# Sooo... what's wrong with Sonic art and porn? o.o;



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 7, 2012)

I don't claim to know a lot about it. I don't know exactly what's going on. But I've been noticing some rather talented artists saying they're being messaged about removing all their Sonic art for "underaged art", even when they characters have been "aged up" to meet the acceptable minimum age requirements. Something about "all characters in the Sonic Universe being under 18", when some of them clearly are ABOVE 18 (Vanilla, who has a 6 year old daughter comes to mind right off. And Rouge is under 18? ...Really?)

I also noticed that one of my favorite Sonic artists, Toyjo, was suspended. I'm "guessing" it was over his art, but once again, I don't know. I'm looking for some answers though, and curious as to what the admins and mods have to say on the subject. If what the general consensus says is true, and FA management is picking on Sonic fanart simply because they don't like it, are we moving into the Nazi era here on FA, where art types are chosen based on the mood of the moment and flagged, and the artist who posted it banned?

Underage art is banned on FA... and yet I've been seeing a lot of underaged art here, and none of it has been Sonic art. If this is going to be done to people drawing Sonic art, it needs to either be done completely and universally, or not at all, otherwise it's just picking on people. I nearly called for a complete censure of MLP art, since they all appear to be underaged, but apparently their canon says they're old enough. But what about all the other fanart on the site? Can the management accurately place ages on all the characters drawn here, and are they even now going around flagging art and issuing removal notices? ...Why don't I think so?

I'll repeat what I said someplace else. The furry fandom was founded and is mostly based on the combination of imagination and freedom of expression. If either of those is removed from the fandom, then it simply becomes someone's personal plaything, and no longer the fandom that it was in the beginning. If artists are going to be censored purely based on their likes and dislikes (especially about something as goofy as Sonic art!) then what's next? It's wrong (IF that is what's happening) to censor or harass someone for drawing or liking a certain kind of art, especially if they're harming no one and actually have a decent following of people who ENJOY said art.


----------



## Zenia (Sep 7, 2012)

There was a big post about it on the forums here. 

It is that the original Sonic style (big heads, small limbs) make the characters look underaged or something. I am not into the fandom at all, so I don't know how true that is. If people draw the characters in their own style, as long as they are of age, it should be ok.


----------



## SpazMan (Sep 7, 2012)

They're taking down even the artists who try to "Age them up". 

Being a Sonic artist myself, I'm extremely bothered by this. You, sir, speak sense.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 7, 2012)

Currently there is a large volume of tickets being processed right now. One of the things that comes with so many users being helped/addressed is that sometimes a specific content sees a lot of removals simply because of the volume of tickets being processed. It doesn't mean we have an issue with the content or are banning it all together. It is a consequence of many tickets being handled. That said let me make it clear that Fur Affinity is not banning Sonic Art or Sonic Porn. However there are still many artists who have content that does not appear aged up enough or appears simply underage. Those people have been asked to remove that content and some of them are...well not taking it too well. We are trying to work things out with people and help them understand but if people reduce themselves to being uncivil, and talking to the public instead of trying to engage in polite dialogue with the administration there is little we can do.


----------



## CannonFodder (Sep 7, 2012)

Considering the last few times this thread has popped up it was people exaggerating about the extend of the sonic cub porn ban I highly doubt that Fa is taking down even aged up stuff.  The sonic canon style porn ban has been in effect for months and ever since then there's been several people who exxagerate it and cause a scare.  The last time people were freaking out claiming Fa was banning all sonic stuff and even though the staff said otherwise it took days for everyone to calm down.

Tl:dr; I'm calling bs.


----------



## ThreeDawg (Sep 7, 2012)

Just take down your Sonic work here, post it on InkBunny, and let your fans know it is over there now.

Problem solved. No need to make a stink about this guys!


----------



## Ozriel (Sep 7, 2012)

Not the art, just the porn. 

If you see any underage porn on FA, report it instead of throwing a tizzy of "if so-and-so is doing it then it must be okay for me to do it".


----------



## Summercat (Sep 7, 2012)

[19:17] <+Summer|away> I don't know how many times I have to say "Porn of Sonic the Hedgehog characters who are canonically 17 or younger isn't allowed unless they've been visibly aged. Since their original styles don't allow for that, the 'classic' and 'sa2' aren't allowed for porn of those underaged characters."


----------



## Hunter (Sep 7, 2012)

When ever you touch on something personal , emotion will tend to override rationality , most concerned are young and hate being told what to do .
Don't expect them to think rationally , it can't be help , adults lean from experience how to handle thees thing , talk them out and be objective.
Anytime you take something away , someone is going to get angry , even if it's for the greater good .


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 7, 2012)

Hunter said:


> When ever you touch on something personal , emotion will tend to override rationality , most concerned are young and hate being told what to do .
> Don't expect them to think rationally , it can't be help , adults lean from experience how to handle thees thing , talk them out and be objective.
> Anytime you take something away , someone is going to get angry , even if it's for the greater good .



I'd like to chime in on this and say that this is often a case with these issues. People really don't like being told what to do. They dislike it just as much as we dislike having to tell people something they work on isn't allowed on our site. That said it's not just younger people who lash out in fits of anger before really giving it time to think. A lot of adults do that as well.


----------



## NiGHTS4life (Sep 7, 2012)

ThreeDawg said:


> Just take down your Sonic work here, post it on InkBunny, and let your fans know it is over there now.
> 
> Problem solved. No need to make a stink about this guys!



It's not that easy.  Inkbunny has a double standard when it comes to mature human art.


----------



## NiGHTS4life (Sep 7, 2012)

This has to be FA biggest fuck up to date.  Let's hope that nothing will happen.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 7, 2012)

NiGHTS4life said:


> This has to be FA biggest fuck up to date.  Let's hope that nothing will happen.



If I may inquire, what do you mean by this? Could be a little more specific? I am deeply interested in what you mean by "this" ...what is "This?" that you speak of, and why is a "fuck up?"


----------



## Hunter (Sep 7, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> I'd like to chime in on this and say that this is often a case with these issues. People really don't like being told what to do. They dislike it just as much as we dislike having to tell people something they work on isn't allowed on our site. That said it's not just younger people who lash out in fits of anger before really giving it time to think. A lot of adults do that as well.



no argument here , maturate is a variable attribute so to speak . 
Note .. if they where mature , they wouldn't be drawing that sort of thing  "no offense"  .

handling so many different personalities is rather tricky , you have to convince em it's there choice  , if your going to be taking something away you have to give something back even if it just moral .
example , "in order to keep the site up and free as well as to avoid legal prosecution we regret that we  have to enforce the following policies , we are grateful for the sacrifices you are making and we would be happy to help you with finding alternate hosting for your material."

if your nice , understanding and give something back , it makes the pill much easier to swallow .


----------



## Zenia (Sep 7, 2012)

NiGHTS4life said:


> It's not that easy.  Inkbunny has a double standard when it comes to mature human art.


So? What is the problem then? Aren't the Sonic guys all animal people? There aren't any humans are there? Except the fat evil guy... and who wants porn of him anyway?

Post on So Furry then. They allow cub and humans.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 7, 2012)

Hunter said:


> no argument here , maturate is a variable attribute so to speak .
> Note .. if they where mature , they wouldn't be drawing that sort of thing  "no offense"  .
> 
> handling so many different personalities is rather tricky , you have to convince em it's there choice  , if your going to be taking something away you have to give something back even if it just moral .
> ...



Lets not judge people too much on what they are into. There have been several people into that content, found to have some pieces not grown up enough but were very mature about it. In reverse there are and have been people into very mature content that act very immaturely when faced with being asked to follow the rules of the site. It comes down the individual. That said when people take up issue with certain things we do try to explain to them why thing are this way.

When we have to ask people to remove pictures of their game collections, gun collections, myspace-type photography, etc we do try to explain that we have a bandwidth issue of sorts. See in order to fund this site it comes out of pocket of the owner as well as from ads. When you are a site that allows for porn you find your ad potential to be very limited. Source of paying for the site becomes tricky. So we have restrictions on content such as photography to prevent people using us like they use Photobucket and keep FA as more of an Art oriented site. We also do try to make suggestions. If you really want to show of your pride and joy (be it a wonderful car you worked hard to get, a collection of stuffed animals, toys from all over, etc) you can create a hosting account elsewhere and link it to your FA profile information. When you update it you can make a journal telling people "Hey I just got some new things in my collection go check it out!".

If you find that for example you cannot upload some of your porn because it falls into the under-age you can always upload to a site like Inkbunny, and leave a link in your main profile info telling people that you have other things on "X" site. Cannot be too specific and you cannot load up submissions just to link to a under-age porn pic but still..there are ways to link people to things you cannot have here without breaking the rules and in doing so making everyone happy.

Unfortunately while many people are happy to take our suggestions others are not so much. When tempers fly and people get bits and pieces of information that may or may not make be accurate it can become near impossible to please people who have worked themselves into a frenzy.


----------



## Hunter (Sep 7, 2012)

Trpdwarf that's pretty much what i was trying to suggest , only you said it better .

i had some pictures that qualified as random stuff i owned removed and i was fine with it , i was a tad peeved when some of my artwork was pulled because some of the background came from public domain sources .
that would have gone way better if it wasn't done in such a heavy handed way , it felt so arbitrary , so i understand fully what thees ppl are feeling , almost violated .

oh and there are probably those out there fanning the flames for there own entertainment.


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> ...I highly doubt that Fa is taking down even aged up stuff. .



RaianOnzika is being threatened with suspension despite he put up his guide to the aged up characters (http://www.furaffinity.net/full/5456025/).


----------



## Hunter (Sep 8, 2012)

GamerFox said:


> RaianOnzika is being threatened with suspension despite he put up his guide to the aged up characters (http://www.furaffinity.net/full/5456025/).


that's a pretty big player , this isn't  going to end with out unnecessary drama.


----------



## NiGHTS4life (Sep 8, 2012)

Zenia said:


> So? What is the problem then? Aren't the Sonic guys all animal people? There aren't any humans are there? Except the fat evil guy... and who wants porn of him anyway?
> 
> Post on So Furry then. They allow cub and humans.


I hope that by tommorrow morning, this whole issue is resolved and everything will be back to normal.


----------



## CobraMcJingleballs (Sep 8, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> That said let me make it clear that Fur Affinity is not banning Sonic Art or Sonic Porn...Those people have been asked to remove that content and some of them are...well not taking it too well. We are trying to work things out with people and help them understand but if people reduce themselves to being uncivil, and talking to the public instead of trying to engage in polite dialogue with the administration there is little we can do.



Ah, but you have effectively banned Sonic Porn that looks like Sonic (see Summercat's statement below.)  It is rather arrogant of the staff here to dare to tell artists drawing fan art not to make it look like the characters they are trying to represent.  To refuse is called artistic integrity.  It would be like saying, we ban trees that look like trees, draw trees the way *WE* want.  I also am *HIGHLY* doubtful about the way admins work with people.  I have been suspended twice, no prior warnings giving.  One suspension even lied and said I was warned repeatedly, wha?  For disclosure, one was a censored pic of sonic (pg rated) because the admin knew ridiculously what was behind the big black censor bar.  The other was a feral pic of bambi with horns and a character from the 2nd movie where he was growing to adulthood, because I guess like Sonic, some characters are just too cute to be adult, despite what actually happened in the movie.  So are you working or suspending people.  From my own treatment, I believe the latter, which is what I am hearing.



Ozriel said:


> Not the art, just the porn.
> If you see any underage porn on FA, report it instead of throwing a tizzy of "if so-and-so is doing it then it must be okay for me to do it".



Plz....some of us are not narcs.  "Underaged" is a subjective term, and since irl you have to card (report) everyone who looks UNDER 40! then the whole under 18 rule is utterly ridiculous.  It could ban anything cute, anything cartoony (since big heads and eyes are neotenous traits and almost all cartoons have them), and can even ban adult characters with small breasts (which is one of the standards applied to sonic - Where's the feminist outrage at that one?)



Summercat said:


> [19:17] <+Summer|away> I don't know how many times I have to say "Porn of Sonic the Hedgehog characters who are canonically 17 or younger isn't allowed unless they've been visibly aged. Since their original styles don't allow for that, the 'classic' and 'sa2' aren't allowed for porn of those underaged characters."



Might I ask why this hidden rule exists?  Dragoneer himself said 2 years ago applying human ages to cartoon, funny, and feral animals was ridiculous.  The note is still perserved on furryleaks for anyone who wants to look.  I specifically used Sonic as an example.  So why the change?  Also why the non-canon opinion that these characters do not age, since Sonic cannon-ly has birthdays.

Probably not going to look for your responses.  The rules of FA should really just state, we're FA admins, we do what we want, with a little picture of Cartmen there for emphasis.  Rules here don't have to make sense and don't even seem be followed.  By the way, I love to follow the rules of the boards I am on.  But this is the only site with totally subjective rules, and I feel not like a member, but someone who at any moment could be shot by the staff.  That is how unwelcome you make people feel here.


----------



## Ozriel (Sep 8, 2012)

lol Narcs. I haven't heard that word in awhile.


----------



## MasterSkadu (Sep 8, 2012)

Soo...when a person style is compared to age...how will you determine what is ok and no ok then?


----------



## hera (Sep 8, 2012)

I think whatever rules the site has should apply to everyone, but apparently that's not happening. I hate to say this but the admins are not being fair across the board.

I sent a ticket about a few months ago about this pokemon picture (NSFW) http://www.furaffinity.net/view/8137687/ 
To me this is underage because the depiction of her tiny breasts and small frame.

This is what I was told from an admin that has a pokemon name at that: SSJ3Mewtwo

_"The most this can be classified as would be feral art that has sexual content. At present FA doesn't forbid images of feral unevolved pokemon from depiction in sexual situations or other mature content."

Closing the ticket.	

_*So Pokemons are feral but Sonic isn't? *_

And then there was this picture which is Ziggs, another video game character. I sent another ticket.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/7398598/ (NSFW)

This was the reply from yet again SSJ3Mewtwo

"The style is a bit questionable, but the character portrayed is not a minor, according to their story canon. This picture is acceptable."

Closing the ticket.	

__*That's funny, I don't recall Sonic ever depicted as a minor either, yet that's getting banned?
*__
*You can't have it both ways admins! Either ban it all. or don't ban it!*_


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

I dunno 'bout all this.  You'd think if something like this were affecting a good chunk of the userbase that there'd be some kinda official announcement about it.  Or a change to the AUP.  Or SOMETHING!  'cuz I mean if even people who draw "Sonic the Generic Anthro"-style characters is gettin' the axe...  o.o

Sidenote!





hera said:


> That's funny, I don't recall Sonic ever depicted as a minor either, yet that's getting banned?


I think Sonic is like 15 in the games.  That's considered a "minor" in like... I think every state in the US.  But Knuckles is 16.  And I guess Shadow is physically at least 50 but seems about 15 or 16 due to stasis? (No clue on that one.)  But I guess that's kind of irrelevant since Summercat said "17 or older."  x:


----------



## Zenia (Sep 8, 2012)

MasterSkadu said:


> Soo...when a person style is compared to age...how will you determine what is ok and no ok then?


"I shall not today attempt further to define the  kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand  description ["hard-core pornography"]; and perhaps I could never succeed  in intelligibly doing so. But *I know it when I see it*, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that. _[Emphasis added.]"_
â€”Justice Potter Stewart


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Zenia said:


> "I shall not today attempt further to define the  kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand  description ["hard-core pornography"]; and perhaps I could never succeed  in intelligibly doing so. But *I know it when I see it*, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that. _[Emphasis added.]"_
> â€”Justice Potter Stewart



can I get a link to that source? That sounds very lovely and I'd like to investigate further.


----------



## apollisoffa (Sep 8, 2012)

I wonder if the admins realize that MLP is actually under aged? Guess they don't care! Oh wait, that's right, admins just ban what they feel like most of the time. Most likely two admins or even one were rage fitting about sonic stuff, and instead of banning the obvious cub stuff, they choose to get rid of pretty much all of it.

The bias here is just... so stupid. Not to mention a lot of the characters in sonic are ages 18. Yes, some are younger, but despite the fact the characters are drawn OLDER, characters do get older, they don't stay the same over and over, and there are even characters who draw in the typical 'sonic style'. It's a style, that's it, a type of style to be drawn in. To ban a style to draw in, that's just retarded. If there are comments, statements, etc pointing out the character is ages 18+, and so forth, then there is no reason to ragefit and ban.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (Sep 8, 2012)

I learned something from this thread...People are very protective of their porn. Disturbingly so...


----------



## apollisoffa (Sep 8, 2012)

People are protective of their artistic freedoms and rights against not being bias against. People are upset one area of art is being locked down, when there are other things obviously wrong, that are okay because an admin happens to be a brony, or loves mlp.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

apollisoffa said:


> People are protective of their artistic freedoms and rights against not being bias against. People are upset one area of art is being locked down, when there are other things obviously wrong, that are okay because an admin happens to be a brony, or loves mlp.



Furaffinity is private property with public access. Users don't have 'rights'. Nor is anyone impinging on artistic freedom. You can draw whatever you want, but if it fails the AUP, please post it elsewhere. 

Also, link to some hard proof that all MLP characters are underaged - or at least the Mane Six.


----------



## apollisoffa (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Furaffinity is private property with public access. Users don't have 'rights'. Nor is anyone impinging on artistic freedom. You can draw whatever you want, but if it fails the AUP, please post it elsewhere.
> 
> Also, link to some hard proof that all MLP characters are underaged - or at least the Mane Six.




It's one thing to remove something when it fails the AUP, but it's another thing to remove something that the admins/mods whatever just don't like it because it doesn't suit their personal taste. Also you link some hard proof that every Sonic character is also underage, and I want to hear it from a sega source.

