if you want to upload your picture of your car, do it over here!"
> 
> Unfortunately, the internet itself has sort of changed, and I think that  trying to fight that is sort of ridiculous.  What we're looking at  doing more is allowing uploads of those to be submit to the site,  provided that they meet certain requirements.  So if you want to upload a  picture of your desk that has your entire collection of toys on it,  your computer, you can do that it just can't go in your main  gallery.  To be able to upload, when folders come out, you can upload it  to whatever folders you want or your scraps folder.  Scraps will  probably be renamed to "miscellaneous" or something of that nature.  Not  quite sure on that yet.  We want to allow photography better, but not  punish it.  So it's sort of a mix on why we've been doing what we've  been doing.  I don't think it works.  We've had our reasons for doing  what we do, but over time I feel like it's more punishing against our  users for how they want FA to be.  I think in that regards, that FA  needs to change a bit to give back more to the users for what they want.


Welp... the goes my hopes and dreams of seeing photography get nuked. Oh joy. I'm so happy.

The reason they are having so many issues "fighting the problem" of photography is because they allow some things, but not others. I can upload pictures of a ton of different things without "violating the AUP" as long as I say "HURR HURR I MADE THIS!!11!!111111111111". Yeah... no. If they had said something like "Hey, look guys... we know you like taking pictures of things, but don't upload it here unless it's furry related**." from the very beginning they wouldn't be having so many issues "fighting the problem".

Just sayin'.

** = fursuits, con photos, traditional art, etc...


----------



## thoron (Nov 24, 2012)

Saellyn said:


> Welp... the goes my hopes and dreams of seeing photography get nuked. Oh joy. I'm so happy.
> 
> The reason they are having so many issues "fighting the problem" of photography is because they allow some things, but not others. I can upload pictures of a ton of different things without "violating the AUP" as long as I say "HURR HURR I MADE THIS!!11!!111111111111". Yeah... no. If they had said something like "Hey, look guys... we know you like taking pictures of things, but don't upload it here unless it's furry related**." from the very beginning they wouldn't be having so many issues "fighting the problem".
> 
> ...



This, this, THIS! There are some people I watch simply cause they photograph wildlife, fursuits and cons. It would be sad to have to lump them in with all the others.


----------



## Devious Bane (Nov 24, 2012)

Still waiting on the summer update. Also, waiting on that CoC too.


> ...townhall meeting?


I'm surprised anyone showed up, let alone took anything that was said there seriously. That being said...


> Anyone wanna sum up the entire video for people who can't or don't have the time to view it.


Garbage. Refer to Gryphoneer's post below.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Nov 24, 2012)

They are already talking about turning FA into a social networking site.  So it will be a furry facebook eventually


----------



## Gryphoneer (Nov 24, 2012)

Saellyn said:


> Since the admins/Dragoneer don't seem to inclined to do it: Anyone wanna sum up the entire video for people who can't or don't have the time to view it.


There you go.


----------



## thoron (Nov 24, 2012)

d.batty said:


> They are already talking about turning FA into a social networking site.  So it will be a furry facebook eventually



Are you serious? Though to be honest, FA already has most of the elements to be one. Journals, shouts, commenting, favoriting work, watching other artists private messasing. SF is already a bit of social networking site with its built in chat system. IB already has a system in place so that only friends can view particular pieces of art. Each and ever art site from DA to FA, SF to YG is to some extent a social networking site. In anything else they should at least make a rule to where any photo's not furry related should be in scraps.


----------



## Catilda Lily (Nov 24, 2012)

So you're angry that people are posting pictures that don't have anything to do with furries? That is just stupid. There are a lot of great pictures out there that don't have to do with furries but were taken by furries.


----------



## Corto (Nov 24, 2012)

I guess it depends on your view of the site. Either it's furry art centered, in which case it'd make sense that you wouldn't allow/want pictures of miscellaneous stuff no matter who took the picture, or you view it more as a furry centered site with a big side dish of art, in which case it would make sense to accept random pictures taken by users.

Since, apparently, FA is moving from the first case to the second, I think it's unfair to call that stance "stupid". Just a different opinion on what should be the site's aims and policies (derived from the site's history and it's still main objective, hosting art), but one that doesn't mesh too well with it's actual/proposed policies. It's not like he's suggesting you allow only pictures of cars or something like that.


