# If you give a damn about ART and the FANDOM, READ this



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 3, 2007)

http://ranea.org/falf/index.html

This is an archive small in content, but grand in relevence to serious artists and serious fans. These articles are nearly a decade old, and I remember reading them around the time I was first getting into the online anthro scene. With the amount of newcomers to the fandom finding their way to FA, in my opinion, something like this ought to be required reading.

Nine years ago, folks. And it seems like little has changed. It'd be great if there was something like this, but more current, not that it doesn't still apply.


----------



## wut (Mar 3, 2007)

Here we go again.


----------



## Litre (Mar 3, 2007)

I predict a fallout of this thread in 3..2..1...


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 3, 2007)

...0.o w/e...

don't care much for a site that takes forever to load and has nothing worth waiting for on it...

perhaps we should have a site that lets furrys be themselves and broadcast what makes them who they are!

...oh wait....


----------



## lolcox (Mar 3, 2007)

mv ./* ~/rants-and-raves


This... isn't really appropriate for this forum, and would probably fit best over in Rants and Raves, because I can sense this happening in this thread *very* quickly.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 3, 2007)

Druox said:
			
		

> Full Name: Dreux Ferrano
> Registered since: December 4th, 2006 10:55
> Current mood: horny
> Artist Profile:
> ...



Well, you certainly put your money where your mouth is as far as broadcasting what makes furries who they are. The articles I linked to, on the other hand delve into the fandom as a whole and it's relationship to the publishing business, sans emo.



			
				lolcox said:
			
		

> is... isn't really appropriate for this forum, and would probably fit best over in Rants and Raves, because I can sense this happening in this thread very quickly.



If advising anyone interested in the state of the furry art scene to read some maturely written, non disparging essays is all it takes to cause a flame war, I wash my hands of it. For some reason I was kind of expecting mature content (that isn't porn) to get mature feedback.


----------



## Litre (Mar 3, 2007)

@ Quote: You're human. Get over it.


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 3, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Druox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Um..that's my profile.....not the things that make me who I am -.-"Â Â What'd you expect, my life story!?Â Â If the site's goal was to explain furries, then it'd be called www.wikifur.com or something...I said be THEMSELVES, not explain why we're different, why do we have to?  Are people really that interested?  I make music, that's my art, you need to try looking at the right things before you start shoving your foot into your mouth 



			
				Litre said:
			
		

> @ Quote: You're human. Get over it.



Eh, I like to think otherwise, besides, it'd explain why i'm 100% different from every other person on this god-forsaken planet.Â Â Think of it as temporary reason...unless you wanna call me perfect XD


----------



## Litre (Mar 3, 2007)

You're not perfect, no one is.

You're still human, by the way.


----------



## lolcox (Mar 3, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> lolcox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd like to take just a moment of your time to remind you that, well... You're dealing with the furry fandom.

They get wigged out when someone else presents a character that even uses the same colour pattern as they do. 




Just my two bucks on the subject, though. <


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 3, 2007)

Litre said:
			
		

> You're not perfect, no one is.
> 
> You're still human, by the way.



That article proves I'm not human actually...

My mind's too complex to be categorized as human.Â Â (for those who didn't understand that: Complexity doesn't mean smart, it means difficult to figure out) I will never be able to be put into a label because I behave so adversely.Â Â Humans, however, are the most predictable of all animals and are put into groups to make them more exciting. ^^


----------



## Litre (Mar 3, 2007)

No wait. No.

You're not human. Go frolic somewhere else and be a bloody muppet away from the rest of us.


----------



## lolcox (Mar 3, 2007)

DruoxTheFurrinator said:
			
		

> That article proves I'm not human actually...
> 
> My mind's too complex to be categorized as human.  (for those who didn't understand that: Complexity doesn't mean smart, it means difficult to figure out) I will never be able to be put into a label because I behave so adversely.  Humans, however, are the most predictable of all animals and are put into groups to make them more exciting. ^^



Must... not... insult.



You're human.
Get over it. Get over yourself.


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 3, 2007)

lolcox said:
			
		

> DruoxTheFurrinator said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You don't know that, or me for that matter.  Your opinion matters not, insult all you want ^^  Your mute crys would fall on deaf ears   "Get over yourself."


=
*(ed./u2k)*: Meanwhile; back over on the original post...

(...worth a try at least once, since that isn't of zero value, IMO)


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 3, 2007)

DruoxTheFurrinator said:
			
		

> If the site's goal was to explain furries, then it'd be called http://www.wikifur.com or something



Since you brought it up, wikifur has always struck me as having the following purposes:

-pimp furry sites
-pimp cons
-pimp works that furries like
-pimp famous / infamous furry artists
-pimp famous / infamous furries even if their only contribution to the fandom is drama
-extensively chronicle said drama, with actual chat logs and LJ links if possible
-compile exhaustive documentation of the various fetishes and subgroups of furrydom
-document instances of fursection

Wikifurs standards (or lack thereof) are atrocious for anything trying to pass itself off as a serious attempt at "explaining furry", if that's even what its agenda is. Maybe it's the nature of the beast, I don't know, since it *is* for furries, by furries, but hopefully no one expects a fully un-tainted look at the fandom from an obviously pro-furry source. It'd be like going to a site called Soviet Wikistan expecting unbiased literature about Communism.

I'm not going to bother trying to explain to you why FALF is a good read anymore. You can talk about how your brain is too complex to be human, but it's obviously not too complex to be butt-fuck ignorant. By the way, the furry label might be tough to fight for some people, but the human label is indellible. Way back a long time ago, (probably in 1994, way before Dave Chappelle had two kiiiddss!) two humans copulated and, for better or worse, you resulted. Despite their equally complex brains which no one else in the world understands, they were human, making you human.

As for trying to explain furries... I don't know. It's like trying to explain why the dead return to life in George Romero's zombie films. Maybe it was caused by space radiation, maybe an airborn virus. Maybe there's no more room in hell, and we've been visited by a curse from da creator mon. Maybe us mundanes are just pretending we're not doomed to be them. Maybe they really are just us. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. They're there, and we've got to survive. Somebody's got to survive.


----------



## InvaderPichu (Mar 3, 2007)

DruoxTheFurrinator said:
			
		

> Litre said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're a goddamn human, get over it.


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 3, 2007)

InvaderPichu said:
			
		

> DruoxTheFurrinator said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Still no, and would you all come up with something better to do than beat this dead-horse of an issue?  Just shut up and go be self-righteous to someone who'll validate your opinions -.-"


----------



## Surgat (Mar 3, 2007)

Dumbass said:
			
		

> Eh, I like to think otherwise, besides, it'd explain why i'm 100% different from every other person on this god-forsaken planet.  Think of it as temporary reason...unless you wanna call me perfect XD





			
				Dumbass said:
			
		

> Litre said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry, "immature, ignorant, self-congratulatory brat" isn't a species. It's a kind of behavior that could be classed as human behavior. You're a human.

You share 99.9+% of your DNA with other humans, and you're psychology is as human as your body. You've adopted much of your surrounding culture's conventions, including language (poorly), etiquette, values, common knowledge, etc. You're not unique.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 3, 2007)

In case you forgot, this thread isn't entitled "Druox's humanity: myth or fo rizzle?"

This thread is here to redirect all of our precious attention spans towards that one site... I checked it out but got bored as soon as I saw the main page...

And humanity is such a crazy thing, I can understand anyone wanting to break away from it as much as they can..


----------



## Xax (Mar 3, 2007)

I'm kind of surprised at 1) the ceaseless attempts to drag Mr. DruoxTheFurrinator back to baseline reality, and 2) the ability of the human mind to unquestioningly believe stupid things.

WHOOPS. (clearly I must have meant 'hy00man'; you dirty mundanes should stop picking on the poor furry)

Oh right, and I'm not so much interested in "funny animals" as I am in weird transhumanist transformation, sorry.


----------



## Seto Ashura (Mar 3, 2007)

This really does seem pointless. *loses both interest and SAN points* There goes the smartass comment I was gonna make...oh well, nevermind.


----------



## Icarus (Mar 3, 2007)

DruoxTheFurrinator said:
			
		

> Litre said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



o.=.0
uhmmm.......kay........

A Test! I demand A Test!

Just cuz you're different doesn't mean you're not human.  I live in a sports and athlete crazed town where most of the people love mammals and being farmers and I'm interested in Arts and Science with a bit of Giant Isopod and Lizard, but does that make me a Hybrid Reptilian/Human alien?  no not rly...

and just because humans are predictable doesn't mean we can put them down.

...Behave adversely? o.=.0  does that mean that you have eaten insects or other weird things that seem taboo, or do you circle in fields at night?  I've seen weirder.

Complexity of the mind?  Are you talking about Thinking In Brainstorming?  'cause that causes me to make a lot of non-sequitors...but...eh I don't listen to the conversation anyway XD.

huuh...weird...


----------



## InvaderPichu (Mar 3, 2007)

DruoxTheFurrinator said:
			
		

> Still no, and would you all come up with something better to do than beat this dead-horse of an issue?  Just shut up and go be self-righteous to someone who'll validate your opinions -.-"



AHAHAHAHAH. OH LAWD. Look who's talking.


----------



## Horrorshow (Mar 3, 2007)

I'm not human either. I'm an elf. I've got mystic elf powers. 