As for the under age pony thing, sure. Next time the animation artist is on, I'll have him type something up, and then you can look in the show credits for his name and there you go. The point however still stands, claiming that an ART STYLE is against AUP, is stupid. Blatent under age stuff, yes, but when a title clearly state the character is over the age of 18, the body matches, and doesn't look under age, then obviously it's not under age. Also yes, users to have 'rights' when it comes to things that are NOT against the AUP being removed because an admin is butthurt about art they just dislike.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

...why do people automatically assume that admins are butthurt about art they dislike, and that's the reason for removals? *shakes his head sadly*


----------



## Contrast (Sep 8, 2012)

I've got a question about underage anthro characters. Let's take Flora from TwoKinds as an example. Technically she's only 11 years old. That makes her underage. But she's a fully matured Keidran (they only live to be about 21 years old), so she must be about 40 in Keidran years.
Would art of Flora be considered underage or not?
Just curious.


----------



## Zenia (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> can I get a link to that source? That sounds very lovely and I'd like to investigate further.


Sure... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

It was something I originally heard on Law and Order: SVU (I believe) when one of the characters asked another about defining child porn (as they had received some questionable photos anonymously at the station). "I know it when I see it."


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Contrast said:


> I've got a question about underage anthro characters. Let's take Flora from TwoKinds as an example. Technically she's only 11 years old. That makes her underage. But she's a fully matured Keidran (they only live to be about 21 years old), so she must be about 40 in Keidran years.
> Would art of Flora be considered underage or not?
> Just curious.



This is a nice way to bring up a point I've been mulling over for a while. That is, "You can't make rules that cover everything; at some point, someone has to use judgement and not follow The Book."

In the case of Keidran from Twokinds, I would compare them to similarly-developed humans. Do they act mature, are they physically mature, etc. Because of their (nearly fully) humanoid builds in Tom Fisbach's style of artwork, it is very easy to tell if a Keidran is an adult or not. The difficulty here is reconciling this with US law, which is freaking murky as hell (And FA's overriding concern with regards to legality). 

So the followup question would be "If porn of Keidran is okay, why not that of Mobians?" The defining difference, for me, is that of mentality and development compared to other characters. The physical development can be visually obvious, but mental development is not. Combine this with the timeline fast forward in that one StH comic story arc where there were NO physical design changes to any of the main cast, though they were long since 'adults', and you have things at best on the border, but averaging on the 'unacceptable'.

Further, the above statement makes the assumption on the maturation rate of Mobians vs Humans - and my limited understanding of such is that Mobians grow up at the same pace as humans do. It's hard to say for certain, because the entire series suffers from JRPG Hyper-Able Children syndrome. You know, where a character in his 30s is 'An Old Man', and aside from the Old Man the next oldest character isn't even 20 yet? I'm looking at *you*, Tales of Vesperia. (But that's getting into my hatred of lazy and incomplete worldbuilding)

Since mentality is hard to show, and in the original styles you cannot age up Mobian characters, we have some issues with porn in the original styles with the canonically underaged characters.

Basically, in TwoKinds, Flora acts like a mature adult in Standard Generic Fantasy Amnesia Plot #4. In Sonic the Hedgehog, we effectively have Red Dawn: The Furry Anime.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Zenia said:


> Sure... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it
> 
> It was something I originally heard on Law and Order: SVU (I believe) when one of the characters asked another about defining child porn (as they had received some questionable photos anonymously at the station). "I know it when I see it."



Thanks. I'll give it a read when I can ( 25 minutes till gohome time, here), because I think the administration could use a hefty dose of pounding that thought into heads.


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Furaffinity is private property with public access. Users don't have 'rights'. Nor is anyone impinging on artistic freedom. You can draw whatever you want, but if it fails the AUP, please post it elsewhere.



Actually, I predicted that this comment was going to be the answer that would eventually come out of one of the admins here. "Fuck you, this is our site. If you don't like it, leave." ...that's how I read that. You really need to work on those people skills, or at the very least, stop talking to people in relation to the site; this sort of crap doesn't help anything.

Telling people that this is a privately owned site and they can leave if they don't like it will end with FA having nothing on it but the exact pieces of art the management currently likes (as the management changes, so too will those types and pieces of art), the few people with the exact same tastes and interest as the current management, and the artists who draw that art... and nothing and no one else. 

I would like to at least hope that's not the end goal of FA, or it's administration.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> Actually, I predicted that this comment was going to be the answer that would eventually come out of one of the admins here. "Fuck you, this is our site. If you don't like it, leave." ...that's how I read that. You really need to work on those people skills, or at the very least, stop talking to people in relation to the site; this sort of crap doesn't help anything.
> 
> Telling people that this is a privately owned site and they can leave if they don't like it will end with FA having nothing on it but the exact pieces of art the management currently likes (as the management changes, so too will those types and pieces of art), the few people with the exact same tastes and interest as the current management, and the artists who draw that art... and nothing and no one else.
> 
> I would like to at least hope that's not the end goal of FA, or it's administration.



FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF FIREFOX ATE MY COMMENT WHEN I CLICKED THE WRONG BUTTON

And I'm going all AKJWB:AKLJB FK:ABW:AKLJAWW from too much sammich and energy drink atop of body wanting to sleep to retype.

Basically:

Non-owners and non-representatives have very few rights on private property, and the above is my knee-jerk response to claims of "trampling on rights of the users". I hate that arguement with the burning passion of a thousand blazing suns. 

However, yes, we understand without the users there isn't a site. We do keep the users in mind, you know.

Also, please don't assume that if an admin removes Item X, that they have a hateboner for Item X. Especially if Item X is against the rules (implicitly/explicitly). 

And to answer your other thing, admins do not make rules willy-nilly, or unilaterally. Else I'd be banning people left and right for, despite many warnings, continuing to refuse to be an otter. And that would be just silly.


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

apollisoffa said:


> People are protective of their artistic freedoms and rights against not being bias against. People are upset one area of art is being locked down, when there are other things obviously wrong, that are okay because an admin happens to be a brony, or loves mlp.



Actually, I did a check on this when I found out that Sonic art was being run through and seemed to be systematically banned. 


First, let me say that apparently the MLP main (lol, Summercat said "mane". SO Brony) characters are not underaged. According to quotes from the creator, along with some rather detailed research and such I found on the subject, they're about 4 years old in horse years, which equals around 18-22 years old in human years. 


Now... why someone would think 20 year old ponies made sense for a children's cartoon, or why ponies that age are still learning basic life lessons than 4 to 14 year old children are learning is beyond me. Maybe they're slow. the creator described them as "childlike". *shrugs*


And now, a question. There ARE a bunch of the younger ponies... ponies who are visibly smaller, younger and in some cases haven't even gained marks on their rumps... in that cartoon. Is there any art of said ponies, and has it been removed? Are the people drawing it being messaged about it? Or is the knowledge that touching MLP in any real way here on the site being likely to cause an avalanche of rage keeping the mods from bothering those artists who draw them?


Why is art like this: 


Applebloom:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/7643379/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5596756/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6062651/


Scootaloo:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/8532654/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5657079/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/7049661/


Sweetie Belle:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/7019311/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/8513280/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5776624/ (omg this...)


Allowed on this site? Aren't those all "fillies", or little kid ponies? These were found with a simple search for the character names, along with a lot of other, similar art. And yet I'd be willing to bet none of these artists have been contacted about these pictures and they obviously haven't been removed. 

My end point would be this. If the management here on FA is going to go, "No underaged art, no exceptions", and then turn and only pick out certain kinds of art... how does that make sense in any way other than to assume they're choosing specific types of art and limiting them? And if they ARE doing such, why not just SAY so, and put an end to it? 

If FA is no longer a safe place for Sonic fanart appreciation, just come out and admit as much, then remove it from the site, just like you did (or *think* you did, apparently) with the babyfurs. I DO understand this is a private site. Really, I do. But this is also a FURRY COMMUNITY. In what way does anyone who runs this place think that people come here to be ostracized and censored? Isn't one of the primary purposes of this fandom to allow the freedom or self expression, and to REMOVE the sense that you're unable to be who you feel you are openly? It almost hurts to see this kind of thing going on here in what I've always felt was a central point in furry socialization online.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> Actually, I did a check on this when I found out that Sonic art was being run through and seemed to be systematically banned.
> 
> 
> First, let me say that apparently the MLP main (lol, Summercat said "mane". SO Brony) characters are not underaged. According to quotes from the creator, along with some rather detailed research and such I found on the subject, they're about 4 years old in horse years, which equals around 18-22 years old in human years.
> ...


no
FA didnt Kick out Babyfurs (actually you are thinking about cub furs who are actually different from baby furs) They only stated "No you cant post Cub porn here, cub art is fine, but no damn cub porn.

some of those images DO violate the AUP, just like how some sonic porn artist are actually still able to have their art up (which also shows that there is a inconsistency on things in this whole subject so I have to assume its a mod that have their own interpretation of the rules towards Sonic porn art that they follow "if the character is canocially underage then any porn art even aged up is a violation". I'm only guess at this as I'm waiting from a replay from an artist who I colored some of their sonic porn art to see if they were contacted.

I thought this whole issue was over and done with due to the fact you guys pushed that the sonic style could be used if the person found a way to make the characters look older if anything anything outside the sonic style who is also showing the characters aged up is good too. Just I'm hearing from artist getting warnings who dont draw in the sonic style who do draw the chars aged up to what they thought was acceptable.


----------



## CaptainCool (Sep 8, 2012)

So what? You actually need an explanation why porn involving kids is bad? 

The characters are almost all under the age of consent. I really don't get what the issue here is.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 8, 2012)

CaptainCool said:


> So what? You actually need an explanation why porn involving kids is bad?
> 
> The characters are almost all under the age of consent. I really don't get what the issue here is.


the problem is the rules stating: Age up the character
Now it seems that if the character is canonically underage to then which the age up rule would be null and void, no point to it.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> Actually, I did a check on this when I found out that Sonic art was being run through and seemed to be systematically banned.
> 
> 
> First, let me say that apparently the MLP main (lol, Summercat said "mane". SO Brony) characters are not underaged. According to quotes from the creator, along with some rather detailed research and such I found on the subject, they're about 4 years old in horse years, which equals around 18-22 years old in human years.
> ...



Actually, "Mane Six" is the official term for the 6 main characters in FiM. 

Further, just looking through those images you linked, a few don't fall under porn, a few are 'aged up', and one or two of 'em seem questionable to the point I'd want to take a closer look. The Sweetiebell Images are definately beyond the pale, though.

The question does remain: Have these been reported? Has an administrator's attention been brought upon these submissions yet? Just because it's on the site doesn't mean it's allowed. People post Magic the Gathering cards allt he time, and I'm damn certain there's a few floating around from when I was making them (Years ago). However, it doesn't mean it's allowed, it just means the admins haven't seen them yet.


----------



## Kitch (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Also, link to some hard proof that all MLP characters are underaged - or at least the Mane Six.


Lauren Faust herself said the Mane Six are all adults.

As for this, I have no problems with the older characters (essentially, anybody but Tails, Cream, maybe Amy) being depicted in sexual situations in art. Even under normal circumstances, teenagers have sex. And their setting is anything but. (And Bunnie and Antoine are both adults, so banning any porn of them or any other established adult would be an overreach regardless.)

Characters who do not have established ages, but who have features analogous for someone of an older age in their setting, shouldn't be messed with.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Kitch said:


> Lauren Faust herself said the Mane Six are all adults.
> 
> As for this, I have no problems with the older characters (essentially, anybody but Tails, Cream, maybe Amy) being depicted in sexual situations in art. Even under normal circumstances, teenagers have sex. And their setting is anything but. (And Bunnie and Antoine are both adults, so banning any porn of them or any other established adult would be an overreach regardless.)
> 
> Characters who do not have established ages, but who have features analogous for someone of an older age in their setting, shouldn't be messed with.



Congrats, excepting the bit with the 'older underaged characters', you pretty much summed up the Administration's POV. 

(Yes, teens have sex, and yes, highschool coming of age stories I find particularly interesting, but US Law is a bitch and doesn't differentiate between a 4 yearly, a 7 year old, a 14 year old, or 17 year old.)

Herpa Derpa Edit--

RE the Mane Six being adults, I actually know this - but it's fun to see people claim otherwise based on their own assumptions, opinions, and interpretations of other items.


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Basically:
> 
> Non-owners and non-representatives have very few rights on private property, and the above is my knee-jerk response to claims of "trampling on rights of the users". I hate that arguement with the burning passion of a thousand blazing suns.



I think it's at least a semi-valid argument, though I see your view as well. Consider this. You rent an apartment from me. I own the land, the building, the room. You pay me rent, and nothing more. You signed the agreement recognizing that fact. You come home one day to find... I dunno... your collection of beanie babies is out at the curb in a bag. I went in MY room in MY building and put YOUR things out after you came to live there... because I don't like them. Do you have any rights in the matter besides leaving and finding someplace else to live? Of COURSE you do.

It's not a matter of just rules. It's a simple concept of respect and consideration. If a Sonic character is proven to be underage, I ALSO support there being no porn of said character. But if said character isn't such, then they should be open to be drawn in adult situations. As far as I understand it, this isn't the case though. ALL characters are being asked to be removed, and claimed as underaged, even the ones noted as being 18 or older. That, to me, would be like suddenly telling all the furs on the site who have a foot fetish that you want them to take their stupid hobby to some other site or be banned, in those exact words. Insulting.



Summercat said:


> However, yes, we understand without the users there isn't a site. We do keep the users in mind, you know.



I'm sure you don't want the site to go down or to dwindle down to nothing... which is why I started this whole thread, to get people to talk about things somewhat. But beyond simply THINKING about the users, you need to handle them a bit more carefully... even the hostile ones. There's a reason so many people in customer service think it sucks ass. 



Summercat said:


> Also, please don't assume that if an admin removes Item X, that they have a hateboner for Item X. Especially if Item X is against the rules (implicitly/explicitly).



I make no such assumptions, so don't worry on that. I DO know that a LOT of people have a "hateboner" for Sonic style art, though, and I'm making the assumption that at least a few of those people are on the management here. That's all. Not really directing it anywhere; it's a sort of general thing.



Summercat said:


> And to answer your other thing, admins do not make rules willy-nilly, or unilaterally. Else I'd be banning people left and right for, despite many warnings, continuing to refuse to be an otter. And that would be just silly.



This decision... to ban what is basically the majority of Sonic art and porn... FEELS like it was a sort of "spur of the moment" thing. Like some manager here went in and found one image... then decided they didn't have anything else to do but scan the site for other Sonic art and issue notes about it's removal. It's also been brought up before, and had supposedly been settled, by one artists account... and yet they've been hit yet again with removal notices. It's less of a feeling that management is making sudden, random rules, and more of a sensation that old rules are being revisited again and again.

Once more, I'm all for cutting out underaged art of the Sonic characters. BUT. If that art is "aged up" appropriately, and noted as such, and considering the majority of that styles *technically* underaged cast, they should be allowed to be drawn and posted here. (I say "technically" because there are a range of different timelines and sources for the cast of the Sonic Adventure series, along with various other side series, all of which seem to give varying ages based on where you look within those series. It's hard to pin an exact age on most of the characters.)


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

CaptainCool said:


> So what? You actually need an explanation why porn involving kids is bad?
> 
> The characters are almost all under the age of consent. I really don't get what the issue here is.



Who are you asking? WHAT are you asking? What are you even saying?

Kids? You mean like Vanilla, who has a child of her own? Yeah, she seems pretty childish. Maybe you mean Rouge, who is stated to be 18? How about Shadow, who is somewhere in the range of 50 years old, with a sort of Wolverine thing going on from being in stasis?

Are you honestly going to tell me you believe that the majority of the Sonic franchise should be banned from being drawn on FA based on the concept that they're "almost all under the age of consent"? What about the ruling (made by management here) of they're being allowed based on being "aged up" to appear more adult? Does that not work for you? 

Speak up and speak clearly!


----------



## CaptainCool (Sep 8, 2012)

Verin Asper said:


> the problem is the rules stating: Age up the character
> Now it seems that if the character is canonically underage to then which the age up rule would be null and void, no point to it.



All images that I have seen that got removed were indeed AUP violations in my opinion. "Aging up" a character is a pretty straightforward thing to do in my opinion. The proportions change when you grow up for example.
So if the character looks the freaking same as he/she looks in the cartoon or w/e in this weird Sonic "style" then you really can't blame the admins for taking down your stuff.



DracosBlackwing said:


> Who are you asking? WHAT are you asking? What are you even saying?
> 
> Kids? You mean like Vanilla, who has a child of her own? Yeah, she seems pretty childish. Maybe you mean Rouge, who is stated to be 18? How about Shadow, who is somewhere in the range of 50 years old, with a sort of Wolverine thing going on from being in stasis?
> 
> ...



It's funny how you deliberately left out all the characters that are underage according to the sonic canon. You know, like Sonic himself or Tails?
I don't have a problem with the adult characters but please keep the other ones on pedobunny.


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Actually, "Mane Six" is the official term for the 6 main characters in FiM.
> 
> Further, just looking through those images you linked, a few don't fall under porn, a few are 'aged up', and one or two of 'em seem questionable to the point I'd want to take a closer look. The Sweetiebell Images are definately beyond the pale, though.
> 
> The question does remain: Have these been reported? Has an administrator's attention been brought upon these submissions yet? Just because it's on the site doesn't mean it's allowed. People post Magic the Gathering cards allt he time, and I'm damn certain there's a few floating around from when I was making them (Years ago). However, it doesn't mean it's allowed, it just means the admins haven't seen them yet.



I know about the Mane Six thing. I'm just making fun of your Bronyisms. xD Keep a hold on that kneejerk reflex to spaz out that Bronies have when someone expresses they don't understand MLP; it's usually just them being intentionally trollish.

And I have a counter question. 

Did someone report all the Sonic art that's being requested to be removed? ALL of it? SO far I've seen almost 10 people saying ALL their Sonic art has been flagged for deletion, and at least one of them had TONS of it. (one comic series went for close to 35 pages). I find it somewhat hard to believe that someone has reported or brought all of that to a managers attention in such a short period of time.