EDIT: As a disclaimer, I could be speaking out of my ass since I didn't bother listening to the Town Hall thing, I just read the cliff notes someone posted.


----------



## Verin Asper (Nov 25, 2012)

thoron said:


> Are you serious? Though to be honest, FA already has most of the elements to be one. Journals, shouts, commenting, favoriting work, watching other artists private messasing. SF is already a bit of social networking site with its built in chat system. IB already has a system in place so that only friends can view particular pieces of art. Each and ever art site from DA to FA, SF to YG is to some extent a social networking site. In anything else they should at least make a rule to where any photo's not furry related should be in scraps.


to which it seems they are reworking the system (putting more stuff into a already patch job car, instead of fixing the car up and adding new things)

I mean really SoFurry actually did take down their site for a while when they implement the new code for it when they change from yiffstar to SoFurry, though unlike FA they actually keep their userbase known for the longest that they were working on new code.

So I'm expecting this new system to break the car, till they do a patch job which will make said car look nice on the outside...but a mechanic's nightmare if the hood was ever lifted up


----------



## Kazooie (Nov 25, 2012)

Out of curiosity, does the photospam put a tangible strain on the servers or something? If I were to see a FA account full of imagespam, I'd just go "Huh, this person is terrible." 

But more often than not, I've been running into quite high quality shots. Not all of them are furry related, but then again, photographers who identify themselves with the furry fandom aren't going to take pictures solely related to the fandom. Requiring this seems pretty terrible; I follow good photographers for their photographs.


----------



## PheagleAdler (Nov 25, 2012)

Devious Bane said:


> Still waiting on the summer update. Also, waiting on that CoC too.
> 
> I'm surprised anyone showed up, let alone took anything that was said there seriously. That being said...
> 
> Garbage. Refer to Gryphoneer's post below.



Your stupid opinions don't matter. None of them do. In fact, you idiots have no clue how to run a site in the first place. Sure, it's not perfect, but Dragoneer was nice enough to run a live "Town Hall" to discuss some of the latest updates. And while we're on the subject, they're actually updating in the near future. I know how butthurt y'all were when they kept getting delayed.

I'm sick of all your negative opinions about the site. So bite me.


----------



## Devious Bane (Nov 25, 2012)

hg3300 said:


> -Stupid Opinions-


This administration is unreliable, untruthful, ineffective, and unable to perform. This is not an opinion, but a fact if not a tendency. Some of the complaints about the Town Hall itself are listed below.
I don't think it's too much to ask from someone to fix their problems when they are entirely fixable, nor do I think it's a good to ignore said problems. There's an opinion, but I doubt that expecting better of this site makes anyone negative - It would make them overly optimistic.

We're sick of your idiotic opinions of what any decently observant person has to say about the site. If you don't want to hear so much about it, how about fixing it? I don't know, that would seem like a_* good idea.*_
However, Lord Hg3300 would forbid the site actually incorporate one after years of horrible decisions because they're nothing more than "stupid opinions" made by "idiots [who] have no clue how to run a site". I think it's this kind of thinking that has kept FA in the landfill for so long - But that's just my opinion.
Fun Fact: I'm ex-military, have worked in several server administrations, and have  seen a enough sites to know how an administration works inside and out. Unless you have a better resume to offer, I suggest you sit down. 
You didn't complain about when people were complaining about the last set of site updates when they were presented in a thread, I don't see why this Town Hall meeting should be any different. Well, aside from all the problems it made - Which consist of but not being limited to:
Video is too long.


> Anyone wanna sum up the entire video for people who can't or don't have the time to view it.





> The actual talking starts at about 33:40 into the video.


The quality was garbage


> Your microphone-inputs were turned up too high; there was lots of  clipping.


It was poorly planned


> ...this town hall took place during Midwest Furfest...


By the way, these are all facts.


----------



## Saellyn (Nov 25, 2012)

catilda lily said:


> So you're angry that people are posting pictures that don't have anything to do with furries? That is just stupid. There are a lot of great pictures out there that don't have to do with furries but were taken by furries.