Like making toys and really bitchin' cookies.


----------



## quark (Mar 3, 2007)

InvaderPichu said:
			
		

> DruoxTheFurrinator said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't mock, his brain is far too complex and 'speshul' for us predictable, mundane hyoomans to comprehend.


----------



## nobuyuki (Mar 3, 2007)

heh, foolish humans only wish they could be a superior machine. A MACHINE OF LOVE.


----------



## wut (Mar 3, 2007)

hahahahah oh god


----------



## snoopfrawgg (Mar 3, 2007)

Oh lawd, this thread went from a stupid person's post to much win.

Also, just to beat a dead horse: You're a human. I'd prefer you weren't, so that you'd not be posting your blather here. Well, unless you're a very intelligent monkey. Then I'd wonder what they were feeding you.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 3, 2007)

Well, to try and give this thread a chance it was denied, maybe some of you guys would care to read a few of the things he linked to before insulting the original poster.

Just the very first little essay I checked seemed to be a read that might even be interesting to those of you here thus far, and some very good points are made if anyone cares to, y'know, _discuss_ in the discussion forum. :3

http://ranea.org/falf/articles/Mange01.html


----------



## dong (Mar 3, 2007)

Yep, I'm going back to the original thread. As somebody who actively reads dry editorials and analytic essays on a regular basis (lol), I can appreciate the value in this repository. Thanks, Wolf-Bone.

As a little note of irony, I'm going to quote a line from one of the essays.



> The other night, though, I got a lesson of why real criticism--in the sense of critical thinking--might be more important than I thought. It's precisely to avoid the kind of criticism those who are skitterish of the term worry about.



Just in case you guys missed it, most of the repeat/controversial topics that come up are immediately slammed because 1) it's a repeat and 2) it generates flame. This is counterproductive- as this thread demonstrates, one loose post from Druox resulted in 2 pages of slamming him on a statement that nobody even _needs_ to engage. You can't stop the flame by attempting to muzzle it. But by muzzling a thread you will stifle constructive comment, and we are merely looking for _new_ insight, given that even critical thinking is limited in terms of converting popular opinion to a more enlightened view. That being the status quo in all arenas, furry fandom being no exception, one should attempt to deal with such appropriately.

*P.S.* If I can be confident it will be received constructively, I may even post a counter-criticism to some of the ancient articles in here. See if we can't get something off the ground. But I will be generally wary of focusing solely on the _furry fandom_- as this strikes me as self-defeating.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 3, 2007)

Based on what people have been relaying to me in private (and just what I'm observing here), it seems a lot of y'alls opinions on the subject are worthless because you *don't* give a damn about art, or the fandom. So why the hell did you bother clicking when the title alone should've indicated the topic is irrelevent to you? Sure, Druox is a douchebag, and I'll gladly join you in mugging his ass, but I didn't start the thread as an invitation to showcase other peoples stupidity. If that's what you guys are after, I don't know why you don't invest more of your time in Crush Yiff Destroy, since the whole purpose of that board is for immature kids on the internet to rack up +1000 postcounts mocking other immature kids on the internet. If this is an unfair judgement on my part, by all means, enlighten me.


----------



## dong (Mar 3, 2007)

I doubt it's unfair judgment. I do doubt ranting on about it will do anything to alleviate it. We're here under the common interest of anthropomorphs...not being critical-minded. Unless you found a forum specifically geared towards the latter, you'll inevitably draw a load of flame one way or another.

Just have to dig for the good stuff.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 3, 2007)

dong said:
			
		

> I will be generally wary of focusing solely on the furry fandom- as this strikes me as self-defeating.



The thing is, when I'm scouring the net for material like this, what sticks out in my mind is the information that focuses on the fandom but also makes a point to show the connect between it and the real world. I hate to say it, since I just dissed it but CYD actually does a better job of this than anything I've seen so far (the articles section, not the forums which are PoE with a narrower focus). If you can get over the obvious slant, it actually is a resource in its own right. Ask me what I would've thought about the prospects of being reasonably known as a furry and having a hope in hell of having a legit art career (or any job for that matter), I would've said not bloody likely. Turns out a couple have been both in the business *and* the fandom for nearly two decades, and are still going. Of course, you also hear horror stories about guys like Herbie Bearclaw, working at Disney while fursuiting for charity events and posting furry art on the web without any problems -- this is until it's discovered he also draws yiff (in no small part thanks to Sibe). He reacts by completely disappearing from the scene. Did Disney can his ass? Did they care? Did they even find out? How are we supposed to know? I'd like to. Not to pry, just for the sake of knowing what lengths I should go to cover my own tracks, if any.

We've got plenty of outlets for art, lulz, and any kind of fetish you can think of (or have yet to), but real information is lacking.


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 3, 2007)

I realize that this discussion is "on topic" but aside from a few questions in your most recent post, Wolf-Bone, the original post didn't give us much to work with.

I'd be happy to offer my input but I don't have the time or interest to scour an entire website looking for something interesting to throw up. If someone wants to start over with a clear, concise topic other than "visit this website!" I'm sure that I and others would be happy to engage in more meaningful discussion.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 4, 2007)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> I realize that this discussion is "on topic" but aside from a few questions in your most recent post, Wolf-Bone, the original post didn't give us much to work with.
> 
> I'd be happy to offer my input but I don't have the time or interest to scour an entire website looking for something interesting to throw up. If someone wants to start over with a clear, concise topic other than "visit this website!" I'm sure that I and others would be happy to engage in more meaningful discussion.



Well, I never suggested people couldn't take their time. I read most of the site over the course of a few days myself. I'd like to know what you'd suggest, aside from me basically copying the articles and pasting them, but that would still require people to actually *read*.

Although I suppose I could write my own essays, based on what I've acquired. But I kind of assumed people would take the words of someone who's been around more seriously, as opposed to someone like myself who's basically a nobody.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 4, 2007)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> I realize that this discussion is "on topic" but aside from a few questions in your most recent post, Wolf-Bone, the original post didn't give us much to work with.
> 
> I'd be happy to offer my input but I don't have the time or interest to scour an entire website looking for something interesting to throw up. If someone wants to start over with a clear, concise topic other than "visit this website!" I'm sure that I and others would be happy to engage in more meaningful discussion.



I think he was basically just offering the entire site as something for people to peruse through on their own, and then bring up anything they may find there that they felt worth discussing. Then became frustrated when he got the reaction he did. 

Not everyone has the time or inclination to go through something like that of course, but which would you advise for those people? Should they simply ignore his thread for being too vague for them to bother with, or should they do what happened here? If you're more inclined to participate in more clearly stated discussions, cool, that's fine, but if you don't have the time to read what was offered, would _you_ waste time jumping in just to comment how much you feel the conversation isn't worth your time? Such a statement would be communicated much more easily (and appropriately) by simply not commenting and leaving a thread ignored and empty.

The writings on that site touch on some points like this, and are actually really worth giving a good look-through when you _do_ have the time. Some talk about the counter-productive and immature behaviors that have become prevalent in the fandom lately, like dong pointed out. Another good one in particular comments on things like confusing "having standards" with "censorship," ( http://ranea.org/falf/essays/standards.html ) a topic that tends to be recurring on sites like this.

Looking at his original post again, it seemed like he was just making an open invite for discussion of any of these essays moreso than trying to initiate one specific conversation. The frustration was in the reaction he recieved. People reacted as if they knew what he was saying, without reading what he offered, and just making assumptions from a post that, as you yourself said, really wasn't saying much at all. :


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 4, 2007)

My one question, though:

Why should I read articles and articles if you've already stated (a couple times, in fact) that this thread is just a textbook example of what the articles talk about? I for one don't need an encyclopedia to tell me what I already know and can observe; I don't really like reading something just to find myself nodding and going "yeah, that's true, that's true, yep, also true". Unless you can tell me that there's something unique, profound, or previously unsaid there, it's still not all that interesting.

The OP tells me I should read it but doesn't tell me _why_; he says it should be "required reading" for newbies to the fandom, but time and time again these same newbies prove they don't want to bother reading a sticky topic outlining basic rules. Moreover, I'd say that the people who "give a damn" about the fandom, and art, are the ones who have already been around the block a few times.

This is a discussion forum; telling us to read something gigantic isn't prompting a discussion the way asking us to read a paragraph or two of your topic might be.

This topic has potential, really! But I think it would work better if someone found a point in the reading, summarized it themselves, asked a few directed questions, and then link to the article as a reference. Is that unreasonable?


----------



## Wyrwulf (Mar 4, 2007)

I am forced to agree with some of the points raised about politeness in the fandom. I'm not talking about things like outright flames or insults, but politeness in a broader sense, things like the wisdom of silence.

Many in the fandom have a tendency to constantly throw in their two bits and share their opinions/beliefs/desires on just about everything, often well beyond the bounds of ordinary polite behavior. It is NOT always acceptable to share your thoughts on something; you have the freedom to speak, but that does NOT mean you should use it at every possible opportunity. 

Take, for example, the recent cub drama. Had we all kept politeness in mind, the drama would have remained confined to a single thread, if it manifested at all. All that was strictly required from each person was a yea or nay; you might have a strong opinion on the matter, but in the _why_ of your vote counts for much less than the vote itself. The subject was, by in large, not really worth much debate. The decision was not going to be made by consensus, it was going to be made by the admins. Arguing about it, and worse yet moralizing about it was only going to offend the people on the other side. The debate was never going to achieve anything except generating animosity.