And so the question is: How did you guys suddenly find out about it all? It would have to be one of two things in my mind. Either it's a witchhunt, in which you search out this kind of art purposefully trying to get rid of it all, or someone who has a real "hateboner" (damn you for sticking that word in my head!) for Sonic art took the time to report literally hundreds of submissions so you would remove them all. Sadly, this fandom being what it is, I can't dismiss either one of those, as drama is the blood that drives the rage filled heart of a furry, and both of these seem to fall under "high drama".


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> You pay me rent, and nothing more.



Money doesn't enter into this unless you send donations, and those should be sent at-will without expectation of recompense.

Further, it is perhaps naÃ¯ve to presume that mods will always act with decorum or apply rules consistently. At the end of the day FA is a private site, of which you are a guest. If you don't like how the person who owns the house handles their affairs, there are other houses to visit.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> I think it's at least a semi-valid argument, though I see your view as well. Consider this. You rent an apartment from me. I own the land, the building, the room. You pay me rent, and nothing more. You signed the agreement recognizing that fact. You come home one day to find... I dunno... your collection of beanie babies is out at the curb in a bag. I went in MY room in MY building and put YOUR things out after you came to live there... because I don't like them. Do you have any rights in the matter besides leaving and finding someplace else to live? Of COURSE you do.



The issue is that a tenant/owner relationship is VERY different. Tenants actually do have rights. A closer analogy would be a privately-owned publicly-accessible park, that can have any rules the owners want. If the owners want to ban RC cars, dogs, beatboxes, Smurfs, and people who are eating hotdogs, then they are perfectly allowed to do so.


> It's not a matter of just rules. It's a simple concept of respect and consideration. If a Sonic character is proven to be underage, I ALSO support there being no porn of said character. But if said character isn't such, then they should be open to be drawn in adult situations. As far as I understand it, this isn't the case though. ALL characters are being asked to be removed, and claimed as underaged, even the ones noted as being 18 or older. That, to me, would be like suddenly telling all the furs on the site who have a foot fetish that you want them to take their stupid hobby to some other site or be banned, in those exact words. Insulting.


The underaged bit was a misunderstanding on the part of the admin who sent out the notes. An example of this was being told by someone that 'Rouge the Bat' was 16. 


> I'm sure you don't want the site to go down or to dwindle down to nothing... which is why I started this whole thread, to get people to talk about things somewhat. But beyond simply THINKING about the users, you need to handle them a bit more carefully... even the hostile ones. There's a reason so many people in customer service think it sucks ass.


Look, you want the admins to be nice and fluffy and buttery? Please try to clamp down on hysteria. I had about 20 people going "THE ADMINS ARE BANNING ALL SONIC ART EVER", despite me, repeatedly, explaining otherwise. I also had to deal with people who started out hostile. Yes, we should be on good professional behavior, but for the love of god remember you get more flies with honey than vinegar.



> I make no such assumptions, so don't worry on that. I DO know that a LOT of people have a "hateboner" for Sonic style art, though, and I'm making the assumption that at least a few of those people are on the management here. That's all. Not really directing it anywhere; it's a sort of general thing.


You may not be making that assumption, but lots of people are going "OH DRAGONEER HATES SONIC ART". I'm just... flabergasted, because as far as I'm aware that's not the case. At all. Of course, I love seeing blanket statements "THE ADMINS ALL HATE SONIC ART" and then the pause after I say "But. Um. I like Sonic porn."



> This decision... to ban what is basically the majority of Sonic art and porn... FEELS like it was a sort of "spur of the moment" thing. Like some manager here went in and found one image... then decided they didn't have anything else to do but scan the site for other Sonic art and issue notes about it's removal. It's also been brought up before, and had supposedly been settled, by one artists account... and yet they've been hit yet again with removal notices. It's less of a feeling that management is making sudden, random rules, and more of a sensation that old rules are being revisited again and again.
> 
> Once more, I'm all for cutting out underaged art of the Sonic characters. BUT. If that art is "aged up" appropriately, and noted as such, and considering the majority of that styles *technically* underaged cast, they should be allowed to be drawn and posted here. (I say "technically" because there are a range of different timelines and sources for the cast of the Sonic Adventure series, along with various other side series, all of which seem to give varying ages based on where you look within those series. It's hard to pin an exact age on most of the characters.)



This isn't a spur of the moment event. It feels like it because the drama exploded so violently, but the rules haven't changed from the LAST time we had a blowup about Sonic the Hedgehog porn. What happened is that we got more admins on, more manpower to answer trouble tickets, and this was an older big one that had been sitting for a while. That's it.

There's no vast conspiracy here. At all. "Never ascribe to malice what could be ascribed to less flattering but innocent reasons".


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

CaptainCool said:


> All images that I have seen that got removed were indeed AUP violations in my opinion. "Aging up" a character is a pretty straightforward thing to do in my opinion. The proportions change when you grow up for example.
> So if the character looks the freaking same as he/she looks in the cartoon or w/e in this weird Sonic "style" then you really can't blame the admins for taking down your stuff.



So you're just someone who dislikes the "Sonic style" of art, and hopes to see it go away. Thanks for clearing that up. don't bother replying, you more or less said it right here.

For the record though, there's nothing wrong with that "weird sonic style". It's what drew those people who draw Sonic art now to draw them as they do, and that *should* be fine. I find the concept that people go looking for things they dislike, bitch endlessly about them, then try to get them removed or sanctioned for their own pleasure to be highly disturbing, though. Maybe try looking at people who DON'T draw Sonic style art? I dunno. Might not work...


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> And so the question is: How did you guys suddenly find out about it all? It would have to be one of two things in my mind. Either it's a witchhunt, in which you search out this kind of art purposefully trying to get rid of it all, or someone who has a real "hateboner" (damn you for sticking that word in my head!) for Sonic art took the time to report literally hundreds of submissions so you would remove them all. Sadly, this fandom being what it is, I can't dismiss either one of those, as drama is the blood that drives the rage filled heart of a furry, and both of these seem to fall under "high drama".



This is a site with thousands of users. Some of them spend hours scouring the site for violations. Some of them look only at one topic and report anything amiss. There is a guy I dubbed 'The Yellow Knight' because all he does is report things labeled 'watersports', when they have nothing to do with pee.

I constantly see tickets with upwards of 50 links, unorganized, from different users. On a good day, they're all the same basic theme/violation.

Whenever I remove something, it is very rarely because I searched it out - usually it is either brought to my attention (via IRC or by ticket, or rarely through browsing other sites), or I see it while browsing the site for my own purposes, or I spot it on the front page because I refresh that constantly. I've got my personal vendettas of certain topics (Screenshots, collection images, non-otters), but there's far too much being reported for me to go out searching for violations.


----------



## CaptainCool (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> So you're just someone who dislikes the "Sonic style" of art, and hopes to see it go away. Thanks for clearing that up. don't bother replying, you more or less said it right here.
> 
> For the record though, there's nothing wrong with that "weird sonic style". It's what drew those people who draw Sonic art now to draw them as they do, and that *should* be fine. I find the concept that people go looking for things they dislike, bitch endlessly about them, then try to get them removed or sanctioned for their own pleasure to be highly disturbing, though. Maybe try looking at people who DON'T draw Sonic style art? I dunno. Might not work...



I don't like the style at all, it is too cartoonish and too simplified for my tastes. But I just ignore the Sonic art, I don't hate it.
I would complain as well if people drew child porn in different styles and uploaded it to FA.


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Money doesn't enter into this unless you send donations, and those should be sent at-will without expectation of recompense.
> 
> Further, it is perhaps naÃ¯ve to presume that mods will always act with decorum or apply rules consistently. At the end of the day FA is a private site, of which you are a guest. If you don't like how the person who owns the house handles their affairs, there are other houses to visit.



Indeed. There are many other houses to visit. ...which just goes back to my statements of "eventually, FA will be nothing but the management, a few like-minded viewers, and the few artists who draw what those people want to see". Since this is an undesirable end result, I think it's not so very naive to assume that the management here would be a bit more considerate.

Let me put it this way. The people who own and run this site owe me NOTHING. This is a known fact. They owe no one else anything who comes here either. ...And yet it is those very same people who MAKE this site into something other than an empty placeholder for art no one feels like posting there for fear of it being sanctioned. If the management takes the mindset that "This is OUR site! If you don't like it get the F**K out!" ... that's exactly what's gonna happen. 

...and then what?


----------



## DracosBlackwing (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Look, you want the admins to be nice and fluffy and buttery? Please try to clamp down on hysteria. I had about 20 people going "THE ADMINS ARE BANNING ALL SONIC ART EVER", despite me, repeatedly, explaining otherwise. I also had to deal with people who started out hostile. Yes, we should be on good professional behavior, but for the love of god remember you get more flies with honey than vinegar.
> 
> There's no vast conspiracy here. At all. "Never ascribe to malice what could be ascribed to less flattering but innocent reasons".



Fair enough. Understand that I'm not trying to be "hysterical". FA is a nice place to view furry art. That's all. So is PawsRU and U-18 Chan. I would *like* to see less drama here, and that's all. And honestly, the concept of "fluffy and buttery admins" makes me laugh so hard I nearly soaked my laptop with the soda I was drinking, so stop it. xD

I also don't think there's any conspiracy here. I just want to get a complete view of what IS going on, BECAUSE of all the people flailing around in journals and whatnot. I would also like to express my views on things here; to try to get people to see what I do from my perspective. If I'm overdoing it a bit, I apologize.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Sep 8, 2012)

Why this argument again, and why with the same cliches from arguments years past?
I haven't seen the users leave in droves over the sonic style. I have seen users leave. I've seen users come in. I've seen users leave for different reasons that have nothing to do with this thread.

Life goes on.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> Indeed. There are many other houses to visit. ...which just goes back to my statements of "eventually, FA will be nothing but the management, a few like-minded viewers, and the few artists who draw what those people want to see". Since this is an undesirable end result, I think it's not so very naive to assume that the management here would be a bit more considerate.



It seems to me like a simple choice; step in-tow with expectations or find somewhere that you agree better with. There will always be furries who aren't into Sonic or whatever seems to be heavily enforced at the time who will continue to post their art on FA - and if for some reason everything becomes a target, then folks who are savvy in ways of the world will have already found themselves new homes. Lamenting about policy is not likely to change it, particularly where...



DracosBlackwing said:


> The people who own and run this site owe me NOTHING. This is a known fact. They owe no one else anything who comes here either.


----------



## ShadowEmberDrake (Sep 8, 2012)

CaptainCool said:


> All images that I have seen that got removed were indeed AUP violations in my opinion. "Aging up" a character is a pretty straightforward thing to do in my opinion. The proportions change when you grow up for example.
> So if the character looks the freaking same as he/she looks in the cartoon or w/e in this weird Sonic "style" then you really can't blame the admins for taking down your stuff.



While it's true a character like Vanilla the Rabbit clearly looks adult, Sonic is a series that spans over several mediums all with different artists and they take different styles and adult characters might not all follow the same example of Vanilla.  From the comics and cartoons the character of Sonic's "Uncle Chuck" comes to mind.  He was as I recall pretty much Sonic with a mustache, but anatomically not any different (other than awesome facial hair) and was an aged man.

So it's sort of hard just to target them out as being underaged based on looks.
Granted a character like Cream would be super easy to tell if she was still young and in which case yeah, it's obvious in that case.

Do you think if every time someone posted porn of a character canonically under 18 that if they stated somewhere in the comment that it's an aged up character it would solve this problem?

Because it seems like that's the only way they can simply because of choosing to use an art style.

Either that or they all have to draw mustaches on all the characters.  Which would become very hilarious and weird.


----------



## ThreeDawg (Sep 8, 2012)

Dear God, is this still going on?

Look, furries, buddies, pals, just DROP this issue! The admins have had their say! Take down your sonic porn, and shuffle it elsewhere. Is this hard? No. Should this hurt your feelings? No. Should this be a violation of your rights, after you agreed to the sites rules when you joined? HELL NO. 

Ergo, be quiet, move your things, or be banhammered.

The only people I see posting here, are not people who are ' Fighting for their rights ', but people who are trying to start a mass exodus from FA, and failing miserably.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

You know, despite the good points I've seen in this thread ("users don't have 'rights'; Furaffinity is a privately-owned public property" being a good one), I'm still a bit confused on the ruling.  If I understand this correctly, "classic/modern"-style _Sonic_ art is now banned because the style makes the characters' ages ambiguous?  Someone cited the example of Flora from _Twokinds_ earlier, who is something like 11 physical years, but a _well_ beyond the "fully-grown Keidran" state, both physically and in the source drawing style. (In short, she's tall and has tits.)  So if I'm understanding this correctly, so long as a character has a "distinctly human shape," where there could be no possible argument as to whether or not they're "of age," their *actual* physical age is completely irrelevant?

For example, let's say someone has... oh, I dunno... a fly character who has a life span of like... five days.  If this character was drawn roughly _like a human being_, with boobs or a penis and whatnot, but was something like two days old, this character would be safe under the AUP? (Yeah, I know that was an absolutely ridiculous example, not to mention "extreme," but I've seen weirder things.  And I'm trying to prove a point besides.  XP)


----------



## ThreeDawg (Sep 8, 2012)

DracosBlackwing said:


> Fair enough. Understand that I'm not trying to be "hysterical". FA is a nice place to view furry art. That's all. So is PawsRU and U-18 Chan. I would *like* to see less drama here, and that's all.
> 
> And yet you ARE causing drama with all this kicking and screaming.....


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> You know, despite the good points I've seen in this thread ("users don't have 'rights'; Furaffinity is a privately-owned public property" being a good one), I'm still a bit confused on the ruling.  If I understand this correctly, "classic/modern"-style _Sonic_ art is now banned because the style makes the characters' ages ambiguous?  Someone cited the example of Flora from _Twokinds_ earlier, who is something like 11 physical years, but a _well_ beyond the "fully-grown Keidran" state, both physically and in the source drawing style. (In short, she's tall and has tits.)  So if I'm understanding this correctly, so long as a character has a "distinctly human shape," where there could be no possible argument as to whether or not they're "of age," their *actual* physical age is completely irrelevant?
> 
> For example, let's say someone has... oh, I dunno... a fly character who has a life span of like... five days.  If this character was drawn roughly _like a human being_, with boobs or a penis and whatnot, but was something like two days old, this character would be safe under the AUP? (Yeah, I know that was an absolutely ridiculous example, not to mention "extreme," but I've seen weirder things.  And I'm trying to prove a point besides.  XP)



Your very weird, strange, yet somewhat erotic humanoid fly porn would be safe. *PORN* of *CERTAIN* characters in hte ORIGINAL/CANON styles for Sonic the Hedgehog is/are not allowed. If you want to draw them in a differing style, and draw them physically mature in said style, sure go ahead and post that to FA.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Well...the same could be said about any Digimon that is a rookie or in-training level. They are considered children, and only Champion level and up are considered in English as Adult.

Point being, the AGE them up argument really means that so long as you are drawing adult artwork of a Sonic universe character you CAN NOT draw them in their ON MODEL design unless you are drawing the characters of Antoine, Bunnie, Rouge, Wave, Storm the Albatross, or Shadow (all characters already 18 or older). Anyone else you draw (Including Sonic himself) you have to break from original model design and change them so that they look aged up and not create a situation of admin discretion. So outside of those few characters (and the already adult characters like Uncle Chuck) the on model Sonic style is banned for Adult art.


----------



## Devious Bane (Sep 8, 2012)

I'm just going to leave this here.
I can't see the difference between these 2 threads honestly.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Devious Bane said:


> I'm just going to leave this here.
> I can't see the difference between these 2 threads honestly.


Neither. Can. I.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Ya know...  That's pretty nice you _FA_ folks actually take into consideration all the things you do before having art removed.  I just kinda worry that, _as was the case here somewhat with Rouge_, not *all* moderators/admins/"clean-up crew" will do the research you, Summercat, seem to do.  You guys draw a thin line when it comes to what is and isn't acceptable.  There's always gonna be people insisting their art is "safe" when, in fact, it looks like "cub porn."  Another example sited earlier was, I believe, Teemo from _League of Legends_?  I recall seeing something about two of those moogle-badgers doing naughty things, and the art itself *looked* underage to me, but a _FA_ mod apparently said "the canon states them as adults, so the image is fine."

Sneaky, sneaky artists and their knowledge of things, I tell ya...


----------



## kandlin (Sep 8, 2012)

I'll chime in with my two cents here, being one of the individuals having received a notice regarding this. 
Below is the note that I received from the moderator: 


> It has come to our attention that some of your submissions are in violation of the AUP, specifically the following:
> 
> Minors in Sexual Situations: FA does not permit humanoid/anthro children under the age of 18 to appear in sexually explicit situations. Submissions containing characters of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration. Attempts to circumvent this policy is not acceptable, and will result in submissions being removed  without notice.
> 
> ...



First, let me say that I do appreciate the note and 'request to remove'. I can respect their request and it gives me time to debate or think the matter over before acting. 
However, my main issue is with the vagueness of the note. It simply states that there is underage porn SOMEWHERE in my gallery. Also, the only clarification at the bottom is that 'nearly all the characters in the Sonic Universe are under 18' not giving any specifics to characters or the 'aging up' argument. 

Now the last few pictures I've posted with sonic characters have had them fully clothed and the last ones that could be considered sexually suggestive was posted nearly two months ago. Now it's not surprising the mods would take a while to notice any piece of art that could be a violation, but with the vagueness of the note as to which one violates the AUP as well as so many Sonic artists receiving these notes within the same day I'm afraid it can only lead me to conclude that ALL Sonic art in my gallery is now a violation.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

kandlin said:


> I'll chime in with my two cents here, being one of the individuals having received a notice regarding this.
> Below is the note that I received from the moderator:
> 
> 
> ...



Have you tried replying to that note asking for more specific information?