No, I just hating seeing shitty picture #346722578. The problem I have is that 90%, *if not more*, of the non-furry related "photography" are "OMG LOOK AT MAH DOGGIE!!111!", "LOOK AT ME IM SO PURTY (no, you aren't)!!11" or, worse, "LOL RANDOM (insert random object here)" trash. If you have to skim through dozens, if not hundreds, of pages of trash just to find one good photo it's a problem. I can see photography being art, but the majority of the stuff uploaded to FA is shit that should be posted elsewhere.


Gryphoneer said:


> There you go.


Thanks.

edit: and after reading that I feel like I want to puke.

Anyone willing to place bets on whether or not Furaffinity will roll over and die if a new furry-geared website (weasyl doesn't count) comes out?

It seems to me that they are avoiding the real issues with the site (again).
inb4 miserable user


----------



## Corto (Nov 25, 2012)

Cut down on the insults/flamewar or I'm banning people.

I don't particularly care about criticizing/defending FA, but obey the forum rules or don't bother posting.

Hugs and kissies.


----------



## Saellyn (Nov 25, 2012)

Corto said:


> Cut down on the insults/flamewar or I'm banning people.
> 
> I don't particularly care about criticizing/defending FA, but obey the forum rules or don't bother posting.


Fine, I'll try to play nice.



Corto said:


> Hugs and kissies.


This is the most frightening thing you have ever said.


----------



## PheagleAdler (Nov 25, 2012)

Devious Bane said:


> This administration is unreliable, untruthful, ineffective, and unable to perform. This is not an opinion, but a fact if not a tendency. Some of the complaints about the Town Hall itself are listed below.
> I don't think it's too much to ask from someone to fix their problems when they are entirely fixable, nor do I think it's a good to ignore said problems. There's an opinion, but I doubt that expecting better of this site makes anyone negative - It would make them overly optimistic.
> 
> We're sick of your idiotic opinions of what any decently observant person has to say about the site. If you don't want to hear so much about it, how about fixing it? I don't know, that would seem like a_* good idea.*_
> ...



You're not a bad person, you just tend to be negative. Sure, the administration isn't perfect, hell maybe even a little incompetent but the site works, it's free...that's pretty much all that really matters to me. I fave people, watch, comment, etc. everything else is just extra. I appreciate it though. And if they do what they said they were going to accomplish in the Town Hall, perhaps your facts will no longer be accurate.

They are hiring more administrators to help with the site and I can't remember was this the first ever FA Town Hall? I wasn't really active before 2010.


----------



## Devious Bane (Nov 25, 2012)

My negativity is simply a matter of impatience and disappointment. When some individual (or group of) fails to perform toward expectations for so long, you tend to develop disbelief in everything they do and say. If the site remained in the state that I joined it in, a lot of my complaints would be non-existant. However, since I did join:
1. A lot of bad decisions were made.
2. A lot of things were changed
3. A lot of good people are gone.

All the Town Hall meeting did was attempt to demonstrate concern and/or gave the community a bit of faith after 4 years+ of constant declination. It's a good gesture and a first for the site, and it may as well prelude a major improvement in the site's outlook. That is of course _*IF*_, and I cannot stress that enough, they work up to what the point of the meeting was about and do what was said was going to be done. By all means my lack of respect for the site, its community, and my list of issues with it will just disappear or become completely irrelevant _*IF*_ that happens.


----------



## Ricky (Nov 25, 2012)

d.batty said:


> They are already talking about turning FA into a  social networking site.  So it will be a furry facebook  eventually



With a bit of re-working things you could easily (from a design  perspective) separate social networking from art/submissions.

The problem is this slippery slope "everything is art" nonsense when everything is spewed on the front page.



catilda  lily said:


> So you're angry that people are posting pictures that  don't have anything to do with furries? That is just stupid. There are a  lot of great pictures out there that don't have to do with furries but  were taken by furries.



Except most people get on the site to view...  Get this: FURRY ART!!!

If  I wanted to view photography I'd go to a photography site. I'm not sure  why anyone would want to view general photography that is specifically  made by furries but that's my opinion and maybe people get on FA for that purpose. If they just separated the content a bit better so people weren't forced to see the stuff, I don't think people would be complaining. If they were to fix that along with all the god-awful art that shows up, I'd probably use the site a lot more myself.


----------