That's the crux of the matter, really. Offending someone, generating animosity and antipathy, and generally pissing people off ARE valid reasons to shut your trap. If speaking your mind will do nothing but aggravate, if speaking will achieve nothing constructive and only throw oil on the fire, then _you should not speak_. The essence of politeness is putting the concerns of others at at least the same level as your own, if not higher. That means going out of your way not to offend people. It means keeping your peace, no matter how strongly you feel, if it will only anger someone else. It doesn't matter if the other person is stupid, immature, rude, or generally beneath you, you must still show them courtesy. Politeness is about YOUR integrity, not theirs. At the very least, you are not sinking to their level.

Everybody has opinions. I have an opinion about very nearly every topic posted here. I almost never reply, however, because having an opinion is not enough to justify sharing it. Again, you always have the right to speak your mind, but that does not make it wise or polite to do so. For another example, take the Druox nonsense above. Yes, his comments were foolish and baseless, yes he might have made groundless and hurtful comments. But at the end of the day, he is meaningless and the things he says are meaningless. It doesn't matter what he thinks of himself, or what he says about you, you will achieve nothing by hurling insults of your own right back at him. You are certainly not going to change his mind (this is the INTERNET, for dog's sake), and there's no panel of judges awarding points for e-style. Even if he insulted you and makes your blood boil, the polite thing to do is to ignore him entirely and let it all pass in obscurity. Yes, that means he gets the last jab. So what? You're _better_ than him, and that sometimes means letting him feel like he's won.

To an extent, it's the Internet's fault. You can't physically walk away on the Net, nor can you punch someone in the teeth online. Just like being in a car on the freeway, the anonymity of the Internet tends to reduce other people to intangible entities at best, mere obstacles at worst. It's not surprising that civility can fly out the window in such an environment.

At it's core, politeness is an act of self-sacrifice, something that is sorely lacking in furry as it is everywhere else. Letting people feel like they've won, letting insults pass without comment, not always getting the last laugh; nobody likes to do these things, but if we all did do them, if we all minded our manners and swallowed our pride to keep the peace, i think we'd all have a generally happier time in each others company (despite the occasional troll). Like any act of self-sacrifice, it's no fun at all, but at the end there's a (silent!) sense of smug superiority that can't be beat. :wink:


----------



## dong (Mar 4, 2007)

Hanazawa has essentially summed up my one half-objection to not the OP but the phrasing of it. This aside:



			
				Wyrwulf said:
			
		

> Even if he insulted you and makes your blood boil, the polite thing to do is to ignore him entirely and let it all pass in obscurity. Yes, that means he gets the last jab. So what? You're better than him, and that sometimes means letting him feel like he's won.



I'd like to drive a subtle point here. We're talking about a situation where there is the possibility of either "playing a game" or not doing so. Playing the game (i.e. getting in a flamewar) involves winning or losing. Not playing the game involves neither.

However, the game becomes prevalent due to the designation of "winner" and "loser" implying a disjunct in the sample space. That is, it is preferable to be considered a "winner" as opposed to "not a winner" or "loser" given that the latter two are one and the same compared to being a "winner".

The only way out of this is for a mass movement towards undermining and nullifying the game. I propose that this is generally not possible, and so "being the better person" is often a bitter bullet to bite. Because, as you can see, it's not at all being about better. Such a conception only perpetuates the constant shifting of the flamewar dynamic; to this end it continues to exist. It's about not being better or worse at all- just being (I direct your attention to the thread entitled "What we are".)


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 4, 2007)

K, I just finished making some notes based on the source material, plus a few other lulz-fests that just recently happened. I ain't gonna spoon-feed nobody but what I'm writing down ought to be a little more fresh than anything posted when Backstreet Boys were still popular.

I got a tonne of college work to catch up on plus some Knuckles fan art which is teh homo gay (not a joke, been putting that off for way too long) so this might take a while. Right now just getting a handful of people to give a shit wins me five Nova Scotias and a Juno award.

March break will be official Furry history month.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 4, 2007)

*comes back to respond, but instead points to Wyrwulf's post.

I couldn't have said it better.


----------



## Wyrwulf (Mar 4, 2007)

dong said:
			
		

> I'd like to drive a subtle point here. We're talking about a situation where there is the possibility of either "playing a game" or not doing so. Playing the game (i.e. getting in a flamewar) involves winning or losing. Not playing the game involves neither.
> 
> However, the game becomes prevalent due to the designation of "winner" and "loser" implying a disjunct in the sample space. That is, it is preferable to be considered a "winner" as opposed to "not a winner" or "loser" given that the latter two are one and the same compared to being a "winner".
> 
> The only way out of this is for a mass movement towards undermining and nullifying the game. I propose that this is generally not possible, and so "being the better person" is often a bitter bullet to bite. Because, as you can see, it's not at all being about better. Such a conception only perpetuates the constant shifting of the flamewar dynamic; to this end it continues to exist. It's about not being better or worse at all- just being (I direct your attention to the thread entitled "What we are".)


And I, naturally, would reject that proposition.

If we are going to apply game theory to flamewars and etiquette in general (a dubious proposition at best: you could argue at length about defining the payout for a flamewar; heck, you'd have to decide on a winner first) then we must acknowledge that a flamewar is a iterated contest. Although the players change depending on each round, all the players retain a complete memory of all the previous rounds and the actions taken therein. 

Payoff depends on the other players acknowledging both the desirability of the contest and the desirability of the state of being a "winner." Payoff is thus awarded by the other players and not by the game itself or any other third party. In a system where payoff is determined by the other players it is possible to penalize any given action, including playing the game at all by altering the fundamental assumptions of the players. In this case, the desirability of being a winner. That might sound silly, but bear with me.

I'd like to first mention that I said "being the better person" largely as a rhetorical device, there are some real rewards to that position that do not depend on external rules. The first is "smug superiority". While remaining silent might not net you external kudos, a very real internal payoff exists in adhering to a given set of rules. Think of anonymous charitable donations. I would propose that internal gratification is an entirely satisfactory substitute for external accolades.

Secondly, I would dispute the notion that there even exist openly acknowledged winners at all. When was the last time anyone was openly revered for their flaming skills? I can't think of any instance off the top of my head where an individual was explicitly rewarded for cutting someone down. We assume that people agree with us when we declare ourselves winners, we assume that they give us kudos even in the absence of explicit statements to that effect. I would assert that the payoff for being a "winner" is every bit as illusory and internal as the payoff for being the "better person".

Thirdly and finally, I would draw parallels with the iterated prisoners dilemma, in that over time actions that might be initially rewarding ("winning") are penalized over the course of multiple iterations. A single round of prisoner's dilemma results in players always defecting; but with both knowledge of the players involved and memory of their actions, defecting players are penalized in favor of players who cooperate. In a flamewar, defecting would correspond to playing the flame-game, while being polite would correspond to cooperation. There are tangible, widely acknowledged benefits to everyone acting in a polite manner (not having flamewars in the first place, greater compassion and harmony in general) that would result if everyone could be have that way, regardless of whether or not it is actually possible to do so. The state of no flamewars at all is preferable to having winners and losers, even if one is routinely a winner. Thus, in my opinion it is rational to be the "better person", with that tactic leading to a greater payoff over multiple iterations even if initially unpalatable. 

I will admit, however, that this is not something I have studied in any great depth and my analogies might be strained.

Still, I remained quite convinced of the value of polite behavior in general, and the value of silence in particular.


----------



## Wyrwulf (Mar 4, 2007)

Christ, today must be my tl;dr day.


----------



## dong (Mar 4, 2007)

*Evidently my expression is sucking hard today @..@*

Initial reaction: SCORE!!!



			
				Wyrwulf said:
			
		

> I will admit, however, that this is not something I have studied in any great depth and my analogies might be strained.



I reckon you know more than I do on the topic, for a start. I made quite a simple error, so thanks for replying (yes, I read it in full zomg!!!) I fuddled around with the Prisoner's dilemma, because by...(oh god, this phrase doesn't make sense) _perpetuates the constant shifting of the flamewar dynamic_ I referred instead to co-operating as "flaming" and defecting as "criticising people who flame". Thus my proposition that a "flameless state" was not possible (to be honest I just gacked the argument from something I wrote about global politics :?, so there's bound to be a little incompatibility).

Ultimately I don't think we're actually in disagreement, really, because by "undermining and nullifying the game" I do mean being polite and silent, as opposed to attempts to superficial engagement. I second this claim: *The state of no flamewars at all is preferable to having winners and losers, even if one is routinely a winner.* After all, that we're in a particular state now does not justify that state or the preservation of such.

Side note- My main concern in suggesting looking at it from a game theory perspective was to examine the rhetoric of "being the better person", and I see you've dealt with that. To this end:



> I would propose that internal gratification is an entirely satisfactory substitute for external accolades.



Agreed, since external accolades inevitably gives internal gratification.



> Secondly, I would dispute the notion that there even exist openly acknowledged winners at all.



I'd like to say I can't, but sadly I can actually think of counterexamples to this, assuming that this point is distinct from your exposition (I'm thinking the abundance of philosophy forums on LiveJournal). Unless of course you mean "externally acknowledged winners", in which case my objections here are moot. In any case, again I would agree that declaration of winning a flamewar, like external accolades is another form of internal gratification (this reminds me of the discussion on the "Scuiside" thread).