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Ya know...  That's pretty nice you _FA_ folks actually take into consideration all the things you do before having art removed.  I just kinda worry that, _as was the case here somewhat with Rouge_, not *all* moderators/admins/"clean-up crew" will do the research you, Summercat, seem to do.  You guys draw a thin line when it comes to what is and isn't acceptable.  There's always gonna be people insisting their art is "safe" when, in fact, it looks like "cub porn."  Another example sited earlier was, I believe, Teemo from _League of Legends_?  I recall seeing something about two of those moogle-badgers doing naughty things, and the art itself *looked* underage to me, but a _FA_ mod apparently said "the canon states them as adults, so the image is fine."
> 
> Sneaky, sneaky artists and their knowledge of things, I tell ya...



It comes down to the above-in-the-thread quote, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" with regards to 'obscene material'. In the US, this has largely been replaced with the 'Miller Test', but for FA's purposes the Miller Test is irrelelvant. As such, "I'll know it when I see it" is legally valid precedent. We've identified what we look at, but due to the nature of the beast cannot go into further details. 

It may be frustrating, but if people would work *with* us instead of *against* us, then things would go a lot smoother.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Cheers to that, Moder-otter!    But you know people on the Internet...  "Diplomacy gives way to petty arguments" and whatnot.  X3


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

kandlin said:


> *snip*


The admin in question is at work right now, so can't take a look through the gallery, but you do have some questional submissions in there, especially in your scraps - primarily of Amy Rose. So i'm guessing that' what it is. I would definatly send a note to the admin for more information.




Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Cheers to that, Moder-otter!    But you know people on the Internet...  "Diplomacy gives way to petty arguments" and whatnot.  X3



Fark that noise. >:|


----------



## Hunter (Sep 8, 2012)

apollisoffa said:


> It's one thing to remove something when it fails the AUP, but it's another thing to remove something that the admins/mods whatever just don't like it because it doesn't suit their personal taste. Also you link some hard proof that every Sonic character is also underage, and I want to hear it from a sega source.
> 
> As for the under age pony thing, sure. Next time the animation artist is on, I'll have him type something up, and then you can look in the show credits for his name and there you go. The point however still stands, claiming that an ART STYLE is against AUP, is stupid. Blatent under age stuff, yes, but when a title clearly state the character is over the age of 18, the body matches, and doesn't look under age, then obviously it's not under age. Also yes, users to have 'rights' when it comes to things that are NOT against the AUP being removed because an admin is butthurt about art they just dislike.



I have to say something here and am going to try to be as coherent as possible (translating from french to English)

As stated , is against the AUP to depict juveniles sexually , the fandom does NOT own the characters , the original creators and the corporation that's owns the copyright do and it is they and not the fandom who sets the cannon , they state they are juveniles then it is so , the fandom has no RIGHTS what so ever concerning this.
Excluding the law and rights , when doing fan art you are subject to the original creator's cannon and no matter what you do , if the character is underage then you are depicting it as being  underage , you can argue and justify all you want but unless you own the right , you can't fight cannon.
This actually came about when Fa! originally purged Cup porn , an artist who i will not name put up a passionate argument concerning his depiction of the Warner kids "animaniacs" , his argument that they where in fact 50 years old "cannon wise a valid argument" but they are depicted as children no matter how old they are .

Next up is the sticky subject of mature underage characters , cannon wise yes the argument IS valid , there is plenty of precedent for this with characters being adults way before turning 18 BUT the law as it's stands is clear on this , adult is at 18 , everything else is underage   , Furafinity is protecting it's legal ass and is taking action accordingly .
I myself ran in to a little trouble a while back , i had a one year old character who was a gene construct  , physically and mentally she was made as an adult but that powers that be objected to it , i had to do a serious re-wright before they stooped giving me grief.

So in conclusion , if you want to control cannon , you have to ask the original artist for permission OR  do your own with your original characters  and derivative work , better yet make your own original IP or join forces with someone who is developing one of there own.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Hunter said:


> So in conclusion , if you want to control cannon , you have to ask the original artist for permission OR  do your own with your original characters  and derivative work , better yet make your own original IP or join forces with someone who is developing one of there own.



Bravo!


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Hunter said:


> *snip*



Well said, Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkey!

(Please don't Guillotine me, was in jest)


----------



## Saellyn (Sep 8, 2012)

A little bit off topic, but:


Summercat said:


> I constantly see tickets with upwards of 50 links, unorganized, from different users.


Wouldn't the simplest solution to this be to get yak or whoever is doing ths coding (if you guys actually ended up "hiring" someone, as *someone *suggested they were going to) to add some sort of report button to the submission pages? That way you wouldn't get tickets with "upwards of 50 links". It would be one ticket = 1 link.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 8, 2012)

There are a lot of people stroking there egos and throwing the word "maturity" around I noticed. Well, the mature and fair thing would be to ban pornographic images of all commercially copyrighted characters from FA period.

So Sega, Bandai, Nintendo, Sony, Capcom etc, characters would not be allowed to be shown in erotic situations on the site. Not even for parody purposes. That is a clear-cut and simple solution. Because no matter how much everyone here wants to be right and say that's wrong, the truth is nothing anyone here is saying is right or wrong.

Everyone has just been talking about personal opinions and biases. This argument is just getting really long in the tooth, and will never be solved because it is unsolvable in the manner being done.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Saellyn said:


> A little bit off topic, but:
> 
> Wouldn't the simplest solution to this be to get yak or whoever is doing ths coding (if you guys actually ended up "hiring" someone, as *someone *suggested they were going to) to add some sort of report button to the submission pages? That way you wouldn't get tickets with "upwards of 50 links". It would be one ticket = 1 link.



Leaving aside the coding manpower issue (which I've been working on to resolve, but anyhow)...

One ticket = one link

But then

We'd have THREE BILLION TICKETS.

The report system on FA is totally unlike how it works on FAF, alas. FAF stacks reports on the same user/post/thread. FA does not.


----------



## Saellyn (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Leaving aside the coding manpower issue (which I've been working on to resolve, but anyhow)...
> 
> One ticket = one link
> 
> ...


As long as they are flagged properly I don't see why "one ticket = one link" would be too much of a problem. With a report button it would make it much easier for tickets to stack. It's possible to make it so that when you report a submission via the "Report" button that it checks to see if the submission has already been reported by another user. If it has been reported it would ammend the existing ticket accordingly. It shouldn't be too hard to do because they "report" is based upon the submission itself (or rather, the submission URL), rather than a "ticket ID". Though, I will admit, I don't know how the current ticketing system is set up on the admin side so it might require as much as a complete rewrite of the system.

*shrugs* It's something that FA should have done ages ago. It probably would have saved a lot of headaches.



Summercat said:


> the coding manpower issue (which I've been working on to resolve, but anyhow)...


Yes please.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

> *PORN* of *CERTAIN* characters in hte ORIGINAL/CANON styles for Sonic  the Hedgehog is/are not allowed. If you want to draw them in a differing  style, and draw them physically mature in said style, sure go ahead and  post that to FA.



OK, I'm a little confused.  I'm honestly not trying to start trouble, just trying to understand:

So drawing characters like Rouge, who are 18 and over, is fine.  That's fair enough.  But you're not allowed to age-up characters whilst keeping them within the Sonic style - why is this the case?  What if someone drew porn of Amy but gave her EXACTLY the same bodily proportions as Rouge, in the Sonic style?  Rouge is 18 in the canon, so her body shape and proportions represent that of an 18 year old Sonic character; why can't this be applied to other characters if the person explicitly states "this is Amy aged 18"?  I know the males are a little more of a grey area but I still fail to understand.  As someone already pointed out, look at Uncle Chuck, he's just Sonic with a mustache but he's an old man!  So if someone drew porn of Sonic, gave him a mustache and said "this is an older Sonic", shouldn't this technically be allowed as he'd resemble Chuck, who according to the canon is a lot older than Sonic despite the physical similarities?  

The Sonic style is cartoony, hence the crazy proportions and such-like.  If people aren't allowed to age-up the characters in that style simply because "they still look young" irrespective of the fact that they've visibly been aged-up, then what about stuff like My Little Pony for example?  The characters look EXTREMELY child-like due to their target demographic being very young children - massive eyes, small bodies and short limbs.  There's a comment from the creator (here: http://comments.deviantart.com/1/223684344/1770555388) that says "They are young adults, but with a maturity level of anywhere from 12 -  18. I guess I sort of justify it in my head that in real life, horses  are adults by the time they are 2 or so. MLPs are horses with human  brains, so they grow up fast, but mature slower....?  It's  imprecise, but that's kind of what I'm thinking. At the end of the day,  they need to be relatable to younger kids, but stories about going to  school and dealing with parents isn't what I wanted to do so, there you  have it."  Young adults - that's a bit vague, she even says the whole thing is imprecise.  That could mean they're teenagers technically...

Also, look at other video game characters, sticking to Sonic's genre a minute.  Yoshi, from the Mario series.  There are loads of different Yoshis and none of them have a defined age, yet you see Yoshi porn on here.  Yoshi's quite cute in appearance and, due to his proportions (short limbs, large head) could be perceived as being rather young...

What about porn of Sonic fan characters?  If the creator says the character is over 18 and the character vaguely resembles an official Sonic character who's over 18, then this would be allowed despite the art style, right?  These things are effectively people's fursonas at the end of the day.  Surely the artist's drawing style, Sonicy or not, shouldn't be a factor here?

I can completely and totally understand FA not wanting porn of under-aged characters (trust me, I don't agree with that kinda thing being posted), but I think the whole "aging-up but not in the Sonic style" thing seems a bit vague, as do the rules concerning certain young-looking non-Sonic characters on here.  I'm just looking for some clarification.


----------



## bleeduntildeath (Sep 8, 2012)

I personally think that it's great where kid shows have underaged characters getting puked in the mouth (watch chowder sometime) but THIS is going to far.... I love 2012 morals a lot


----------



## Hunter (Sep 8, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> There are a lot of people stroking there egos and throwing the word "maturity" around I noticed. Well, the mature and fair thing would be to ban pornographic images of all commercially copyrighted characters from FA period.
> 
> So Sega, Bandai, Nintendo, Sony, Capcom etc, characters would not be allowed to be shown in erotic situations on the site. Not even for parody purposes. That is a clear-cut and simple solution. Because no matter how much everyone here wants to be right and say that's wrong, the truth is nothing anyone here is saying is right or wrong.
> 
> Everyone has just been talking about personal opinions and biases. This argument is just getting really long in the tooth, and will never be solved because it is unsolvable in the manner being done.



There are plenty of other site that cater exclusively to toon parody and wear furs are in the minority or just unwelcome .


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> _Words!_


I think that at this point, it's kind of a routine of this:
- If "underage" adult material is spotted or reported, moderators look into it.
- If the character is indeed underage after taking into consideration the source material, art style, and any modifications made ("aging-up" for example), the material is to be removed.
- If the character is *not* deemed "underaged," the material stays, even if the character _looks_ underaged *unless* a really good reason is given for the adult material to be removed.

I'm not quite sure how _Sonic_ stuff falls into this, but I guess the current ruling is that characters like Tails, Marine, Cream, and possibly Amy Rose are barred from being posted if the art is both drawn in the original style *and* pornographic in nature.  Characters like Sonic, Knuckles, Rouge, or Shade, who are *obviously* "adult beings," are much less likely to have pornographic art featuring them removed.  Or something like that.

_Don't take my word as the gospel, I'm just giving my interpretation on things._  D8


----------



## thebrave (Sep 8, 2012)

In my opinion it is all a copyright issue. Btw I had the same problem on  deviantart, the only thing is that image was simply Amy in a bikini,  dressed... This one http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6773852/ but with the nipple censored.
Unfortunately the copyright issues are really dangerous, think about it,  if Sega sue FA or DA for some obscure reasons then the autor of the  "bad" image is in trouble, and FA (I don't think DA because they are  much bigger) could close because the admins may decide that all the  trouble is too much for them, or for their money.
Alternatively the problem could be' really the underage adult fanart,  and in that case is not Sega who annoys but directly the police....
In my opinion if the problem is the law about underage content, and the  law includes cartoon characters too then the only solution is to draw  older character. So only characters who are 18 years old or more in the  original show. Or to draw the young one in a way they are obliviously  older.

If the problem is a copyright issue with Sega then is much worse, to  fight the law is bad but to fight the multinationals is a nightmare, but  if this is the case please FA give us a clear rule, "no fanart". It's fine for me. I agree with Monkeyxflash. 
Personally I don't care, I like to see the characters is adult  situations because I found it funny (except for some strange fetishes and for cleary kid characters), but what I really love is to see  the work of some good artists. The worst solution is the one who should  close FA.

Btw, if the problem is the age here there is a list of the ages:

Games

Sonic 15
Tails 12
Knuckles 16
Amy Rose 12
Blaze 14
Rouge 18
Big 18
Chaos 4000+
Charmy 16, retconned at 6
Cream, 6
Espio 16
Silver 14
Chip ageless
Shadow n/a, created 50 years ago
Jet 14
Marine 7
Storm 19
Vector 18
Vanilla unknown, around 30
Wave 18
Tikal 4000+ but 14 physically
Metal sonic n/a
Eggman unknow (50-60?)
Ray the squirrel unknown (I think 12)
Mighty16
Bark unknown (maybe 18)
Beam unknown (maybe 15)
Fang unknown (maybe 18+, he uses guns)
Shade 4000+, but 15-16 physically
Lumina unknown (ageless?)
Illumina unknown (ageless?)
Void unknown (ageless?)
Maria Robotnik 12
Iblis, Solaris, Black Doom, all the elemental monsters, immortal
Shahra unknown (ageless?)
Erazor unknown (ageless?)
Babylon Guardian unknown (ageless?)
Merlina unknown (15?)


Cartoons
Sally 16
Bunny 18
Antoine 18
Rotor 17
Sonia 15
Manic 15


here you can found some more (like the ones from the comics)
http://sonic.wikia.com/wiki/Categor.....ters_by_Gender


----------



## Punnchy (Sep 8, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> Currently there is a large volume of tickets being processed right now. One of the things that comes with so many users being helped/addressed is that sometimes a specific content sees a lot of removals simply because of the volume of tickets being processed. It doesn't mean we have an issue with the content or are banning it all together. It is a consequence of many tickets being handled. That said let me make it clear that Fur Affinity is not banning Sonic Art or Sonic Porn. However there are still many artists who have content that does not appear aged up enough or appears simply underage. Those people have been asked to remove that content and some of them are...well not taking it too well. We are trying to work things out with people and help them understand but if people reduce themselves to being uncivil, and talking to the public instead of trying to engage in polite dialogue with the administration there is little we can do.



What does having someone talking to the public about the situation do to prevent administration from discussing things with them further and simply suspending their account? I can see how it may cause more drama llamas if they do discuss things with the public but on the opposite side of the coin, they may only be asking the public's opinion to better understand the situation themselves.


----------



## Toxicko (Sep 8, 2012)

The thing that bugs me most is the rumor aged-up art is getting taken down. As I've seen people who draw aged-up art, and it looks aged-up to ME.. But it seems like something that could be taken differently by others? What's to say to some people it looks 18+ while to maybe one admin it looks younger? What if every admin thinks differently? Do the admins just delete things on their own, or do they talk to other admins first? Because maybe that should be done.

I would bring up more points.. Like the fact Rouge has a 18 year old body in the Sonic style, and if someone drew Amy like that, she should be allowed (someone made that point in here and it's a good one) But I really don't want to argue about this.

The only other thing I'll say is.. A few months ago I reported a legit cub porn image of Cream the Rabbit, who looked like her canon age (6) But it's still up. If you guys are really clearing though this Sonic stuff, I'm just confused why that's left up.. as well as the rest of the person's gallery, as it's full of pretty questionable content.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Furaffinity is private property with public access. Users don't have 'rights'. Nor is anyone impinging on artistic freedom. You can draw whatever you want, but if it fails the AUP, please post it elsewhere.
> 
> Also, link to some hard proof that all MLP characters are underaged - or at least the Mane Six.



Oh my god, if I see this excuse one more time....

What was furaffinity made for?
Why is it so successful?
Where is furaffinity located?

You can't hide behind this excuse anymore. You can't be so blatantly hypocritical anymore. Furaffinity was made for *people* to post their art. It is so successful because of its large *userbase*. Furaffinity is located on a *global public domain*.

How long do are going to spit in the face of very force that allows this site to exist? What would happen if have the people here could part with their porn and faux-fame to see how they're being treated and just left?

Stop making this excuse, its disgustingly egocentric and just fucking untrue. Dragoneer made something for people, that doesn't mean he controls the ones that embraced it and certainly doesn't mean he and little power tripping posse has any right treat them like they do.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> Rage!!!.



Good God, calm down! Somebody grab a sedative or something...I do believe their server is in the magical land of Virginia, USA. Which is a dark place where laws exist and some of those laws are against child porn...I guess they should stick to their guns though and let the site face legal backlash while we all bust a final one to the sonic porn...


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Butterflygoddess16 said:


> Good God, calm down! Somebody grab a sedative or something...I do believe their server is in the magical land of Virginia, USA. Which is a dark place where laws exist and some of those laws are against child porn...I guess they should stick to their guns though and let the site face legal backlash while we all bust a final one to the sonic porn...



Yeah, that post had nothing to do with CP laws. Its was in response to that magical little saying around here "Its ours, we'll do what we want".
But, please - continue to try and buff your horn a my expense, I dont mind.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> Yeah, that post had nothing to do with CP laws. Its was in response to that magical little saying around here "Its ours, we'll do what we want".
> But, please - continue to try and buff your horn a my expense, I dont mind.



Say huh :?:


----------



## Sipher (Sep 8, 2012)

Some of the art is pretty questionable sometimes due to the style, though it is also fair to say that it does get picked on alot more due to it's style. Also taking in to account that in different countries there is also different ages for legality. the US having one of the highest ages. However some of the arguments used before to protect other types of pornographic images are also being used against others their aged up style just because there original age falls under the legal limit of the US means it gets ticketed and taken down regardless due to some over zealous people that hate something.