P.S. Sorry I'm sprouting word salads guys, I'm a little too tired to be concise.


----------



## iller (Mar 5, 2007)

TL;DR

PS:  "Confurence" DIED b/c of crap like this  ...too much talky talky, no real solutions.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 5, 2007)

iller said:
			
		

> TL;DR
> 
> PS:  "Confurence" DIED b/c of crap like this  ...too much talky talky, no real solutions.



And there won't be any real solutions....


----------



## imnohbody (Mar 5, 2007)

Pardon the tangents, but...

a) What exactly does "TL;DR" mean?

b) In regards to winning a flame war, to quote from Wargames: "The only winning move is not to play." By that standard, I'm only partially a winner.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 5, 2007)

imnohbody said:
			
		

> Pardon the tangents, but...
> 
> a) What exactly does "TL;DR" mean?
> 
> b) In regards to winning a flame war, to quote from Wargames: "The only winning move is not to play." By that standard, I'm only partially a winner.



A: Too Long; Didn't Read


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 5, 2007)

iller said:
			
		

> TL;DR
> 
> PS:  "Confurence" DIED b/c of crap like this  ...too much talky talky, no real solutions.



Some people are having a discussion in the discussion forum.

If its too long for you to read, just keep on moving and participate in a conversation more easily digestible to you. 

There's no reason to pop up and interfere in someone else's dicussion, especially when its as nice and civil as this one is being. If people want to participate, they can participate, but if you don't want to participate, just leave it be.

I mean, hard to expect real solutions to be reached (especially when this isn't even a solution-oriented thread, just people discussing their views) if nobody is allowed to talk about things without interruptions. ;P


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 5, 2007)

In other words, the grown ups are talking and it's past your bedtime.

Progress is being made on my end, btw, but with college and all it'll probably be March break til I post much else on the subject.


----------



## dong (Mar 5, 2007)

To play devil's advocate against myself, sometimes I get very indulgent and start engaging certain topics in inappropriately difficult ways...but in this case I want to counteract the connotations from the phrases I was fielding: "This is a _furry_ forum"...what, does that mean this is a _retard_ forum? Hell no. To this end I've been pleasantly surprised.

So that said, if people feel I'm affecting the entire thread detrimentally by wanking on too much feel free to say so directly.

Now...



			
				Iller said:
			
		

> "Confurence" DIED b/c of crap like this  ...too much talky talky, no real solutions.



There's a difference between crapping around a point and discussing one. Here, it emerged that we have compelling grounds to encourage people to (as Nohbody suggested) not engage in flame wars. The only reason it is not an adequate solution is because you can't change people- they can only change themselves, and many prefer to flame for whatever personal gratification it brings them.

Wolf-Bone: I feel ya there. Since I'm in Oz, I won't get much time to myself till at least Easter, so no hurry from me.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 6, 2007)

dong said:
			
		

> So that said, if people feel I'm affecting the entire thread detrimentally by wanking on too much feel free to say so directly.



Considering that your conversation IS the thread right now, I'd say it should be a little difficult for someone not participating at all to accuse you of being detrimental to a thread ;P


----------



## dong (Mar 6, 2007)

I was kind of afraid of that too XD It's no fun for readers if all we got is some boring philosophy dude monologuing.

I should be studying as I have a test next week, but noooo, I'm on teh internetz...


----------



## Ylm (Mar 6, 2007)

I didn't read this thread :>


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 6, 2007)

dong said:
			
		

> I was kind of afraid of that too XD It's no fun for readers if all we got is some boring philosophy dude monologuing.
> 
> I should be studying as I have a test next week, but noooo, I'm on teh internetz...



*points to the guy above him

Don't worry about it. This is the sort of discussion where, if people aren't interested in what is being discussed, in this case philosphical monologuing, they will either pass it up entirely or make a comment to the effect that they find your conversation dull and beneath them. But that should never be taken as reason to cease your conversation, it should just be taken as an "ignore me for I have nothing to contribute." :3


----------



## dong (Mar 6, 2007)

Heh, don't mind *Ylm*, as friends do, he and I have sworn to undermine each other in secret...oops did I say that out aloud?

Guess we gotta emphasise that simply because some people like mental masturbation doesn't mean everybody else has to gtfo!

Otherwise, it's such a nice feeling to be able to wank on in good company 

P.S. Eldoran, you baaaaaastard!!! >O


----------



## Icarus (Mar 7, 2007)

can someone summarize this for me? D:

I am a very tl;dr person...


----------



## rowanwand (Mar 7, 2007)

Hahahahaahahaha Druox isn't human...he's a bot.

As for the website...the front page kinda bored me.  I didn't actually make it to clicking on any links.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 7, 2007)

Someone should copy the entire site's source code and just insert Sonic Knuckles and Tails threesomes strewn about. That'll keep people's attention.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 7, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Someone should copy the entire site's source code and just insert Sonic Knuckles and Tails threesomes strewn about. That'll keep people's attention.



Actually it would make me not even bother reading it more, or even visiting the site.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 7, 2007)

I was going to say something about blatant sarcasm, but, the giants boobs, can't focus, it's like they just float over you, waiting to crash down you like the Hindenburg.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 7, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> I was going to say something about blatant sarcasm, but, the giants boobs, can't focus, it's like they just float over you, waiting to crash down you like the Hindenburg.



Yes but sarcasm is a two way street.


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 7, 2007)




----------



## SachiCoon (Mar 8, 2007)

DruoxTheFurrinator said:
			
		

> That article proves I'm not human actually...
> 
> My mind's too complex to be categorized as human.  (for those who didn't understand that: Complexity doesn't mean smart, it means difficult to figure out) I will never be able to be put into a label because I behave so adversely.  Humans, however, are the most predictable of all animals and are put into groups to make them more exciting. ^^



AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## WillowFox (Mar 8, 2007)

This is why I don't call myself a "furry" because of people, yes, PEOPLE meaning HUMANS like THIS:



			
				Litre said:
			
		

> You're not perfect, no one is.
> 
> You're still human, by the way.



That article proves I'm not human actually...

My mind's too complex to be categorized as human.  (for those who didn't understand that: Complexity doesn't mean smart, it means difficult to figure out) I will never be able to be put into a label because I behave so adversely.  Humans, however, are the most predictable of all animals and are put into groups to make them more exciting. ^^
[/quote]
You know, the fucking stupid retarded gamer morons who believe that they are some kind of animal or fucking mythical creature, using your pseudo intellectual and mildly poetic bullshit in a lame attempt to glorify yourself over us "Humans". I believe whole heartily that this type of person has no place in this world other than to amuse the rest of us. This type of human being, in my opinion, would be better off grouped together in a small building and gassed, as they are useless to the world.
OK, yeah we get it, it was funny for a little while when you people thought you were really dragons or orcs or whatever the fuck you played in some stupid D&D or yugi-oh game that you played back in high school because you had no friends and your home life sucked so bad that you regressed into your minds for escape, staying home playing with computer parts while everyone else was hanging out with friends or what not. But it's not funny anymore and is now apparently some kind of psychological issue, you really need to seek help if you honestly believe that you are some kind of animal trapped in a human body or what ever you think you are. Look in the mirror... You are a human being, you are trying to hide from the fact that you are human because the world and society are not easy on you and you're too lazy to accept what you are and press on so instead you find some kind of bullshit excuse to tell yourself and the people around you that you are not human when in fact you just don't want to be.
Now not wanting to be human is better than REALLY believing that you are NOT a human.
You are only lying to yourself. -Why? because we see and know that you ARE indeed a human being.
Sorry, but you are a human, you may not have to "get over it" but you should really accept and deal with it. Pretending you are an animal or something else is OK once in a while but when it becomes a significant part of your life, it's a problem.
Sorry for stating the obvious.


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 8, 2007)

WillowFox said:
			
		

> This is why I don't call myself a "furry" because of people, yes, PEOPLE meaning HUMANS like THIS:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You win. 

Lifers need a f****** life. They really take this furry thing WAAAAAAAAAAAY too seriously. Then they whine when someone calls them a "freak" as if the fur fandom within itself is "normal". What's even more funny is the "Species" category in the main FA gallery and how people write "Dog, cat, gryphon ect." instead of typing down what they really are, which is human. I'm just a human who RPs as a anthro hamster online for fun (there is more fun things in life. Like sleeping) but I will never have that RP life interfere with my real life. Like a wise man/woman once said, "Leave your fursona on the computer and leave your computer often."


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 8, 2007)

WillowFox said:
			
		

> This is why I don't call myself a "furry" because of people, yes, PEOPLE meaning HUMANS like THIS:



Why would you give the word the definition used by what you feel to be the most undesirable elements of the fandom?

The only universal defining attribute of the label "furry" is an above-average affinity for anthropomorphic animals. Anything more than that is going to be the personal definition of one person or another. Some people would argue that even that bare minimum is just MY personal definition.

So I've always been confused as to why someone would deny the label of "furry" that they would clearly otherwise attribute to themself, just because of an unappealing aspect of someone ELSE'S definition. Such as, in this case, having to believe you aren't human.