Due to a style you can say the same for certain pokemon like un-evolved forms and MLP ( don't hide behind the artist saying they are adults. if that is the case then the age issue of certain characters can also be thrown out if they are "mature" enough ) what I'm getting at is that in their original style they fall into looking very under-age. or just wrong in general and they fall into the same pitfalls that the sonic style has it that their size just makes it look like cub or under-age works. Though I have seen other images where they actually look very mature and the complete opposite of what they originally are based on still not my thing but they actually look of age. but even if it isn't and the original style of both those were considered then i could only really reiterate the " i know it when i see it " comment mentioned before. Especially since your taking the characters from a human age point. yet everything else that doesn't clarify it's age is given more leniency granted that MLP has given ages for the characters , yet the same reasons would mean they are to young.

If there is to be some kind of rule it has to affect all types of images and just not one style, since FA has a large user base it has many different styles. Some easily making characters look under-age even when there truly adults. This is always going to be a powder keg that is just going to explode at some point. It's happened before with another group in that cub issue, even people that didn't like the cubs either followed them to the site they made since you can put in a keyword blocker so you can avoid things you don't want to see. wouldn't now be a good time to implement something similar since it's unlikely that any consensus between user's will get an unbiased answer. I felt that ageing up the characters was the end of it since it seemed like a very good idea and should have appeased everyone. Though there are many that just hate the characters as is and want rid of it completely.

( i apologise in advance if my wording confuses people )


----------



## Hybrid Project Alpha (Sep 8, 2012)

thebrave said:


> Games
> 
> Sonic 15
> Tails 12
> ...


Actually, Tails is 8 and Vector is 20
according to Sonic Channel


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> You can't hide behind this excuse anymore. You can't be so blatantly hypocritical anymore. Furaffinity was made for *people* to post their art. It is so successful because of its large *userbase*. Furaffinity is located on a *global public domain*.



Except, y'know, the part where it's factually correct. You are a guest. Conduct yourself accordingly.



Delta said:


> How long do are going to spit in the face of very force that allows this site to exist? What would happen if have the people here could part with their porn and faux-fame to see how they're being treated and just left?



People will come and go as I've mentioned previously. If the site doesn't meet your expectations, there are plenty of others that will.


----------



## Aquin (Sep 8, 2012)

To be honest i think this whole mess is rather hilarious and sad at the same time. If Sonics are banned for being underage then so should Ponysonas. No offense to Neer but if your gonna ban one then ya gotta have rules against them all. Not taking any sides here just saying what i think.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Aquin said:


> If Sonics are banned for being underage then so should Ponysonas.



Welcome to the thread. You might want to start at page 1 and make sure this issue hasn't already been covered. Multiple times.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Butterflygoddess16 said:


> Say huh :?:



Feigned-ignorance doesn't translate into innocence.
You see when people respond to someone in the passive-agressively berating manner, you did, its to make the person they're communicating with look and/or feel dumb. In turn this makes the offender look and/or feel smart or witty. Its just a form of ego-boosting at the expense of others and a fairly smart one since if they are proven wrong or their point was otherwise made irrelevant they can just insist that their passive aggressiveness was genuine or in your case, just feign ignorance and hope that the ones who read over the dispute fall for it, allowing them to save face.

I've been around the internet and assholes for a long time.
Just come at people directly, its a lot more respectable than trying to come out "on top".


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Except, y'know, the part where it's factually correct.



Explain yourself.



			
				Taigitsune-Kun said:
			
		

> You are a guest. Conduct yourself accordingly.


I'm a person using a site, I'll conduct myself the way I please and react to behavior in whatever way I deem fit.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> You see when people respond to someone in the passive-agressively berating manner, you did, its to make the person they're communicating with look and/or feel dumb.



Have you read your first post in this thread? Sure it's openly aggressive rather than being passive, but do you deny trying to take the high ground with it?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> Explain yourself.



If I have to explain to you what it means to use a public site you do not control (or in all likelihood contribute to) then I'm afraid no explanation is going to be adequate.


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Sonic porn's not my thing, I didn't recognise the characters as being underaged but then again I've never watched sonic or played any of their games. The argument that it's okay if the characters are sufficiently aged should be sufficient though in my view. 
I'm surprised it's a topic which generates such friction.


----------



## Morticia (Sep 8, 2012)

This whole thing is such wankery.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Have you read your first post in this thread? Sure it's openly aggressive rather than being passive, but do you deny trying to take the high ground with it?


You ignore the context of the conversation Im having with someone else completely.



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> If I have to explain to you what it means  to use a public site you do not control (or in all likelihood contribute  to) then I'm afraid no explanation is going to be adequate.



You claimed, I was factually incorrect with no explanation of why  you made this claim nor proof of your claim. If you are willing to  provide those simple elements, I will have to write you off a simply  someone who avid disagrees with me because you do not approve of my  behavior. As such, your claim means little and is no more than a false, fleeting hope to make me reconsider my position.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 8, 2012)

The things I'm most tempted to say on this matter would probably lead to drama. So to sum it up in two words, I'll just call this another chapter of the huge book called "human idiocy".

That being said, I'm against banning any kind art. Even cub porn... though in its case, I'm partly able to understand why some people want it banned. I mean fine... if you're someone who's closed minded and paranoid about some art, at least we can understand the logical reasoning behind it. But in the case of Sonic art as a whole... why, just why dear God among the people you created... ok, I can't do this :cry: Seriously... why on Earth would any minimally sane person want an art style banned, and link an *art style* to cub porn x_x

No offense to the staff members who decided on this ban. But I'd say someone who thinks like this has been smoking for so long that the effect became permanent, and should call 911 for a reality check. There's no measurement unit that can describe how deep someone has to have their head stuck up their asses to have a mentality like this... probably light years. Their father is probably Kim Jong Il and their mother is Stalin, and their entire childhood consisted of moving rocks in a desert and praying to Jesus to end global warming and stop gay people. They should remove all mirrors they might risk coming across, and wear 10 layers of bags over their heads when going out in public. And probably require special training to even deal with awareness that they are in fact a person (like I occasionally need with awareness that I'm part of this species). I lastly recommend such persons to install a valve in their head, in which they can pour gas every night before going to bed, with a drain to change it in the morning. They should also go to Mars and live there instead.

That is my view on people who base censorship decisions on such criteria (in general, not talking about FA). Again, cub porn is controversial for some clear and known reasons at least, so this doesn't include that. But  wanting to ban all creatures with small bodies and large heads  because "if we want to get really stupid we can consider such an artistic style automatically looks like cub porn"... you good sir make me puke *takes off gentleman hat and uses it as a bag* If everyone in the world would think like this about everything, imagine what would happen. I mean that's like outlawing plastic water pistols because kids might interpret that as a real gang shooting, or toy cars because they make kids go street racing.

That's pretty much all I had to say on this matter. Hopefully rationality will prevail and this ban will be lifted soon. I'm not into Sonic art as much FYI (used to be more in the old days), and could care less that I don't see Sonic porn on a website that's not even mine. It's the idea and mentality of such bans disturbs me worse than some horror films. Also the shit some artists are being put through because of the delusions of some people... it's wrong.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> I'm a person using a site, I'll conduct myself the way I please and react to behavior in whatever way I deem fit.


By that logic, if I popped over to your house, it would be perfectly fine if I repainted your walls any color I wanted and then yelled at you for telling me to stop.  x:

Buddy, learn to pick your battles better!  Or at least try and make more sense in them.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> You ignore the context of the conversation Im having with someone else completely.





Delta said:


> Oh my god, if I see this excuse one more time....
> 
> What was furaffinity made for?
> Why is it so successful?
> ...



Can you please explain what context there was prior to this? It looks to me like you came in with guns blazing, and to what end? Do you think by condescending that you're going to convince people to abandon their well-reasoned and level-headed stances on the matter?


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> By that logic, if I popped over to your house, it would be perfectly fine if I repainted your walls any color I wanted and then yelled at you for telling me to stop.  x:
> 
> Buddy, learn to pick your battles better!  Or at least try and make more sense in them.



It wouldn't actually, because I didn't make the house for you. I also didn't open my house to the public or use the public to make it into what it is now.
You would be trespassing and vandalizing. I would have you arrested.



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Can you please explain what context there  was prior to this? It looks to me like you came in with guns blazing,  and to what end? Do you think by condescending that you're going to  convince people to abandon their well-reasoned and level-headed stances  on the matter?



If you are confused as to who my opening post was aimed at, please read the comment I quote in it.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Mircea said:


> I'm against banning any kind art. Even cub porn... though in its case, I'm partly able to understand why some people want it banned. I mean fine... if you're someone who's closed minded and paranoid about some art, at least we can understand the logical reasoning behind it. But in the case of Sonic art as a whole... why, just why dear God among the people you created... ok, I can't do this :cry: Seriously... why on Earth would any minimally sane person want an art style banned, and link an *art style* to cub porn x_x



Unfortunately it's not a subjective matter where laws are involved. FA must protect itself from very real and present legal liabilities in order to remain in-place.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> I also didn't open my house to the public or use the public to make it into what it is now.



FA is open for public use, granted that the public follows the stipulations in the AUP, COC, TOS, etc. They owe you, me, and everyone else literally nothing.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> If you are confused as to who my opening post was aimed at, please read the comment I quote in it.



Oh, ok. My response stands, then.



Taigitsune said:


> Do you think by condescending that you're going to convince people to abandon their well-reasoned and level-headed stances on the matter?


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> It wouldn't actually, because I didn't make the house for you. I also didn't open my house to the public or use the public to make it into what it is now.
> You would be trespassing and vandalizing. I would have you arrested.


Okay.  I'll concede that was a bad example.  So let's expand on the example Summercat (I think it was?) used:
Let's say you were a public park manager.  The park is open to the public and for public use.  One day, you see teenagers making out on a picnic table _very_ enthusiastically.  There's no rule specifically for that circumstance, much less rules about people being affectionate, but you can clearly see it's making other people very uncomfortable.

What do you do?


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> FA is open for public use, granted that the public follows the stipulations in the AUP, COC, TOS, etc. They owe you, me, and everyone else literally nothing.


And I don't expect anything other than to not be treated like a peasant. 
If they were to conduct themselves fairly with the use of logic and sound reason, I would have no qualms.
Simply the fact that they embrace the phrases "It's our site and we'll do what we want, you dont have any rights." is enough to show that they operate on their own accord, using most likely emotion and personal belief as the driving force behind how they make decisions and how they treat users.

You can lead people and respect them at the same time. Just because you have power doesn't mean you become a dictator.



Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Okay.  I'll concede that was a bad  example.  So let's expand on the example Summercat (I think it was?)  used:
> Let's say you were a public park manager.  The park is open to the  public and for public use.  One day, you see teenagers making out on a  picnic table _very_ enthusiastically.  There's no rule  specifically for that circumstance, much less rules about people being  affectionate, but you can clearly see it's making other people very  uncomfortable.
> 
> What do you do?



Legally, if it was that enthusiastically  there's a good chance they'd be breaking some indecency law and you'd be  oblige to stop them because they're breaking the law. If they aren't  however, you could ask them to stop - it doesn't mean they're obligated  to. This is where it comes to a point of "choosing your battles" as you'd say  and the onus of it would lie on the people around them. Do they keep  staring or do they look away and/or move to another part of the park? Its  not an easy situation to navigate, but its possible and more so possible  to do it the right way.


----------



## Teal (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> And I don't expect anything other than to not be treated like a peasant.
> If they were to conduct themselves fairly with the use of logic and sound reason, I would have no qualms.
> Simply the fact that they embrace the phrases "*It's our site and we'll do what we want, you dont have any rights." *is enough to show that they operate on their own accord, using most likely emotion and personal belief as the driving force behind how they make decisions and how they treat users.
> 
> You can lead people and respect them at the same time. Just because you have power doesn't mean you become a dictator.


 Isn't that how ALL sites work? -_-


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> And I don't expect anything other than to not be treated like a peasant.



Again, you _are_ a peasant in this scenario. If you don't like how a restaurant is run, it's a simple enough decision not to return there, isn't it?


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> And I don't expect anything other than to not be treated like a peasant.
> If they were to conduct themselves fairly with the use of logic and sound reason, I would have no qualms.
> Simply the fact that they embrace the phrases "It's our site and we'll do what we want, you dont have any rights." is enough to show that they operate on their own accord, using most likely emotion and personal belief as the driving force behind how they make decisions and how they treat users.
> 
> You can lead people and respect them at the same time. Just because you have power doesn't mean you become a dictator.


They... *are*... treating us fairly, if you hadn't noticed!  Do you know how many freakin' stipulations and concessions they've made jsut to keep their userbase happy??  But people just want more and more and more because they, much like you, seem to think they're *entitled* to some kind of special treatment just because they contribute to the site!  Or more often, because they simply *participate* (leaving comments and such)!

As what's-his-face said, _Fur Affinity_ owes you, owes me, owes *no one anything*!!  They're doing *us* a favor by letting *us* post our shit to *their* web servers!  If they suddenly decide to get rid of something, *they have the right* because their website is *not a democracy*!

_Phew.  Wow.  Did it just get hot in here, or did I lose my temper?  x:_


----------



## VGmaster9 (Sep 8, 2012)

I do not want to see the artists i like who draw Sonic style art get banned, that's all there is to it.


----------



## Teal (Sep 8, 2012)

VGmaster9 said:


> I do not want to see the artists i like who draw Sonic style art get banned, that's all there is to it.


 It's sonic PORN. Not sonic art. Read the thread.


----------



## VGmaster9 (Sep 8, 2012)

TealMoon said:


> It's sonic PORN. Not sonic art. Read the thread.



They also make Sonic porn, even though they mostly draw nudes.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Again, you _are_ a peasant in this scenario. If you don't like how a restaurant is run, it's a simple enough decision not to return there, isn't it?



Except I'm _not_ a peasant in this scenario, neither are you nor anyone else who frequents the site. And I just had a discussion about the "if you don't like it, leave" phrase the other day - I came to the conclusion that is simply a preservative for ignorance and traditionalism.

But more so in regards to FA:
Im not here to complain, Im here to enjoy some art - which for some of the people I watch - isn't something I can do everywhere. FA is more like a niche museum than a restaurant. Its also the biggest one with the most diversity and quite frankly the most potential. There are other museums within the same niche, but they aren't the same because they dont have the diversity and they very existence of FA limits their ability to expand. Telling me to leave because I dont like being treated like a commodity isn't all that effective because quite frankly there's no where else to go that could give me the same experience. FA's status as such a place though...isn't an excuse for a power-tripping mindset. I think if more users realized that they're the reason FA is such a landmark in the fandom, this bratty idealism would have disappeared a long time ago. Its the same reason why restaurants can operate as they see fit, but there success is based on the impression they leave on people. Too many bad impressions can lead to loss of business which in turn leads to bankruptcy or company sale or simply closing down.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

VGmaster9 said:


> They also make Sonic porn, even though they mostly draw nudes.



Unless I'm mistaken, nudes are considered mature and thus fall under the umbrella of adult-oriented work.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> I just had a discussion about the "if you don't like it, leave" phrase the other day - I came to the conclusion that is simply a preservative for ignorance and traditionalism.





Delta said:


> Too many bad impressions can lead to loss of business which in turn leads to bankruptcy or company sale or simply closing down.



These two positions are logically inconsistent. On the one hand, you disagree with leaving if you don't like the way things are run, then turn around and explain that the natural consequence of running things too strictly is a loss of business.

Nevertheless, why not go ahead and aim all the vitriol and entitlement you've displayed in this thread directly at someone who has the power to do something about things and see where that gets you. Not too quickly, though; I have to pop some popcorn first.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> They... *are*... treating us fairly, if you hadn't noticed!  Do you know how many freakin' stipulations and concessions they've made jsut to keep their userbase happy??  But people just want more and more and more because they, much like you, seem to think they're *entitled* to some kind of special treatment just because they contribute to the site!  Or more often, because they simply *participate* (leaving comments and such)!
> 
> As what's-his-face said, _Fur Affinity_ owes you, owes me, owes *no one anything*!!  They're doing *us* a favor by letting *us* post our shit to *their* web servers!  If they suddenly decide to get rid of something, *they have the right* because their website is *not a democracy*!
> 
> _Phew.  Wow.  Did it just get hot in here, or did I lose my temper?  x:_



Again, you mistake me for someone who wants to be pampered. I don't - Im not asking for anything more than to be treated like a person, which is what I've been saying all along - be less angry, anger tends to skew how you perceive messages and makes your way more suitable to your own biases. How many stipulations and concessions have they made just make the userbase happy? And was it really just to put a smile on our faces or was it because it was needed or simply well-thought out innovation? I'd like to know, because in my experience I've seen the bad far outweigh the good (and I'll admit that just might be "american news syndrome" at work.)

And yes, I know its not a democracy - thats been proven over and over again. I haven't been talking about democracy though, I've been talking about not being a dictator and treating people with respect not because they owe us anything, but because its the right thing to do.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> be less angry, anger tends to skew how you perceive messages and makes your way more suitable to your own biases.



Seriously? à² _à²


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> These two positions are logically inconsistent. On the one hand, you disagree with leaving if you don't like the way things are run, then turn around and explain that the natural consequence of running things too strictly is a loss of business.
> 
> Nevertheless, why not go ahead and aim all the vitriol and entitlement you've displayed in this thread directly at someone who has the power to do something about things and see where that gets you. Not too quickly, though; I have to pop some popcorn first.



Tehcnically that's only inconsistant if all of humanity acts as a homogenous mass, it's entirely possible that his individual behaviour differs from the majority, if not rather likely. 

I don't think it's very nice to promote an image of the website as 'we don't really care about users we do what we like, you can enjoy it or leave,' I'm sure that's not a genuine reality and it unnecessarily dismisses arguments out of hand.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> These two positions are logically inconsistent. On the one hand, you disagree with leaving if you don't like the way things are run, then turn around and explain that the natural consequence of running things too strictly is a loss of business.
> 
> Nevertheless, why not go ahead and aim all the vitriol and entitlement you've displayed in this thread directly at someone who has the power to do something about things and see where that gets you. Not too quickly, though; I have to pop some popcorn first.



Im not sure how that's inconsistent. Its the equivelent of saying "Things here are ran badly, here's what happens when things are ran badly."
And again, you ignore the fact that I want nothing from the powers that be other than to not act like dictators and treat their userbase with respect. Where you and Jessica get the idea that I want something from anyone eludes my understanding completely.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Seriously? à² _à²


Quite so, I've conducted all of these arguments without letting anger control my rational. Is it absurd for me to suggest that those communicating with me do the same?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> I don't think it's very nice to promote an image of the website as 'we don't really care about users we do what we like, you can enjoy it or leave,' I'm sure that's not a genuine reality and it unnecessarily dismisses arguments out of hand.



Now that we can agree upon, and it has been addressed:



Summercat said:


> Non-owners and non-representatives have very few rights on private property, and the above is my knee-jerk response to claims of "trampling on rights of the users". I hate that arguement with the burning passion of a thousand blazing suns.



tl;dr yes it was cavalier, but the true position is far less drastic than the original quote would have you believe.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Hey, Delta?

This isn't 'nam. There are rules here. FA is a private site that we allow people to use as long as they comply with our rules, enumerated in the Terms of Service, Code of Conduct, and the Acceptable Upload Policy. 

You can be in our privately owned publicly accessable park as long as you follow our rules. If one of our rules is "No Skateboarding", then don't complain you get told to stop skateboarding or asked to leave.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> Where you and Jessica get the idea that I want something from anyone eludes my understanding completely.





Delta said:


> I want nothing from the powers that be other than to not act like dictators and treat their userbase with respect.



I'll just leave this here.


----------



## VGmaster9 (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Unless I'm mistaken, nudes are considered mature and thus fall under the umbrella of adult-oriented work.



They can be mature and not be sexually explicit.


----------



## Lylian (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> Oh my god, if I see this excuse one more time....
> 
> What was furaffinity made for?
> Why is it so successful?
> ...



Ummmm... I made an account just to respond to this. As stated when making an account for the forums, "By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws."
In my personal opinion you sound pretty hateful, and I read up to the end of page 5 in hopes that you explained yourself better. Again, just in my opinion, by why not just drop your argument as it pretty obvious that very few, if any people in this thread support your viewpoint. 

Anywhozzle~ While writing this, page 6 of the thread started, so I gotta catch up~


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

VGmaster9 said:


> They can be mature and not be sexually explicit.



Again unless I'm mistaken, I'm reasonably sure the law applies equally to both.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> tl;dr yes it was cavalier, but the true position is far less drastic than the original quote would have you believe.



Don't get me wrong, I care about users. Users make the site go. But if a business has a disruptive customer, they will ask the customer to leave. 

I work in security IRL; I deal with this situation all the time. I used to patrol parks for a private corporation - the parks were open-access, but still private property and as a representative of the owner I could ask people to leave (and if they refused, call the police for trespassing). This didn't occur very often; usually people in the parks after they were supposed to be closed, or one particular asshole who kept walking his dog off the leash (and tried to argue with the police when they showed up I was illegally harassing him. They told him to GTFO.)

That's the long and the short of it. 

(For the record, I hated that job. My current post is muuuuuuccchhhh nicer. Less conflict with passive-aggressive assholes).


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Hey, Delta?
> 
> This isn't 'nam. There are rules here. FA is a private site that we allow people to use as long as they comply with our rules, enumerated in the Terms of Service, Code of Conduct, and the Acceptable Upload Policy.
> 
> You can be in our privately owned publicly accessable park as long as you follow our rules. If one of our rules is "No Skateboarding", then don't complain you get told to stop skateboarding or asked to leave.



If a rule or practice is argued to be cast in an incorrect form with veracity you correct them though, yes? I'm sure I've seen examples of that happen, so I think the park analogy is a tad weird if not distracting. Complaining about anything should be fine if people can provide sufficient reasoning, even helpful.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Less conflict with passive-aggressive assholes.



Not that today would have me believe you on that point, but as a fellow moderator of online content I can find no fault with the rest of your position. Keep takin' out the trash.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> If a rule or practice is argued to be cast in an incorrect form with veracity you correct them though, yes?



I'm.. having trouble following exactly what that sentence means. Could you please try restating it? I keep trying to break it down but things keep overlapping.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Not that today would have me believe you on that point, but as a fellow moderator of online content I can find no fault with the rest of your position. Keep takin' out the trash.



IRL, Taigi. IRL. In person, I have a lot less confidence of being backed up *when I'm right*. Here, if people flat-out lie about me ("He had a cat! He had a cat on post!" was an actual complaint to the office abotu me at my last post. Wat), the other administrators and Dragoneer will look into it, see it's a lie, and tell the person lying to STFU. ...or that they're incorrect, here's why, etc.. Depends on the details.


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I'm.. having trouble following exactly what that sentence means. Could you please try restating it? I keep trying to break it down but things keep overlapping.



If a specific rule results in an outcome that is unfair or inconveniant it gets re-written to avoid that problem. 

For example a hypothetical rule against sloppy photography might accidentally result in stylised photos being removed to an extent that people call it unfair.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> IRL, Taigi. IRL.



S'all good. I was going another direction with it, which is admittedly somewhat tasteless of me. Having a record of things certainly makes life easier, haha.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> I'll just leave this here.



Touche, "anything more." I should have added. Though considering what I asked is standard procedure for interacting with others in nearly all civilizations, I'd be inclined to argue that those concepts are "anything".



Summercat said:


> Hey, Delta?
> 
> This isn't 'nam. There are rules here. FA is a private site that we  allow people to use as long as they comply with our rules, enumerated in  the Terms of Service, Code of Conduct, and the Acceptable Upload  Policy.
> 
> You can be in our privately owned publicly accessable park as long as  you follow our rules. If one of our rules is "No Skateboarding", then  don't complain you get told to stop skateboarding or asked to  leave.



Yes Summer, I know you have rules here and I know some of them are necessity. Im not asking that the rules be abolished, Im asking that you let go of the mentality that you and the rest of the admins rule over the parks inhabitants. Don't be dictators, just be leaders. You have placed down rules by your right to do so - so enforce them as you should. Don't tell the users they don't have rights, dont make us feel like second-class citizens just because we dare peruse the grounds of your park. Respect the userbase, as their attendance keeps your park open, and they will respect you for managing such a place.

Its all about mutual symbiosis.



Summercat said:


> I'm.. having trouble following exactly what  that sentence means. Could you please try restating it? I keep trying to  break it down but things keep overlapping.


"If a rule is unsound or irrelevant, you make efforts to correct or reconstruct it so that it makes sense, right?"


----------



## Lylian (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> If a specific rule results in an outcome that is unfair or inconveniant it gets re-written to avoid that problem.
> 
> For example a hypothetical rule against sloppy photography might accidentally result in stylised photos being removed to an extent that people call it unfair.



So once more, just my opinion........ It's still a private site, not to be rude, but they don't have to be fair.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> If a specific rule results in an outcome that is unfair or inconveniant it gets re-written to avoid that problem.
> 
> For example a hypothetical rule against sloppy photography might accidentally result in stylised photos being removed to an extent that people call it unfair.



The problem is that the 'stylised' photos in your argument is subjective, and ultimately the decision on what the subjective means for the purposes of the rules rests in the administration. People constantly claim x, y, or z about the rules and what is acceptable - but the administration only view 'x' (Or even '4') as the correct interpretation of the rules.

One gentleman went on a rampage, causing harassment and several issues between himself and many users - because he mistakenly thought all photos that involve guns were banned, no matter what. In reality, it's just 'collection' images of weaponry you didn't modify/touch up yourself. People can post photos of restored/painted weapons when they did the restoration or painting themselves, and people can use them as props in photos.

This gentleman then blamed the administration for being unclear when he was justifyably smacked down. ...for interpreting the AUP on his own, and ignoring half of the entry he was quoting.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> be less angry, anger tends to skew how you perceive messages and makes your way more suitable to your own biases.





Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Seriously? à² _à²





Delta said:


> Quite so, I've conducted all of these arguments without letting anger control my rational. Is it absurd for me to suggest that those communicating with me do the same?


Eh.  So I lost my temper.  It doesn't mean I lost sight of what I was trying to say or lost my neutral view of what _you're_ trying to say.  It just means I got a little frustrated with how you continue to present yourself and your counter-argument -- two things I don't agree with at present.  But to be fair, at least I didn't call you any names.  Buttface.  ;P


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> Yes Summer, I know you have rules here and I know some of them are necessity. Im not asking that the rules be abolished, Im asking that you let go of the mentality that you and the rest of the admins rule over the parks inhabitants. Don't be dictators, just be leaders. You have placed down rules by your right to do so - so enforce them as you should. Don't tell the users they don't have rights, dont make us feel like second-class citizens just because we dare peruse the grounds of your park. Respect the userbase, as their attendance keeps your park open, and they will respect you for managing such a place.
> 
> Its all about mutual symbiosis.



I respect the userbase, I do not respect certain arguements - including the "Admins are trampling on users rights/freedoms". This is especially annoying when applied to rules that the administration lays down. I get people upset that I take down their random Google images, or them posting meme photos/pictures they used generators for. 

What I don't get is the common refrain of rejection of the site owner's rights to make and enforce the rules. This isn't a democracy. This isn't a republic. In the most democratic form it could be considered a Merit-based Oligarchy. 

If you want to discuss the rules, that's fine - don't question the rights (because the site IS private property) of the administration to make and enforce those rules.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Eh.  So I lost my temper.  It doesn't mean I lost sight of what I was trying to say or lost my neutral view of what _you're_ trying to say.  It just means I got a little frustrated with how you continue to present yourself and your counter-argument -- two things I don't agree with at present.  But to be fair, at least I didn't call you any names.  Buttface.  ;P


No, but again - you thought I was asking for something I wasn't. I'm glad you've calmed down though, isnt it nice to be calm?


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 8, 2012)

Hmm...I feel the topic has skewed just a bit. O_O


----------



## Lylian (Sep 8, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> Hmm...I feel the topic has skewed just a bit. O_O



I agree..... So less human rights, more porn? Or something like that


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Hunter said:


> I have to say something here and am going to try to be as coherent as possible (translating from french to English)
> 
> As stated , is against the AUP to depict juveniles sexually , the fandom does NOT own the characters , the original creators and the corporation that's owns the copyright do and it is they and not the fandom who sets the cannon , they state they are juveniles then it is so , the fandom has no RIGHTS what so ever concerning this.
> Excluding the law and rights , when doing fan art you are subject to the original creator's cannon and no matter what you do , if the character is underage then you are depicting it as being  underage , you can argue and justify all you want but unless you own the right , you can't fight cannon.
> ...



So what you are saying is that FA should not allow fan art. However, may I be the first to sorta point out the site owner's very own fursona is a fan character, based on a child level character in that fan character's genre, that has been shown in adult situations.  Of course things like this is always going to pop up whenever you EVER allow any type of fan character regardless of what the genre that character comes from. IF Sonic art issues are going to stop creating drama the "Age them UP" argument isn't going to fly because what one person considers to be the process of aging up may not necessarily be someone else's opinion on that goal being accomplished. Vague rules create vague rulings.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 8, 2012)

Well, since my previous suggesting of ultra banning fan art was a tad excessive...
What about some sort of body chart to show exactly where the "sweet spot" would be in aging-up a character?

However, I've recieved conflicting remarks in this area before. At the very least, I believe Sonic characters should be able to retain the Canon Head. But I've seen mods who have a problem with the characters facial expressions even with the aged up body. :/


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Hybrid Project Alpha said:


> Actually, Tails is 8 and Vector is 20
> according to Sonic Channel



All Sonic character ages are unreliable because Sega has constantly changed them. Sonic was 17 at one point, now he's back to 15. Tail's age has changed at least 3 times since his creation. It also depends on exactly what media of Sonic you are basing your ages on. The Sonic Satam/Archie Comic universe, Sonic X universe, Sonic video game universe, or Sonic manga universe all of which are different from one another depending on the character in question.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> What about some sort of body chart to show exactly where the "sweet spot" would be in aging-up a character?
> 
> However, I've recieved conflicting remarks in this area before. At the very least, I believe Sonic characters should be able to retain the Canon Head. But I've seen mods who have a problem with the characters facial expressions even with the aged up body. :/


Summercat said, _pages back_ (and apparently even further back than that?), "17 or older."  Even though 18 is the national average in the United States for "legal adult."  She also agreed that in some cases, even if the character isn't 17 years old physically, but _looks_ like an adult (_Twokinds_), this was okay for porn.  Another admin also said the opposite; if a character _is_ a legal adult, but doesn't _look_ like it (_League of Legends_), this was also okay for porn.

I swear I've said this before, but in different wording.  x:  Oh well.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

I agree that the whole thing is very vague and needs clarifying properly by a staff member.

If a member of staff could please spare me a couple of minutes to answer my previous questions on the matter, I'd be really grateful:



jenhedgehog said:


> OK, I'm a little confused.  I'm honestly not trying to start trouble, just trying to understand:
> 
> So drawing characters like Rouge, who are 18 and over, is fine.  That's  fair enough.  But you're not allowed to age-up characters whilst keeping  them within the Sonic style - why is this the case?  What if someone  drew porn of Amy but gave her EXACTLY the same bodily proportions as  Rouge, in the Sonic style?  Rouge is 18 in the canon, so her body shape  and proportions represent that of an 18 year old Sonic character; why  can't this be applied to other characters if the person explicitly  states "this is Amy aged 18"?  I know the males are a little more of a  grey area but I still fail to understand.  As someone already pointed  out, look at Uncle Chuck, he's just Sonic with a mustache but he's an  old man!  So if someone drew porn of Sonic, gave him a mustache and said  "this is an older Sonic", shouldn't this technically be allowed as he'd  resemble Chuck, who according to the canon is a lot older than Sonic  despite the physical similarities?
> 
> ...


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Summercat said, _pages back_ (and apparently even further back than that?), "17 or older."  Even though 18 is the national average in the United States for "legal adult."  She also agreed that in some cases, even if the character isn't 17 years old physically, but _looks_ like an adult (_Twokinds_), this was okay for porn.  Another admin also said the opposite; if a character _is_ a legal adult, but doesn't _look_ like it (_League of Legends_), this was also okay for porn.
> 
> I swear I've said this before, but in different wording.  x:  Oh well.



I said 17 and younger isn't allowed. 18+ is. 

Also, I'm a dude. I do dude things. I have dude bits. When I make out with a guy it's gay. :v


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> FA is open for public use, granted that the public follows the stipulations in the AUP, COC, TOS, etc. They owe you, me, and everyone else literally nothing.



While true you have to admit, with the recent slue of changes to the SUP, COC, and TOS in the past 2 years, creating retroactive reverse grandfather rules where something that may have been allowed previously no longer is so, yet the artist will be TT for it with possible actions taken due to not being aware how the change has also changed the status of their gallery, I'd say it's sorta annoying. Especially if you are an artist that's been on FA for as long as it has existed which could bring your upload count easily over 1000 images, keeping up with changes can be a pain.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> I agree that the whole thing is very vague and needs clarifying properly by a staff member.
> 
> If a member of staff could please spare me a couple of minutes to answer my previous questions on the matter, I'd be really grateful:



If you could excise the exact questions out, that'd be appreciated. I'm having difficulty parsing walls of text.



Ebony_Leopard said:


> While true you have to admit, with the recent slue of changes to the SUP, COC, and TOS in the past 2 years, creating retroactive reverse grandfather rules where something that may have been allowed previously no longer is so, yet the artist will be TT for it with possible actions taken due to not being aware how the change has also changed the status of their gallery, I'd say it's sorta annoying. Especially if you are an artist that's been on FA for as long as it has existed which could bring your upload count easily over 1000 images, keeping up with changes can be a pain.



The onus is on you to keep your gallery in line with the AUP. It's not like any changes have been stealthy - we announce them each time we do a revision.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I said 17 and younger isn't allowed. 18+ is.


Oh.  Uh... hrm.  I misread that this entire time, ya.  o.o;;





> Also, I'm a dude. I do dude things. I have dude bits. When I make out with a guy it's gay. :v


OH GOD, WHAT HAVE I DONE?!  AAAA -- Sorry.  ;.;


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Oh.  Uh... hrm.  I misread that this entire time, ya.  o.o;;OH GOD, WHAT HAVE I DONE?!  AAAA -- Sorry.  ;.;



It happens all the time, like the assumption I'm a cat. :v No worries n.n

One of these days I'll play along and wonder how long until they find any of my photos in my FA gallery :v


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Hey, Delta?
> 
> This isn't 'nam. There are rules here. FA is a private site that we allow people to use as long as they comply with our rules, enumerated in the Terms of Service, Code of Conduct, and the Acceptable Upload Policy.
> 
> You can be in our privately owned publicly accessable park as long as you follow our rules. If one of our rules is "No Skateboarding", then don't complain you get told to stop skateboarding or asked to leave.



Devil's Advocate:

While FA is indeed a private site, the users help those who own it generate money by participating in it, so it's not exactly as one sided a relationship as It's our stuff do what we say, since, the consequences of chasing off all those who participate and bring in people and ad revenue would be to lose income (which is spent however the owner feels they should spend it). In other words, that model of thought isn't the best good business model.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> If you could excise the exact questions out, that'd be appreciated. I'm having difficulty parsing walls of text.


Uh... I don't think that's going to be possible I'm afraid :S  The entirety of the first paragraph, for example, is kind of all one question.  The questions can't be isolated because that would remove the context of what I'm trying to ask (if that makes sense).  That's why I quoted myself rather than simply attempting to condense my original post and ask short questions.  Sorry dude - I'm not trying to be awkward or anything, my post is a little bit long because I don't know how else to word it...