It isn't so much the unattractive elements of the fandom that give "furry" such a bad name. Its the fact that other people who ARE a part of this fandom, even if they're not a part of the separate side interests SOME members are involved in, insist that those elements they don't like are defining characteristics of "Furry."

Its the people who _aren't_ into underaged hermaphroditic shitting dicknipples who insist that those things are defining parts of Furry a hell of a lot more often than the people who actually dig on the fetishy stuff.


----------



## dong (Mar 8, 2007)

Good spotting. People from every (whichever) side forget a little something about stigma- regardless of minority representation it ends up taking over the entire image. Hence the belief that furry _is_ an amalgamation of fetishes when in fact it is simply...not.

It just so happens that the fandom was on average more open about such things (for several reasons, suggestions ranging from intrinsic tolerance to the fact this is teh internetz) means that exposure here is greater than the mainstream. With exposure comes exposure bias!

---

As for the summary...as far as I recall it started with Wolf-Bone posting a link to some articles from c.1998. Then there was a flame-war over whether Druox was human or not (my comment: identity-politics teh lawl!) Then it kinda settled down into a rather dry discussion of the prisoner's dilemma as applied to forum dynamics (my fault). Then iller said tl;dr out of the blue and we got into some anti-tl;dr bashing.

I must be psychic. While going to class I had the thought that I would be writing this today.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> Don't worry about it. This is the sort of discussion where, if people aren't interested in what is being discussed, in this case philosphical monologuing, they will either pass it up entirely or make a comment to the effect that they find your conversation dull and beneath them. But that should never be taken as reason to cease your conversation, it should just be taken as an "ignore me for I have nothing to contribute." :3



I wanted to say this thread was boring, but it made me laugh when everyone started reminiscing on poor Druox's poorly chosen words. *laughs, but cries too*

But, yes.. I saw the beginning of this thread, and just jumped back in, and how the hell it got to this, I have no clue... -_-


----------



## WillowFox (Mar 8, 2007)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> WillowFox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



- uhm, anyone who hears "furry" hears ABOUT the negatives first, and the negatives being this extreme, make me not want a part of it. Think about it, think of "trailer home" and what do you picture, white trash fat people living with a junk yard for a front yard and screaming children playing in dog shit in some trailer park. Now Furry, think of it, fat geeky weirdoes, that live in moms basement fucking stuffed animals and believing they're animals, talking with others over telnet pretending to be hermaphrodite inflated vixens.... Yeah not something I want to associate myself with by slapping the "furry" tag on myself. I enjoy anthro and non anthro art, I enjoy some of the people, the costuming is fun/funny (well some of it) and it's a fun hobby. However I do not call myself a "Furry" because it is not what I am, Nor am I a fanboy, I could be classified if classification is needed, as a furry fan, but that closes the spectrum of my interests greatly, as I am a fan of many types of fantasy art and fantasy based things, so I am simply a fan of that in general, not simply a "furry" I just have a bunch of interests.
I just don't like to be stereotyped into a freakshow, wich is what most of "Furry" has turned into sadly.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

WillowFox said:
			
		

> Wolfblade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not necessarily. When I think of McDonald's, I think of delicious, cheesy, yummy goodness! Then I think about how much HP I lost... usually after I finish eating.


----------



## Bokracroc (Mar 8, 2007)

thegreathamster said:
			
		

> What's even more funny is the "Species" category in the main FA gallery and how people write "Dog, cat, gryphon ect." instead of typing down what they really are, which is human.


People actually fill that out properly (or try to)?
Mine's full of crap:



> Species: MP3
> Age: ass
> Shell of choice: Flip 2D
> Operating system: Windows 3.1
> ...


Apart from the favourite game it's all bull.
[size=x-small]es, being ass years old amuses me greatly[/size]


----------



## Hanazawa (Mar 8, 2007)

I didn't realize you were an MP3, Bokracroc; perhaps I ought to try listening to you. Are you available for download through iTunes?


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 8, 2007)

WillowFox said:
			
		

> This is why I don't call myself a "furry" because of people, yes, PEOPLE meaning HUMANS like THIS:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You know, the fucking stupid retarded gamer morons who believe that they are some kind of animal or fucking mythical creature, using your pseudo intellectual and mildly poetic bullshit in a lame attempt to glorify yourself over us "Humans". I believe whole heartily that this type of person has no place in this world other than to amuse the rest of us. This type of human being, in my opinion, would be better off grouped together in a small building and gassed, as they are useless to the world.
OK, yeah we get it, it was funny for a little while when you people thought you were really dragons or orcs or whatever the fuck you played in some stupid D&D or yugi-oh game that you played back in high school because you had no friends and your home life sucked so bad that you regressed into your minds for escape, staying home playing with computer parts while everyone else was hanging out with friends or what not. But it's not funny anymore and is now apparently some kind of psychological issue, you really need to seek help if you honestly believe that you are some kind of animal trapped in a human body or what ever you think you are. Look in the mirror... You are a human being, you are trying to hide from the fact that you are human because the world and society are not easy on you and you're too lazy to accept what you are and press on so instead you find some kind of bullshit excuse to tell yourself and the people around you that you are not human when in fact you just don't want to be.
Now not wanting to be human is better than REALLY believing that you are NOT a human.
You are only lying to yourself. -Why? because we see and know that you ARE indeed a human being.
Sorry, but you are a human, you may not have to "get over it" but you should really accept and deal with it. Pretending you are an animal or something else is OK once in a while but when it becomes a significant part of your life, it's a problem.
Sorry for stating the obvious.
[/quote]

TL;DR, lol, NARF!!! (fuckin' white kids)


----------



## Bokracroc (Mar 8, 2007)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> I didn't realize you were an MP3, Bokracroc; perhaps I ought to try listening to you. Are you available for download through iTunes?


Nope. I'm rated TA so iTunes wouldn't allow me.
[size=xx-small]Totally Awesome[/size]


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 8, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> WillowFox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



TL;DR, lol, NARF!!! (fuckin' white kids)
[/quote]

I suppose you are one of the ones who takes furry seriously.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> whatever the fuck you played in some stupid D&D or yugi-oh game that you played back in high school because you had no friends and your home life sucked so bad that you regressed into your minds for escape, staying home playing with computer parts while everyone else was hanging out with friends or what not.



Well, I do all of the above: building computers, play D&D, and hang out with friends. I'm out of high school. And I'm not out of my mind, or a social outcast in any way. I just like sitting at a table with my friends on the weekends, rolling dice and being fatasses over bags of chips and junk food. It's just having a good time.

However, I can see how easy it is to roll out that stereotype... stupid people gives us bad PR.


----------



## SokiTwopaw (Mar 8, 2007)

I really dont want to read every one else's comments, BUT!

I do see where you are coming from and I do agree with some of the articles in there. How ever seeing that a majority of the furs here want a summary or a quick answer to everything it would probably best behoove this to have the links to the essays posted.


----------



## WillowFox (Mar 8, 2007)

thegreathamster said:
			
		

> Wolf-Bone said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I suppose you are one of the ones who takes furry seriously.
[/quote]

At least some one gets it.
Arguing with a furry or anyone over the Internet is like trying to tell a retard that they're retarded. So I don't take any of this seriously at all, the people who do, creep me out to no end.
The ones that try to wear ears and tails to work especially piss me off, saying that its their right and part of who they are, when in fact they're just self righteous liberal assholes who feel the need to scream for attention, and don't understand that A) there is a dress code and you can be fired for it because YOU signed a contract with said company under those very terms, and B) It's fucking weird and stupid to wear ears and tails at a WORK PLACE. On your own time fine, you wanna be a weirdo then go for it, but for cripe sake if you have any shred of sanity don't wear that shit to work, and think you're not gonna get harassed by your boss and or fellow employees over it. 
-PS, Tails and ears don't make you look in the LEAST like an animal, not even highly expensive fursuits by really good costume artists will make you look like a "real furry" or animal in any way shape or form. No matter how good the costume you will always look like an idiot in a costume, that's why its FUN and not SERIOUS.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

WTF is with people not using the quote brackets properly. Also are we gonna scream about "niggers" next?


----------



## lolcox (Mar 8, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> WTF is with people not using the quote brackets properly. Also are we gonna scream about "niggers" next?



Arshes, my fellow companion of African-American descent, do not become upset over the immaturity of the above users.

Step outside, and take a deep breath. Feel how it cleanses you deep within.
Breathe deeply, and relax.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

^post 81 - Hahaha XD 

I always find these threads amusing when someone gets mad about not being taken seriously and then does the same crap he accuses others of doing. I know there's a can't beat them join them, but still.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

Dude, the quote was not done properly. For like the whole last page, there's there's little [/quote] sitting there, saying "I don't have any quote to slash"...

I dunno if it was you originally cus it's in a few posts.. it confused the hell out of me though.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

Which is exactly why I stated it wasn't used properly. I didn't even say who did it, instead we got someone going off the deep end and cussing people out instead of reading back on the thread.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

Ya, I saw it. What was worse was that I was trying to quote the improperly quoted post...
I think I fixed/tried to fix it (maybe I just said WTF and didn't fix it)...


lmao. Wow. I say some stupid shit sometimes.


----------



## WillowFox (Mar 8, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Which is exactly why I stated it wasn't used properly. I didn't even say who did it, instead we got someone going off the deep end and cussing people out instead of reading back on the thread.