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Devil's Advocate:
> 
> While FA is indeed a private site, the users help those who own it generate money by participating in it, so it's not exactly as one sided a relationship as It's our stuff do what we say, since, the consequences of chasing off all those who participate and bring in people and ad revenue would be to lose income (which is spent however the owner feels they should spend it). In other words, that model of thought isn't the best good business model.



Yeah, I hear you. I understand this - I worked to become an administrator because I felt an obligation to the community to help out. 

But my ire isn't directed at users who are simply peeved at a rule. My ire is at people who are incesened and how dare I remove something against the rules, what gives me the right to judge or remove things from a user's gallery without permission.

THAT attitude is the one I hate. Currently there's one guy doing the whole "FUCK DA POLICE" mentality because I removed... ...rageface generator generated memes from his gallery.


----------



## RottenNekomata (Sep 8, 2012)

After reading all of this the main point I got was: Child or child like porn is not allowed. Users are complaining because of it. AUP and TOS is not read by those users. Sonic and the rest drawn canon are fine as long as it's marked general. Anything requiring a mature or adult tag must not look like a child ever.
I thought that was common sense.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> Uh... I don't think that's going to be possible I'm afraid :S  The entirety of the first paragraph, for example, is kind of all one question.  The questions can't be isolated because that would remove the context of what I'm trying to ask (if that makes sense).  That's why I quoted myself rather than simply attempting to condense my original post and ask short questions.  Sorry dude - I'm not trying to be awkward or anything, my post is a little bit long because I don't know how else to word it...




"Why can't you age up characters in the official sonic style?"

Because the style simply does not work that way. At all. The fact that the characters are all physically the same (except small children) REGARDLESS OF WHAT AGE THEY ARE IN THE STORY is what causes the problem - the style is designed to make 'ageless' characters, but then they gave the characters specific ages.

"If you can't age up the Sonic style, what about other cartoons for kids like My Little Pony?"

In My Little Pony, the 'Mane Six' are all depicted as adults of varying maturity levels. Applejack runs a farm, Fluttershy runs a vetinary clinic, Twilight is effectively a college student, Rarity runs her own tailor shop, Rainbow Dash is a permajock and depicted as a local leader for weather control, and Pinkie Pie works at a shop part time (She would be the youngest in 'maturity', but they're all about the same age). The difference between them and Sonic is that A) Underaged characters in the style are visibly different from mature characters, and B) The style, while cartoonish, is applied to characters that are mature (with no specific age given).

"What about Yoshi?"

Yoshi is depicted as an adult Yoshi.

"What about porn of Sonic Fan characters?"

What about them? They're fine.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> Well, since my previous suggesting of ultra banning fan art was a tad excessive...
> What about some sort of body chart to show exactly where the "sweet spot" would be in aging-up a character?
> 
> However, I've recieved conflicting remarks in this area before. At the very least, I believe Sonic characters should be able to retain the Canon Head. But I've seen mods who have a problem with the characters facial expressions even with the aged up body. :/


 Way I see it they got 2 options. Either, create a list of characters that can not be drawn in adult situations and posted to FA since the admins, despite their "Age them up", ruling are still going to, more likely than not, delete art posted of these characters, OR ban the on model Sonic art style for adult situations. If you are an artist that can emulate that art style to the letter, but do so in adult art, you can't post it. Otherwise it's always going to be these (Hey, I drew that picture and the characters with the intent of them being adults) Admin (Well, they still like like the kid versions to me), and we'll just have another thread like this over and over again.

THOUGH, the problem with banning a style, is should by right continue down the line of any other art style that causes characters by default to look more childish/cartoony.


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> The problem is that the 'stylised' photos in your argument is subjective, and ultimately the decision on what the subjective means for the purposes of the rules rests in the administration. People constantly claim x, y, or z about the rules and what is acceptable - but the administration only view 'x' (Or even '4') as the correct interpretation of the rules.
> 
> One gentleman went on a rampage, causing harassment and several issues between himself and many users - because he mistakenly thought all photos that involve guns were banned, no matter what. In reality, it's just 'collection' images of weaponry you didn't modify/touch up yourself. People can post photos of restored/painted weapons when they did the restoration or painting themselves, and people can use them as props in photos.
> 
> This gentleman then blamed the administration for being unclear when he was justifyably smacked down. ...for interpreting the AUP on his own, and ignoring half of the entry he was quoting.



It's the subjectivity, where possibility of movement does exist, which I feel this whole issues is about. Allow me to expand. 

I see this as the argument,

-Underage sexual material is banned
-Sonic characters are underage
-Hence sexual material depicting sonic characters is underage porn
-Hence it should be banned

However the premises which build to state sexual sonic images are underage only function in a minority of scenarios in which the subject is obviously characterised as a child. 

The problem in my eyes is that rather than 'innocent until proven guilty' the approach is that some users feel anything which isn't specifically and very obviously distorted from the original sonic style to emphasise adulthood is viewed as underage, when that may never have been their artistic intention.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> If you could excise the exact questions out, that'd be appreciated. I'm having difficulty parsing walls of text.
> 
> 
> 
> The onus is on you to keep your gallery in line with the AUP. It's not like any changes have been stealthy - we announce them each time we do a revision.



Yes, that's easy to say, not as easy to do with all the AUP rewrites now isn't it? I've had this issue in the past, where the situation actually caused another rewrite of an AUP.  I'm just saying, when you play a game, it's nice to know the rules of that game, but when the rules of the game get changed mid-game, you can't not expect people to be confused or upset about that rule change, private site or not. This discussion alone is going to cause yet another change/ clarification, alteration of the AUP retroactively.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> It's the subjectivity, where possibility of movement does exist, which I feel this whole issues is about. Allow me to expand.
> 
> I see this as the argument,
> 
> ...



Artistic intention is nice and all, and is usually taken into account when performing administrative action. Assume Good Faith and all that. 

However, because of subjectivity and the fact you can NOT define this stuff any further, FA has to go to the whole "I'll know it when I see it" test that the US had for obscene material before Miller. I mean, I've posted - repeatedly - guidelines of what I look for as telltales to let me look further - width of hips and shoulders, lengths of arms, size of head to chest, etc - but those are just items that flag the image for further review. Further review is a judgement call by the administration, and ultimately it's the administration's opinion that matters for the purposes of the AUP/TOS/CoC.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Yes, that's easy to say, not as easy to do with all the AUP rewrites now isn't it? I've had this issue in the past, where the situation actually caused another rewrite of an AUP.  I'm just saying, when you play a game, it's nice to know the rules of that game, but when the rules of the game get changed mid-game, you can't not expect people to be confused or upset about that rule change, private site or not. This discussion alone is going to cause yet another change/ clarification, alteration of the AUP retroactively.



I don't know how many times I have said this:

The rules on 'Sonic Porn' haven't changed since the last time we had this hulabalo.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Ok, that's legit. I personally find the discussion interesting because of where it's leading, not because it directly affects me or what I draw. Because I have a feeling the only logical way to resolve this issue will not be pleasing anyone if it goes the course it has to with the way FA admin currently feels about the topic.

(FRANKLY, I think admin would have a strong leg to stand on if there weren't that Sonic(ADULT) tag in the submission categories).


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Ok, that's legit. I personally find the discussion interesting because of where it's leading, not because it directly affects me or what I draw. Because I have a feeling the only logical way to resolve this issue will not be pleasing anyone if it goes the course it has to with the way FA admin currently feels about the topic.
> 
> (FRANKLY, I think admin would have a strong leg to stand on if there weren't that Sonic(ADULT) tag in the submission categories).



That's a red herring. Sonic(adult) can also refer to the style of artwork, and there's still plenty of official characters that are fair game.

Further, the entire argument of "It's in the submission categories still that makes it allowed" ignores the fact that A) It used to be allowed, B) The submission categories are on the 'to be eliminated' list, and C) Do not override site rules.

We also can't readily remove it without relabeling EVERYTHING in the database that has that submission category.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I don't know how many times I have said this:
> 
> The rules on 'Sonic Porn' haven't changed since the last time we had this hulabalo.



Yes, but that was only a few months ago and now Retroactive deletions are taking place, where, frankly just grandfathering those and preventing new submissions probably would have been the wises and most drama free way of going about it. I mean let's face it, a submission posted on FA greater than a year suddenly being deleted is by right going to tick some people off because it really would be out of the blue.

But hey, not my site or site rep to worry about, but It's interesting how these actions are causing opinions to be generated among users and in the fandom.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I respect the userbase, I do not respect certain arguements - including the "Admins are trampling on users rights/freedoms". This is especially annoying when applied to rules that the administration lays down. I get people upset that I take down their random Google images, or them posting meme photos/pictures they used generators for.
> 
> What I don't get is the common refrain of rejection of the site owner's rights to make and enforce the rules. This isn't a democracy. This isn't a republic. In the most democratic form it could be considered a Merit-based Oligarchy.
> 
> If you want to discuss the rules, that's fine - don't question the rights (because the site IS private property) of the administration to make and enforce those rules.



Again, you're writing as if I want some rule to be amended or punishment not dealt. I dont know how many times I have to restate it so thats its an understood fact, *I dont want to change the rules and i don't want to avoid punishment as I've done nothing wrong*. I'll copy and paste what I asked of the administrative staff: 

_Im asking that you let go of the mentality that you and the rest of the  admins rule over the parks inhabitants. Don't be dictators, just be  leaders. You have placed down rules by your right to do so - so enforce  them as you should. Don't tell the users they don't have rights, dont  make us feel like second-class citizens just because we dare peruse the  grounds of your park. Respect the userbase, as their attendance keeps  your park open, and they will respect you for managing such a place._


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

All of these park analogies really are silly, just speak in terms of the actual site. PLEASE. It's all beginning to sound like chinese proverbs.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

Thanks for getting back to me and clearing up the confusion for me.  Just got another quick one though:



Summercat said:


> "Why can't you age up characters in the official sonic style?"
> 
> Because the style simply does not work that way. At all. The fact that  the characters are all physically the same (except small children)  REGARDLESS OF WHAT AGE THEY ARE IN THE STORY is what causes the problem -  the style is designed to make 'ageless' characters, but then they gave  the characters specific ages.


That's fair enough to an  extent.  However, I still don't understand the logic with the female  characters; Rouge is an 18 year old and has a different body shape and  facial features to, say, Amy.  So theoretically, you COULD age-up Amy if  you use Rouge's features because Rouge clearly has a mature body with  curves, more shapely legs, eye make-up etc.

Here's Rouge: http://images.wikia.com/sonicencylopedia/images/6/6f/Rouge_the_Bat.png
Here's Amy: http://images.wikia.com/sonic/images/7/74/Amy_Rose.png

Rouge looks older than Amy.  Because she IS older than Amy.  In much the same way Sonic looks older than Tails because he IS older than Tails.  Tails' proportions are different to Sonic's - Tails is short, with little arms and legs whereas Sonic is tall, with long arms and legs.  The style can allow for older looking characters, so I don't understand why people aren't allowed to "age up" in the official style.

I'm not asking these questions because I go around drawing this kinda thing all the time (there's absolutely NO porn whatsoever in my gallery, Sonic or not) - but, as a Sonic artist, I need to know where I stand for whenever I accept trades and commissions and things.  Plus I know some other people in this topic have been asking similar things.


----------



## Soline (Sep 8, 2012)

The 'problem' with the whole banning thing as far as I've seen in my (admittedly niche) wanders of FA, is that a large portion of the admins are notoriously biased towards or against certain things, which means even if the AUP was clear and precise on exact, character specifics, it would still be pot luck sending a ticket or uploading something, you might attract the attention of an admin who agrees with you, or one who disagrees, or who's simply on a bad day and bans the entire user because "fuck it, I'm Admin". The few who do their best to give unbiased judgements aren't enough to make much of an appearance from behind the biased ones.


It doesn't help that the AUP operates a two-tone policy for the whole child-thing. On the one hand, some stuff has to be aged up because it -looks- underaged. And on the other hand, other stuff is acceptable while looking underaged because somewhere along the lines an 'official source' has said "Ayup they're actually adults". They're two contrary methods, not to mention the confusion it winds up causing. 

FA should operate one principle or the other. Either take a visual, physical checklist approach and say "things that look underage. No. Age it up, or it'll be banned" All Sonic characters, because as someone pointed out earlier, are drawn to the same style, should be aged up, because they -all- have high voices and look like children. So should all MLP, First Generation Pokemon(Or whatever? I have no idea what they're called, the baby ones, Charmander and Nidorina and all those ones), the baby-digimons, and all the other franchises that has characters that _look/sound_ young or underaged; because that's the principle being operated, and if you happen to have a weeaboo or otherwise innocent/cutsie style that means your characters look young and can be seen by most as underaged, you run the risk of them being deleted.

OR stick with the 'official rules book' policy. Sonic Lore says Rouge is over 18, and Vanilla is by default for having a six year old kid, they're allowed, the kiddies aren't. MLP is allowed because the rule books say they run stuff and are 'young adults' (Honestly I'm not sure they'd be allowed in this policy either since the owner makes a big fuss out of 'well they're sorta adult but not quite see we wanted a younger audience and not schoolkids but not proper adults either...savvy?' which to my mind amounts to "They're children, but we don't want to drive away all the bronies and admit that") And so and and so forth. But it would also mean Admins have to actually listen to the artist, and what _their _rulebook says. It would mean tough luck if the picture happens to -look- underaged, because the artist makes a point of saying "Look, this is my adult, over 18, 32 year old waitress wolf who has a litter and a nice kitty husband, she just happens to have retained her youthful looks"


Yeah, just my few cents worth. And personally I hate that MLP is being a completely free ride for the moment, under numerous little wriggly reasons and loopholes, that pretty much seems to amount to "They're the most popular thing since sliced bread, we're not about to lose a third of our traffic to uphold our rules against them" (No, I don't hate MLP, quite like it actually, just hate the 'free-pass' attitude they seem to get)


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> That's a red herring. Sonic(adult) can also refer to the style of artwork, and there's still plenty of official characters that are fair game.
> 
> Further, the entire argument of "It's in the submission categories still that makes it allowed" ignores the fact that A) It used to be allowed, B) The submission categories are on the 'to be eliminated' list, and C) Do not override site rules.
> 
> We also can't readily remove it without relabeling EVERYTHING in the database that has that submission category.



You are just proving my point though. It's all these sudden recent changes that are making some issues come off to the causal user as hypocritical do to their continued existence. It's sorta like, you mouth is saying one thing but your eyes are saying something totally different. If this is a rule the admin intended to implement and enforce, they you gotta go all the way even if it's an inconvenience to do ( hey, if you're willing to inconvenience those artist, then why shouldn't everyone in the deal feel the pain, sorta speak).

I also, though, don't see then how this works with other characters. Ferals for instance who have been shown to be intended in their original media as being 'children' in the respective genre. Does this mean there will now be a ban or removal or say, adult work of Land Before Time, Rookie Level digimon, and yes, some aspects of MLP for example? In some causes artist intent doesn't mean much of anything when in it's official canon they are still Identified as children.  Digimon are pretty explicit about the maturity intent of certain levels of digimon.  Because people are really going to hate me saying this but Artwork of like Renamon, Guilmon or any other rookie level digimon art is technically, according to the rules of their own canon, child art:

For most Digimon, there are six Digivolution levels: 


Fresh or Baby (å¹¼å¹´æœŸI _Younenki I_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Childhood I"), officially translated as "Baby I"
In-Training (å¹¼å¹´æœŸII _Younenki II_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Childhood 2"), officially translated as "Baby II"
Rookie (æˆé•·æœŸ _Seichouki_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Youth"), officially translated as "Child"
Champion (æˆç†ŸæœŸ _Seijukuki_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Adolescence"), officially translated as "Adult"
Ultimate (å®Œå…¨ä½“ _Kanzen-tai_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Perfect form"), officially translated as "Perfect"
Mega (ç©¶æ¥µä½“ _Kyuukyoku-tai_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Ultimate form"), officially translated as "Ultimate"


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Yes, but that was only a few months ago and now Retroactive deletions are taking place, where, frankly just grandfathering those and preventing new submissions probably would have been the wises and most drama free way of going about it. I mean let's face it, a submission posted on FA greater than a year suddenly being deleted is by right going to tick some people off because it really would be out of the blue.
> 
> But hey, not my site or site rep to worry about, but It's interesting how these actions are causing opinions to be generated among users and in the fandom.



It was more than a 'few' months ago. http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/114609-Sonic-Guidelines-for-Mature-Adult-Images Feburary. Further, when the rules changed then, it wasn't anything major, simply a clarification and minor modification. The meat of the issue hadn't changed.

Further, FA hasn't grandfathered anything in for years, and certainly not since I've been an admin. 

As a final note, know how people complain about tickets never being answered? This is all due to admins answering tickets from months ago. 



Delta said:


> Don't tell the users they don't have rights, dont make us feel like second-class citizens just because we dare peruse the grounds of your park. Respect the userbase, as their attendance keeps your park open, and they will respect you for managing such a place.[/I]



Don't claim rights you don't have, and I'll refrain from pointing out you do not in fact have those rights. Deal?


----------



## Soline (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta you said the exact same thing again. You have no rights, you are second class to the admins/owners. What you're trying to say, I assume, is "Admins, show a little respect for the people who frequent here, and they'll stop hating you."


----------



## E1337ist (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> ...why do people automatically assume that admins are butthurt about art they dislike, and that's the reason for removals? *shakes his head sadly*



I think it's because people are getting mixed messages about what art is and is not okay to post. The whole issue here seems to be divided into two groups: the first group decides whether an AUP violation is met according to the characters' cannonical ages, and the second is whether the characters _look_ underage. Both are legitimate viewpoints, at least as far as Sonic porn goes. The problem lies with the admins and moderators not being able to come to a unified, definite conclusion about how Sonic porn should be dealt with. Some images get removed by one guy, and a bunch more are given the okay by another, simply because the staff have different opinions on whether they violate the AUP.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> Thanks for getting back to me and clearing up the confusion for me.  Just got another quick one though:
> 
> 
> That's fair enough to an  extent.  However, I still don't understand the logic with the female  characters; Rouge is an 18 year old and has a different body shape and  facial features to, say, Amy.  So theoretically, you COULD age-up Amy if  you use Rouge's features because Rouge clearly has a mature body with  curves, more shapely legs, eye make-up etc.
> ...