Damnit, this is why I'm stupid, I jump the gun on shit alla time, I thought you were talking about This kind of quote= " 
I'ts because all I did was hit reply I did'nt even toy with those quote brackets so I didn't think you meant them, I thought you meant quotes and brackets not quote brackets, my bad  See what I mean about retards on the internet?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

Actually I am, but I didn't say who broke it, I just noticed a continual line of posts where it is broken.

If you are to quote someone, you need to make sure it's nesting properly just like html formatting.

There seems to be a missing opening bracket of who said the quote, I think some of that was part of Droux's statement.

What also happened was someone posted "fucking white kids" I know we may make racial jokes hence my "niggers" statement, but if we said "fucking blacks" as a link I'm very sure someone would have screamed racism and reported the post immediately. I suppose it's ok because it was in reference to White people?

How does that help anything?


----------



## EternalUndeath (Mar 8, 2007)

*sigh* Yet another pointless argument thread (although, I admit being relieved that I'm not the one who posted it for once). You want a _real_ website? www.burnedfurs.mv.com. There. 
Oh, and btw, YOU'RE ALL HUMAN. END OF STORY. MOVE ON. Not that I enjoy that fact. Given a choice, I'd become a dragon in a heartbeat. I just have to accept the fact that no such choice exists and that I simply have to live with this disgustingly soft greggim body whether I like it or not. Now that I've said my piece, I shall depart. Good day.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

For a second I thought that was a reality check, but... as I continued reading, I became less sure.

edit: I tried your link, but got "Server not found."


----------



## rowanwand (Mar 8, 2007)

lolz @ everyone.

I wear ears and a tail to class (I'm in college, btw, we get away with that sort of thing) just because I can.  And fursuiting is a hobby of mine because I enjoy being a goofball.  In fact, once I get my super-awesome-amazing-chocolate-coated-megasuit finished I'll probably volunteer at a children's hospital or something.

And...as for the RPing geeks who insist that they're an animal or non-human online, people...this is the internet.  Let the little guy be whatever he wants to be, this is the only place it'll ever happen.
In all honesty, how much does it hurt?  You know he's human, isn't that enough?  Stop trying to crush his spirit. I mean come on.  I could sit here and tell you that I'm a cat, but you would know that I'm really human, and mostly for the following reasons:
1. Cats don't have the proper appendages for typing
2. Anyone who's seen a cat macro (picture of cat with text) knows that cats can't spell even if they could type
3. Any cat would rather lay around in the sun than post online anyway

That said, we can deduce from simple reasoning that yes, Druox is indeed human:
1.  Demons or whatever most likely do not have proper appendages for typing.  Too many tentacles/hooves, etc
2. Demons probably only spell in Olde English or some nonsense like that
3.  A demon would rather be damming souls to eternal damnation than posting online

As for what makes a furry "furry", I would say an excessive amount of facial/back hair and the lack of a razor.


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 8, 2007)

EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Oh, and btw, YOU'RE ALL HUMAN. END OF STORY. MOVE ON. Not that I enjoy that fact. Given a choice, I'd become a dragon in a heartbeat. I just have to accept the fact that no such choice exists and that I simply have to live with this disgustingly soft greggim body whether I like it or not. Now that I've said my piece, I shall depart. Good day.



Wow. *Wow wow* [size=x-large]*wow wow!!!*[/size] 


If that isn't a true blue case of hypocritecy, I don't know what is. You come here and say "I'm human, and YOUR human, deal with it" yet you cry about wishing your WERE a dragon, like alot of over obsessed furries wishing or thinking they were their fursona. You're like John Kerry at a presidential debut, a flip flopper! Make up your mind!

I'm human and I'm proud to be human (Yeah, we are scum but meh!) and I never, ever *EVER* want to be my fursona or even a real hamster. Not only that I know a Human-like furry world would be physically and biological impossible (Because we have made our own human world to fit the convenience of humans. There will be SO much modifications we had to make for our animal selfs), I know that most likely (whether you want to admit it or not) it will be circled around sex. I personally would gag at my own body if I'm my fursona looking at myself in the mirror, naked. Nevermind having sex with another fur! Its like screwing a hamster with human arms and legs. I know once in a while, its fun to RP and maybe even draw anthropomorphics in an human world but this is all fantasy. Its all fake. I'm sorry if its like a 10 year old wrestling fan find out wrestling is fake but its true. 

If you're gonna preach to everyone we are human to all the people who thinks or wants to be an animal or fursona, please practice what you preach, yourself. Thank you.

P.S.: Your link don't work.

P.S.S.: Burnedfurs is dead.


----------



## rowanwand (Mar 8, 2007)

thegreathamster said:
			
		

> I'm human and I'm proud to be human (Yeah, we are scum but meh!) and I never, ever *EVER* want to be my fursona or even a real hamster. Not only that I know a Human-like furry world would be physically and biological impossible (Because we have made our own human world to fit the convenience of humans. There will be SO much modifications we had to make for our animal selfs), I know that most likely (whether you want to admit it or not) it will be circled around sex. I personally would gag at my own body if I'm my fursona looking at myself in the mirror, naked. Nevermind having sex with another fur! Its like screwing a hamster with human arms and legs.



Oh come on, everyone knows that having sex with animals with human appendages is simply the best. [sarcasm sarcasm sarcasm sarcasm]

You are QFT.  

Although on occasion I wish I had fur because I am not allowed to have a pet at school and being furry would almost be like being my own pet. [lol]


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 8, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> What also happened was someone posted "fucking white kids" I know we may make racial jokes hence my "niggers" statement, but if we said "fucking blacks" as a link I'm very sure someone would have screamed racism and reported the post immediately. I suppose it's ok because it was in reference to White people?



Again, sarcasm / non sequitor. But for what it's worth, I'm glad someone else here doesn't have the whole mentality that white people are evil by nature and therefor anything negative said about any of them is fully justified. It's pretty much the only reason I'm not on any RastafarI forums yet. Every one of them I've encountered seems rife with that.

And Burned Furs was a lost cause almost by design. I'll expand on this one in another post that no one will be bothered to read.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 8, 2007)

_What are we fightin' for?
What are we fightin' for?

The world got smaller but the bombs got bigger
Holocaust on a hairpin trigger
Aint no game so forget the score
What are we fightin' for?_


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My identity is something of interest, I suppose. Since I'm mixed ..or "blended" whatever the hell PC or coined phrase you'd like to use, I usually end up in the "not belonging" category. I was picked on because I was a mongrel, jungle bunny or whatever have you. 

I've been called a bunch of Latin/Hispanic based racial slurs, and I'm not even that. I've been spat at, for not speaking Spanish and people have told me I was betraying my heritage for not speaking that language. It's like...uhh what the fu?

I'm part Iranian, and I'm part Black. It drives me crazy sometimes because if you're part Black, you're Black.

I mark OTHER (on documents where applicable) most of the time because it's like..."wait a minute...why should I deny I'm part Iranian too? 

So obviously I am part of "both worlds" but I belong to neither.

But anyways, I'm rather fair minded when it comes to issues, and I don't have that "Black Guilt Gene" which means most of the time I look at the situation, not "well past history they treated us poorly" etc.

I'm not a furry, I like drawing the art, but that's because there are so many things you can create. I'd like to expand out to storyboarding and futuristic backgrounds, because the problem with a lot of these communities is that there is way too much character focus, than actual development. That's why I don't really have a fursona or avatar. I have a character that's been around for over 10 years now online but she's not a furry one.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 8, 2007)

I'm adopted, so I don't really know what I am. I assume I'm at least mostly white, having fair skin, blonde/brown hair and blue/grey eyes. But all I know about my heritage is that my parents were from Saskatchewan, Canada, which is a huge mix of French, English, Scottish, Irish, German, Norweigian, Polish, Ukrainian, Jewish, Swedish, Dutch, and various Native tribes. Maybe that's why I grew to agree with the position that race is a social construct pounded into our collective conscience through centuries of indoctrination. Sure, skin color is real, and genetic. And so are hair color and eye color, but no one arbitrarily assigns a group identity based on those superficial characteristics. Yet every one of those nationalities I just mentioned, despite being considered white are unique cultures. Of course, race essentialists will always spew their rhetoric about Europeans of all creeds being collectively oppressive against anyone who isn't white - while conveniently leaving out the fact that Europe's history is an epic saga of of whites conquering and enslaving other whites... As well as other inconvenient truths about who assisted Europeans in the enslavement of non-whites.

Funny, I don't think I've ever heard of "black guilt", but it sounds like a game you can't win. I sure as hell know you're damned if you do and damned if you don't when it comes to WHITE guilt. If you don't suffer from it, you're a racist. You're a racist even if you do suffer from it. It makes you invent delusional beliefs that race is a lie we tell ourselves, because you want to escape the fact that you are white, and therefor inherited your racism. I won't even go into some of the hatred I've seen spewed on the Rastafari forums I've lurked on.

I agree with your constructive criticisms of furry art, and it'd be nice to see that more often. I don't consider myself to be a furry either, despite the abundance of anthro work I do. Why? Simply because as I've already demonstrated, I'm sick of being classified under a label whos identity is not mine.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

Explanation on Black guilt: You ever notice when a Black guy gets in trouble the whole community is quick to defend him? That is what I mean, like OJ, Micheal Jackson, everyone ran quickly over to say how it was just the White man out to get him.

There is a case where these fireman played a prank on a Black fireman Teddy Pierce. Basically after a volleyball match where Pierce was boasting "feed the big dog feed the big dog!" the fireman who lost decided to prank him by adding some dog food to his meal. When he found out he was upset, but didn't call it racist. He then went and sued the city claiming it was racist. They settled out of court awarding him him 7mil iirc. They then overturned the decision when there was public outcry about how it was overkill.

There were these Black activists trying to construct how it was racism. That same fireman who sued was playing pranks on other guys which were much worse. Shaving off hair around a fireman's genitals, and putting a hat and beard on a guy with a sign "oi vey I'm a Jew" (<--- so what the hell was that then, friendly tagging?)

Back on to furry characters, I don't mind porn but it seems so mundane too? The characters often have the most stupid expressions, because people don't know how to draw facial expressions or deep emotions well, the poses seem the same. I see a pose from a well known or "pop-u-fur" then suddenly there is an explosion of the similar pose elsewhere. It's not that it's infringement, but damn is that BORING. Most attention is making the genitals extremely well rendered, but the anatomy goes right out the window. "Who cares if her foot is on backwards, look at the shine on those nips!" Vaginas are placed like you were playing a slider puzzle. One moment it's like on her stomach, the next frame its falling off her butt. "But who cares, it doesn't have to be real" but yeah I'd like it to look BELIEVABLE, so I'm not going DA HELL.

People scream about the stupidest stuff too "Don't steal mah species" when...it's like a dog with a piece of beef jerky on its butt. "I invented the winter coat idea first" That's your only mark in art? A winter coat? Your Original Species? I know there is an attachment to characters because of the time it took to create them, but for all the time wasting on screaming how your "oh so original fox character" was stolen, how about creating a good background for the character to interact in, not just "Floating character sex".

However, that's not just furry, it's anime and comics too. The whole reason I liked a comic and/or anime was because of STORY not just a pretty character. I don't mind having characters just for the sake of having one. My character AniMage was originally a T-shirt design - she's a product in my opinion ...not my SOUL. However, that's all a lot of these artists want to think about being famous for, that it consumes them.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 8, 2007)

I've always noticed the rush to defence-mode whenever something like that happens, but I've never heard it likened to a guilt complex. Interesting way of looking at it. Makes sense in a way.

I'm pondering some yiffy art, and the main roadblock I keep running into is that it seems like *it's all been done*. The only thing different I feel like I can go for is to aim for the impression that the two characters are actually in love. I wouldn't be the first, but I'd definately be in the minority. And yeah, some people focus way too much on the naughty bits, as if that was what makes a character sexy. Maybe I'm just backward, but I always found a nice body and attitude sexier than a dick or vagina. But then again, expressing love or personality through a drawing requires more than just building a mannequin. But mannequins seem to please a lot of people. Must be why people use Poser.

It's funny about the style / pose / color-scheme issue, because I remember back when Starfinder wasn't even *trying* to hide the fact that she wanted to be Goldenwolf and Kyoht, you couldn't convince her dumbass EZboard fanbase that she was anything but a prodigy. I don't get why anyone would try that hard. I find it easier to work on the fundamentals and let the style develop on its own. Or even do different pieces in different styles. I get sick of doing the same shit after a while. That's why I haven't done any new Tribe Omega work since the last art dump.

Speaking of which, I was doing braided / dreadlocked mains before it was vogue. I doubt anyone started doing it because I did it, but still, for me to try to claim a hairstyle as old as human civilization? WTF? I remember when people used to bitch about people ripping off Goldenwolf for drawing Native American styled anthros. Yeah, she might have made it *popular*, but what, did she *invent* the Native American style? Hell, we're all ripping off *somebody*. We're ripping off the first person who ever drew! Biters!


----------



## WillowFox (Mar 8, 2007)

What? wait. WHAT? Why are we talking about black people and white people?
LOL what burned furs? havent heared that term since the late 90s.
What the hell are we even talking about anymore?


----------



## dong (Mar 8, 2007)

I think the burned furs thing was a response to people whining about how some "humans were claiming not to be human" or something...

I got a different angle for that one. Let us assume for the sake of argument that a person who claims they are not human isn't human, since definitions can be held arbitrarily. You could then try finding out what makes them so fantastically different to consider them apart from the group.

My bet is that if it's not some kind of endogenous dissociative issue they're forming a deliberate belief (presuming common definitions of human) to differentiate themselves in the biggest possible way...and further people take offence because it implies some kind of positive quantitative valuation i.e. "I'm better than you".

*Arshes Nei*, *Wolf-Bone*...yeah I ain't heard it called a guilt complex before either, I knew the phenomenon as the positive discrimination movement. But I totally feel ya there- personally since my ethnicity is Chinese (and I was born, raised and live in Australia), it specifically bothers me that other people _assume my ethnic identity is important to me_.

*Oh Great Hamster*...*EternalUnderneath*'s rant wasn't quite hypocrisy...and really, exactly what is _wrong_ with that hypothetical? I mean the bit about "it'd be centered around sex" bit. I see a lot of talking around this point but people just fail on the whole when it comes to rationalising it.


----------



## WillowFox (Mar 8, 2007)

. 
.         
.             
.                                   
.                                           
.                                        Your mom.
.
.
.
.
.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 8, 2007)

If you're gonna spam, be more clever.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 8, 2007)

Take it in the face, Willow!

skeet skeet!


----------



## izartist (Mar 8, 2007)




----------



## EternalUndeath (Mar 9, 2007)

Ho...
ly...
crap.
This is just beyond help.

Alright, first off - I know BF is dead (btw, the link didn't work b/c I forgot to remove thw 'www'). They've been dead for quite some time now, but I firmly believe in their principles and think that every self-respecting fur should read the contents of their site.

Second off, Mr. Hampster doesn't want to become his animal because HIS ANIMAL IS A F*CKING HAMPSTER!!! I wouldn't want to be a goddamn hampster either. Dragons kick so much more ass, so fuQ. And about the whole 'it'd be centered around sex' thing... well, not _centered_ around it...  ~__~

Also, I am not a hypocrite. Just because I said I _wish_ something were true, doesn't mean I _believe_ it to be true. There's a big difference there.

Are we done now? Can we drop this topic now? We've torn it to shreds and burned the shreds, so let's just let it die already.

Good bye.


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 9, 2007)

EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Second off, *Mr*. Hampster doesn't want to become *his* animal because *HIS* ANIMAL IS A F*CKING HAMPSTER!!! I wouldn't want to be a goddamn hampster either. Dragons kick so much more ass, so fuQ.



Ahem, That's *MISS* hamster. And I don't want to be a dragon either because they are mythical creatures and I rather be human anytime. Here is an article, just for you......

http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/Fuck_you%2C_I%27m_a_dragon%21




			
				EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Also, I am not a hypocrite. Just because I said I _wish_ something were true, doesn't mean I _believe_ it to be true. There's a big difference there.



*In singing voice* Yes you arrrrrrrreeeeeeee!!!!!!!

You wish to be a mythical creature to the point of hating yourself. That sounds like your over obsessed with your furry animal to me.



			
				EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Good bye.



Bye-bye, freak. :wink::wink::lol:


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 9, 2007)

thegreatmaster said:
			
		

> You wish to be a mythical creature to the point of hating yourself. That sounds like your over obsessed with your furry animal to me.



That's not what hypocrisy is. If he/she were claiming to *be* a mythical creature without actually *beleiving* it, that would be hypocrisy. If he/she were doing something contrary to his/her believes, *that* would be hypocrisy. 

Eternal Undeath-

I've known about the burned furs about as long as I've known about FALF, and my opinion of them hasn't changed much. They were as fanatical in their conservatism as the furs they were opposed to were in their liberalism. The Burned Furs in the end proved themselves to be unnecessary, because conservatism in the fandom never died, it just more or less went underground, the way they wished the overt sexuality dominating the fandom would. Really, what they were pissed about was the fact that furs with their views weren't the top dogs. They wrote some good material on how the unchecked tolerance in the fandom could potentially hurt the fandom, and the object of its passion, anthro art. The problem is that message got lost in the rest of their crap.

Personally, I agree with a lot of their principles, but their practices made the cause self-defeating.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 9, 2007)

So, I've heard 'burned furs' before, but know nothing of the site/principles/whatever.

So they basically hated furry pr0nz and the likes? Cus it makes the fandom look bad?

lol. The way I see it -- do what you want. No one is going to think absolutely positive of anyone for being a fur, regardless of any overabundance or absence of furry porn and sex and hedonism....

Life is a cup of tea. So drink up while it's still warm. 
... unless it's iced tea. Then, drink it before the ice melts.....

Isn't there some kind of saying about life and tea? dammit.. even if there was, I'm sure it doesn't apply here.
bah.. whatever.


----------



## rowanwand (Mar 10, 2007)

EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Mr. Hampster doesn't want to become his animal because HIS ANIMAL IS A F*CKING HAMPSTER!!!



Hahahahahahahahahahaha*gigglesnort*hahahaha.

Wow.  Just wow.

I wouldn't mind being a hamster.  But only if it were like...Hamtaro hamsters or something, you know, hamsters that could talk and run around all day out of their cages cause they're intelligent super hamsters, and still be back in time for afternoon sunflower seeds.

/yes I watched Hamtaro
//get the f*ck over it


----------



## Rostam The Grey (Mar 10, 2007)

I want to be a dragon hamster! A hamster that breathes fire! So I can lite up any kids that grab me by the tail!


----------



## verix (Mar 11, 2007)

I'm an anthropomorphic toaster with a five foot penis. No seriously, you guys. I really, really connect with The Brave Little Toaster. In fact I was him in a past life.


----------



## Bokracroc (Mar 11, 2007)

I'm an MP3, my FA profile says so!


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 11, 2007)

rowanwand said:
			
		

> EternalUndeath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hamtaro.....uhh! :x





*Ahem*

MY FURSONA IS BETTER THEN YOURS COZ IT B A DR4GON AND IT FLIES N BREATHS FIRE ON PEOPLE5 N YOUR FURSONA SUX BECAUSE ITS B A HAMSTER N HAMSTERS SUX N DRAGONS R BETTER SO SHUT UP!!2!@


:lol:


----------



## EternalUndeath (Mar 12, 2007)

Alright, first I feel I must apologize to thegreathampster for getting her gender wrong (you must admit, however, that telling a person's gender just by what he/she says is a real bitch to do).

Second - no, grimfang, BF is... _was_... not anti-porn. They just thought (and I agree with them) that no one who isn't looking for it should be able to come across it inadvertantly. They also said that anything involving plushophelia or bestiality should be separated completely from the fandom. And they were right - if you're into that (not you specifically, I'm just speaking to the general audiance) kind of stuff, we don't need to know about it. It has nothing to do with anthropomorphism in art and makes the entire fandom look like some sort of perv convention to the mundanes.

Oh, and getting back to *Mrs.* hampster - You're wrong, I don't hate myself. I just hate you and people like you that talk s*it about something they don't understand. Call me a hypocrite all you like, your opinion of me doesn't matter in the slightest, but don't start spouting off about my feelings towards mysef or anyone else without any facts to base your ravings off of.

Have a nice day


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 12, 2007)

EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Second - no, grimfang, BF is... _was_... not anti-porn. They just thought (and I agree with them) that no one who isn't looking for it should be able to come across it inadvertantly. They also said that anything involving plushophelia or bestiality should be separated completely from the fandom. And they were right - if you're into that (not you specifically, I'm just speaking to the general audiance) kind of stuff, we don't need to know about it. It has nothing to do with anthropomorphism in art and makes the entire fandom look like some sort of perv convention to the mundanes.



Like there isn't a fandom with obsessive whackjobs. You're going to find people with fetishes and weird hobbies in their obsessive hobbies no matter what fandom you run across.


----------



## 1337intellect (Mar 12, 2007)

[size=x-small]This may be, but you must admit, there is reason for the stereotypes that are placed upon furrs. I mean, there has to be some reason why people believe these things, doesn't there?[/size]


----------



## Arsonos (Mar 12, 2007)

I've got to say this has got to be the stragest flamewar I've ever seen...


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 12, 2007)

Arsonos said:
			
		

> I've got to say this has got to be the stragest flamewar I've ever seen...



I think the strangest flamewar is the people jumping ship from FA to FAP because "cub porn" is wrong even though FAP allows it too. I'm quite sure someone would enjoy seeing "cub" in big bold letters on the front page (which shows up regardless if you're logged in or not).

My favorite is the paid features option. I hardly think the person who owns the site has any real experience with accounting to even start rocking that boat. I'm sure a nice little tip to the IRS would have that place shut down in a heartbeat once the person decides to start selling services.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 12, 2007)

EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Alright, first I feel I must apologize to thegreathampster for getting her gender wrong (you must admit, however, that telling a person's gender just by what he/she says is a real bitch to do).
> 
> Second - no, grimfang, BF is... _was_... not anti-porn. They just thought (and I agree with them) that no one who isn't looking for it should be able to come across it inadvertantly. They also said that anything involving plushophelia or bestiality should be separated completely from the fandom. And they were right - if you're into that (not you specifically, I'm just speaking to the general audiance) kind of stuff, we don't need to know about it. It has nothing to do with anthropomorphism in art and makes the entire fandom look like some sort of perv convention to the mundanes.
> 
> ...



I know I'm not helping this topic in its death by replying, but thanks for the info about BF. I can see your point. It's like, I shouldn't have to see straight porn when I'm looking at stuff.

.. maybe a little different xP

But, yes. Porn is porn. However, bestiality somehow pushes (or exceeds) those very outer walls of acceptance by society... actually, I think it's illegal. And bestiality rings do get shut down, so I guess that puts a community, as a whole, at risk. That would suck if FA got shut down in such a manner.

I wonder if normal people (lol) consider furry porn (just anthro) a form of bestiality... >_>

Hm.. well, as long as I don't see anything too crazy, I think I'm ok... but I'm sort of a kink myself, so... yaa.


----------



## Wolfblade (Mar 12, 2007)

Grimfang said:
			
		

> That would suck if FA got shut down in such a manner.



Laws don't apply to drawings. Nothing depicted in a drawing can get the site in trouble, content-wise.



			
				Grimfang said:
			
		

> I wonder if normal people (lol) consider furry porn (just anthro) a form of bestiality... >_>



That's the thing. Many do. So, for all the flailing from people within the fandom to separate plushie and zoo and whatever the fuck else, its all quite pointless in that "normal people" are ALWAYS going to view the furry fandom as freaks. Children's cartoons (something most "normal people" will ALWAYS see anthro animals as) + Sex = perverted freak.

And I've said it before, but again, I have very rarely seen people who are into fetishes trying to say that the fetish they like is a defining aspect of furry. The people who insist on inextricably linking "Furry" with bizzarre sex acts are far more often than not the people who are denouncing those sex acts and not the people doing them.


----------



## Satoshi (Mar 12, 2007)

..I like being human :(
'cause I'm squishy 
and I have thumbs :D


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 12, 2007)

I have thumbs!  But i'm not squishy...v.v

well...I can be squishy...but when squished I become...not...squishy....yeah...


----------



## Satoshi (Mar 12, 2007)

like bread C: 
though..
bread doesn't have thumbs :C


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Mar 12, 2007)

no..not like bread, only 1 part of me can be squishy...if left unsquished x.x

I wanna be squishy though v.v


----------



## Satoshi (Mar 12, 2007)

ouu ;o i see :V
eat bread
it'll make you squishy :BB


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 13, 2007)

EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Oh, and getting back to *Mrs.* hampster - You're wrong, I don't hate myself. I just hate you and people like you that talk s*it about something they don't understand. Call me a hypocrite all you like, your opinion of me doesn't matter in the slightest, but don't start spouting off about my feelings towards myself or anyone else without any facts to base your ravings off of.


Butt hurt, much? 

Ok, so you're looking for a source? Here:



			
				EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> *sigh* Yet another pointless argument thread (although, I admit being relieved that I'm not the one who posted it for once). You want a _real_ website? www.burnedfurs.mv.com. There.
> Oh, and btw, YOU'RE ALL HUMAN. END OF STORY. MOVE ON. Not that I enjoy that fact. *Given a choice, I'd become a dragon in a heartbeat. I just have to accept the fact that no such choice exists and that I simply have to live with this disgustingly soft greggim body whether I like it or not.* Now that I've said my piece, I shall depart. Good day.



What I see here is "I wish I was a dragon because I hate my human self". 
That means you hate yourself because you want to be a mythical creature, yet you come and rant about "YOU'RE ALL HUMAN. END OF STORY. MOVE ON." to folks who wish or even think they were an animal, like you. You're full of lulz. :lol:

And also, you're going to hate someone you don't know on a forum because they disagree with you? Hahahahahahahahahahaha! :lol:



			
				EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> *Mrs.* hampster



Once again, wrong. I'm _*MISS*_ Hamster. I'm not married. 



			
				EternalUndeath said:
			
		

> Have a nice day



Kinda funny how you end each response with an "I shall depart. Good day", "good bye", or "have a nice day" as if your leaving this topic yet you keep on coming back. I'm guessing you like the butt hurt, eh? :lol:


----------



## 1337intellect (Mar 13, 2007)

[size=x-small]Get over yourself. You're not funny. However, you are succeeding at being a complete ass.[/size]


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 13, 2007)

1337intellect said:
			
		

> [size=x-small]Get over yourself. You're not funny. However, you are succeeding at being a complete ass.[/size]



Are you still suffering from butthurt over me ruining your thread? Awww, you want a bottle? How about a diaper change?


----------



## 1337intellect (Mar 13, 2007)

[size=x-small]Fuck you, asshole. If you think there's nothing wrong with the way you're acting, then tell me what you thinkg is so great about it.[/size]


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 13, 2007)

1337intellect said:
			
		

> [size=x-small]Fuck you, asshole. If you think there's nothing wrong with the way you're acting, then tell me what you think is so great about it.[/size]



:lol::lol::lol::lol:

I just make fun of weenies, like you. Comments like that make my job worth wild. Hahahahaha!


----------



## 1337intellect (Mar 13, 2007)

[size=x-small]Take it to Totse.[/size]


----------



## thegreathamster (Mar 13, 2007)

Naw, its more fun here.


----------



## Damaratus (Mar 13, 2007)

It appears that this particular thread may have run its course.  Will be locking it for further review.  Some of you will be receiving warnings as well for improper behavior on the forums.


----------