Herp, forgot I multiquoted in my rage at the blow.

Amy Rose might be doable, except that as an adult shown in the series (the 10/20 years later thing), she's shown with the exact same body type. Your arguement presumes that she's got more growing to do when the official style has her the same shape.




Ebony_Leopard said:


> You are just proving my point though. It's all these sudden recent changes that are making some issues come off to the causal user as hypocritical do to their continued existence. It's sorta like, you mouth is saying one thing but your eyes are saying something totally different. If this is a rule the admin intended to implement and enforce, they you gotta go all the way even if it's an inconvenience to do ( hey, if you're willing to inconvenience those artist, then why shouldn't everyone in the deal feel the pain, sorta speak).
> 
> I also, though, don't see then how this works with other characters. Ferals for instance who have been shown to be intended in their original media as being 'children' in the respective genre. Does this mean there will now be a ban or removal or say, adult work of Land Before Time, Rookie Level digimon, and yes, some aspects of MLP for example? In some causes artist intent doesn't mean much of anything when in it's official canon they are still Identified as children.  Digimon are pretty explicit about the maturity intent of certain levels of digimon.  Because people are really going to hate me saying this but Artwork of like Renamon, Guilmon or any other rookie level digimon art is technically, according to the rules of their own canon, child art:
> 
> ...



Ebony, how many times do I have to say

A MINOR MODIFICATION SEVEN MONTHS AGO A RECENT MODIFICATION DOES NOT MAKE.


----------



## Soline (Sep 8, 2012)

Also, props to the strange pie-otter-cat person for sticking around in such a busy thread


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Ebony, how many times do I have to say
> 
> A MINOR MODIFICATION SEVEN MONTHS AGO A RECENT MODIFICATION DOES NOT MAKE.



Ok fine, but what about the second point. How will that be handled. Because well child characters are child characters afterall regardless of what they may happen to be. Will other genre expect to have the same level of scrutiny, if not why, not. If so, when?


----------



## ThreeDawg (Sep 8, 2012)

MFW, I could have sworn that this thread would have been finished by now. Lets see its content....

Intelligent awnsers from admins and users, more attempts to fuel the flames by Delta...

Ok. Let us take a moment, and think. Should you be arguing about this? No.

If a man comes up to you, pulls out a gun, and tells you to put your belongings on the groud, what do you do? Do you question this? Do you protest this?

Hell no. You put your belongings on the ground, and simply hope he does not still bust a cap in ya.

So, lets put it this way now.

Admin comes up to you, taps you with the hilt of his banhammer. He asks for you to take down all your sonic porn.

Do you argue with him? Do you question this? Do you protest this? No. You take down all your sonic porn, and hopes he does not choose to ban you anyway.

This is how it works. Now behave.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

E1337ist said:


> I think it's because people are getting mixed messages about what art is and is not okay to post. The whole issue here seems to be divided into two groups: the first group decides whether an AUP violation is met according to the characters' cannonical ages, and the second is whether the characters _look_ underage. Both are legitimate viewpoints, at least as far as Sonic porn goes. The problem lies with the admins and moderators not being able to come to a unified, definite conclusion about how Sonic porn should be dealt with. Some images get removed by one guy, and a bunch more are given the okay by another, simply because the staff have different opinions on whether they violate the AUP.



Actually, both are used depending on the situation. In the official style, we go by canon. In the unofficial style, because they CAN be aged up physically, we go by visible maturity.


----------



## Soline (Sep 8, 2012)

You're likening the Admins to muggers, in attempt to placate angst that the admins are being abusive?....I'm impressed ThreeDawg, you managed to do the exact opposite of your intentions.

(also, for future reference, I'd wait for the person to turn around, and smack him with the heaviest thing I just put on the ground)


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Soline said:


> You're likening the Admins to muggers, in attempt to placate angst that the admins are being abusive?....I'm impressed ThreeDawg, you managed to do the exact opposite of your intentions.
> 
> (also, for future reference, I'd wait for the person to turn around, and smack him with the heaviest thing I just put on the ground)



Chuck  Norris wouldn't stand for that.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Ok fine, but what about the second point. How will that be handled. Because well child characters are child characters afterall regardless of what they may happen to be. Will other genre expect to have the same level of scrutiny, if not why, not. If so, when?



Not a damn clue, and only vaguely relevant to the current issue.

 Due to being smacked in the face during several of the cub porn debacles by the people I was trying to help and get input from, I no longer really consider myself impartial regarding formulating ANY policy that has to do with underaged characters. I can't help but feel that a lot of the arguements for anything else to be banned are spurious and based more on "I got screwed over so everyone should be screwed over", see the MLP 'debate' (regarding the Mane Six at least. The CMC, not so much unless aged up)

Now, I can *implement* policy without bias. That much I trust myself on, and I can trust earlier policy that I had a hand in crafting. But as a rule, I avoid 'cub' issues and focus on things I find more enjoyable, such as being hit in the face with a broken glass bottle.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

ThreeDawg said:


> MFW, I could have sworn that this thread would have been finished by now. Lets see its content....
> 
> Intelligent awnsers from admins and users, more attempts to fuel the flames by Delta...
> 
> ...



I hate image macros, but...

http://thesignalinthenoise.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/youre-not-helping.jpg


----------



## VGmaster9 (Sep 8, 2012)

All FA needs is better mods and we would never have this problem. This is starting to be like DA again, post something the staff doesn't like and you get banned. The reason I joined FA in the first place so I could be able to see the stuff I wanted and many artists I saw on DA migrated to FA.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

Just in case the age of all the Sonic characters is still being questioned (despite being noted by someone else in this topic earlier), I would like to lay down the facts and give you some different links to back it up. Indeed not every character in the Sonic Universe is underage. In fact, the age of some are unknown but are quite obvious. Seeing as Sonic Retro is a very prestigious website when it comes to facts, here are some links from them to back these facts up.

Shadow the Hedgehog - Sonic Retro
Rouge the Bat - Sonic Retro
Big the Cat - Sonic Retro
Wave the Swallow - Sonic Retro
Vanilla the Rabbit - Sonic Retro

Notice they don't look all that different from some of the characters that are underage because that's the style. Even when Sonic characters have aged, there's little to no change in the way they look physically because that's the style. Archie Comics "Sonic the Hedgehog" can attest to that. Aside from the Uncle Chuck example, let's look at the "25 Years Later" arc which clearly shows little to no change in the style.

Sonic the Hedgehog 25 Years Later
Miles "Tails" Prower 25 Years Later
Knuckles the Echidna 25 Years Later
Shadow the Hedgehog 25 Years Later
Sally Acorn 25 Years Later
Julie-Su 25 Years Later

The age and style of these characters count as canon because SEGA still owns rights to these Sonic characters in the Archie Comics series even if SEGA lets Archie Comics do whatever they want to the story and it's character to a degree. I don't support porn of under-aged characters in any way shape or form nor do I support implied porn of under-aged characters in any way shape or form. I agree if someone's going to draw adult content using Sonic characters, certain characters should be aged up but the style shouldn't factor into age. Style never factored into age in the Sonic Universe unless SEGA stated the age of that character.

*So can I ask members of the staff (moderators and administrators) something? Why can't we age up in the Sonic style when clearly it's been done by SEGA and Archie Comics?*

I would like no back-seat modding responses please because I won't respond to it, sorry.

Personally, I don't have anything that breaks the rules anyway. Neither do some Sonic artists I know who draw Sonic related adult content while following the rules and yet they're being targeted. Either by members who might have an issue with such content, or simply by the way the policies are being handled of recently.

People are saying there are other sites one can go to if they don't like the way things are here now. Let me just say, *why should I pack up and move to some other site if something's bothering me here*. For one, my account on Fur Affinity which I'm still using to this day has been around for over 6 years now. I have very close friends here and some are only here. I refuse to join other art sites that won't allow human art for example. Even if I was to move to one that allows any art, I'm giving up my friends and audience who are watching me here. When I registered for this site, I never thought years from now I might run into trouble because the way things are being handled. As a respectable member of the Fur community, Sonic community, and so forth, this concerns me.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> So can I ask members of the staff (moderators and administrators) something? Why can't we age up in the Sonic style when clearly it's been done by SEGA and Archie Comics?



You answer that yourself, above that question:


> *Notice they don't look all that different from some of the characters that are underage because that's the style. Even when Sonic characters have aged, there's little to no change in the way they look physically because that's the style.* Archie Comics "Sonic the Hedgehog" can attest to that. Aside from the Uncle Chuck example, let's look at the "25 Years Later" arc which clearly shows little to no change in the style.
> 
> Sonic the Hedgehog 25 Years Later
> Miles "Tails" Prower 25 Years Later
> ...


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

So we can draw porn of Sonic so long as we give him a crown and cape as in '25 years later' even if we don't change his physical appearance whatsoever, because he canon says this is the older Sonic despite him being almost identical to his 15 year old self?


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> So we can draw porn of Sonic so long as we give him a crown and cape as in '25 years later' even if we don't change his physical appearance whatsoever, because he canon says this is the older Sonic despite him being almost identical to his 15 year old self?



No.

Because he's the same physically as his 15 year old self, and aged up only by props, there's no real change in design or aging up going on.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

17. Sonic in the Archie comics is currently 17 years old.


----------



## Armaetus (Sep 8, 2012)

Why is Summercat the only staff participating in this currently?


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> No.
> 
> Because he's the same physically as his 15 year old self, and aged up only by props, there's no real change in design or aging up going on.


But the canon EXPLICITLY states that this is the older Sonic.  If "the character looks young" is the only factor coming into play here then there are a ton of other franchises that should be getting hit by this as well.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 8, 2012)

Something about this whole situation brings this little ditty to mind.



> Yes! So if this woman weighs as much as a duck, then she is a witch!


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I hate image macros, but...
> 
> http://thesignalinthenoise.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/youre-not-helping.jpg



I'm surprised that after all these years you're still willing to put up with this.

You need to win the 'worlds most patient person' award or something. :I

As for on topic for 'sonic porn'...

I'm not gonna miss it. Sorry guys.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

One other thing. I understand why the style is the way it is. Do you, the staff (both moderators and administrators) understand this? That's why I asked this question.


> *So can I ask members of the staff (moderators and administrators) something? Why can't we age up in the Sonic style when clearly it's been done by SEGA and Archie Comics?*


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Glaice said:


> Why is Summercat the only staff participating in this currently?



Because I'm the only one without a life. 

In all seriousness, it's because everyone else is doing other things, we're talking about this on IRC as things go on, but there's no real need for anyone else to pipe up, I guess?



jenhedgehog said:


> But the canon EXPLICITLY states that this is the older Sonic.  If "the character looks young" is the only factor coming into play here then there are a ton of other franchises that should be getting hit by this as well.



The canon of that story arc, yes. However, because the only difference is props between him and the younger version, we simply cannot allow that loophole. 

It all ties back to the fact that without props (Or fake mustaches), you cannot age up in the original Sonic style.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> One other thing. I understand why the style is the way it is. Do you, the staff (both moderators and administrators) understand this? That's why I asked this question.



Because they didn't actually age up the characters. They just added in props, there were no changes to the physical designs.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Don't claim rights you don't have, and I'll refrain from pointing out you do not in fact have those rights. Deal?



....Don't ask to be treated fairly and respected as another human being? Do you....comprehend your thought process when you say things like this? Do you reflect at all? Are you confused by what I'm asking? The way you responded makes it sound like I just demanded that the admins throw over the keys of the site to me, thats not what I'm asking. If you aren't confused, then by God - I'm sorry I ever began conversing with someone as drunk with power as you. Thats just terrible and I hope you find your way back to rational thought.



Soline said:


> Delta you said the exact same thing again. You have no rights, you are second class to the admins/owners. What you're trying to say, I assume, is "Admins, show a little respect for the people who frequent here, and they'll stop hating you."



I said the same exact thing, yes. I stated that i'd be copy/pasting what I said before. I do have rights, Im not a second class citizen to any one - nobody is. What Im trying to say is "Admins, don't step on your userbase - respect them and they'll respect you."



ThreeDawg said:


> MFW, I could have sworn that this thread would have been finished by now. Lets see its content....
> 
> Intelligent awnsers from admins and users, more attempts to fuel the flames by Delta...
> 
> ...



Whoa! First off, really bad example - nobody is threatening me here or making me do anything. When people are put into positions such as the one you've stated there is no "right answer". Believe it or not some people choose not to be victims (its usually not about loosing you money or valuables when someone puts someone else at gunpoint - its about power and preying on people. Same concept as rape not being about sex - but about power) and come out on top. Secondly, if an administrator told someone to take down their sonic porn (you haven't specified if it broke the rules or not) the user could say no. If they were banned it could be disputed and if it turns out that the admin in question was abusing their power they would hopefully be stripped of their power and the ban lifted. If it was against the rules, then yes, the user should oblige and punishment should be dealt accordingly. There is no fear of "being banned anyway" this isn't a game server ran by twelve year olds - the scenario you've presented isn't how it works at all. I'm gonna guess that you're fairly young, still in your teens probably. If I can advise on something its this, never blindly subject to the powers that be, you sacrifice so much that you dont have to simply by saying "thats how it is" when you are within your rights to expect equality and respect. Thats what this is all about.


----------



## Ozriel (Sep 8, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> But the canon EXPLICITLY states that this is the older Sonic.  If "the character looks young" is the only factor coming into play here then there are a ton of other franchises that should be getting hit by this as well.



To me and the rest of the world that are not into the whole Sonic fandom, he looks the same as his younger self. So there's not much of a change.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> ....Don't ask to be treated fairly and respected as another human being? Do you....comprehend your thought process when you say things like this? Do you reflect at all? Are you confused by what I'm asking? The way you responded makes it sound like I just demanded that the admins throw over the keys of the site to me, thats not what I'm asking. If you aren't confused, then by God - I'm sorry I ever began conversing with someone as drunk with power as you. Thats just terrible and I hope you find your way back to rational thought.



How does "Don't claim to have rights you actually don't" equal "Don't ask to be treated fairly?" Are you unable to grok the difference there?

I try my best (I'm a flawed human, so sometimes I fail) to treat everyone with respect and to deal with everyone fairly under our rules. People who claims freedom of speech are challenging the rules and our authority to make and enforce those rules. THAT is what grinds my gears.

We're talking levels of "How dare you remove meme images from my gallery" and "What gives you the right to judge my gallery!"

THAT.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

But surely it's not a loophoole if the canon states this is the case?  

Look at the other characters though - Tails in the "25 years later" arc, you can't tell me that he doesn't look any older.  His proportions are different, his outfit his different - heck, even his facial expressions and attitude are different as well, he's clearly much more mature than the standard Tails.  So the point that you can age-up in the Sonic style is made valid by this, surely?


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

How is it a loophole? What part of it was done by Archie Comics and SEGA fell on deaf ears? All characters in Archie Comics Sonic the Hedgehog are a copyright of SEGA.

Seriously, if people are going to get outcasted off this site because of illogical legalities. Do me a favor and do it for all other franchises that cater to kids and have young looking characters thanks.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> But surely it's not a loophoole if the canon states this is the case?
> 
> Look at the other characters though - Tails in the "25 years later" arc, you can't tell me that he doesn't look any older.  His proportions are different, his outfit his different - heck, even his facial expressions and attitude are different as well, he's clearly much more mature than the standard Tails.  So the point that you can age-up in the Sonic style is made valid by this, surely?



No. What differences there are - and a lot of that can be attributed to artists not deisgn - are too minor for any sort of guideline, guidepost, or anything. 

No. Zero. Zilch. You cannot age up the official styles. Either stop posting porn of the unengaged characters to FA, or learn how to draw in alternative styles. You'll grow as an artist.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Because I'm the only one without a life.
> 
> In all seriousness, it's because everyone else is doing other things, we're talking about this on IRC as things go on, but there's no real need for anyone else to pipe up, I guess?
> 
> ...



so, will there be an official statement that bans the original sonic style in all adult art save for the characters already mentioned as already being 18+?


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> How is it a loophole? What part of it was done by Archie Comics and SEGA fell on deaf ears? All characters in Archie Comics Sonic the Hedgehog are a copyright of SEGA.
> 
> Seriously, if people are going to get outcasted off this site because of illogical legalities. Do me a favor and do it for all other franchises that cater to kids and have young looking characters thanks.



I'll say it once more and not again:

THERE WERE NO DESIGN CHANGES, ONLY PROP CHANGES. THERE IS NO PHYSICAL WAY TO TELL THE OLDER VERSION FROM THE YOUNGER VERSION WITHOUT PROPS. CLAIMING OTHERWISE IS DISINGENUOUS, AND FALLS AFOUL OF THE SHIPPO "HES REALLY SIX HUNDRED YEARS OLD I SWEAR" GUIDELINE.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> so, will there be an official statement that bans the original sonic style in all adult art save for the characters already mentioned as already being 18+?



....

....

I've already started to lose my temper, Ebony. Don't push me, especially when you know that what you're asking an official statement for is... the status quo. The current state of affairs. There are no changes in policy on this issue. None. Zero. Zilch. Zip.


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I'll say it once more and not again:
> 
> THERE WERE NO DESIGN CHANGES, ONLY PROP CHANGES. THERE IS NO PHYSICAL WAY TO TELL THE OLDER VERSION FROM THE YOUNGER VERSION WITHOUT PROPS. CLAIMING OTHERWISE IS DISINGENUOUS, AND FALLS AFOUL OF THE SHIPPO "HES REALLY SIX HUNDRED YEARS OLD I SWEAR" GUIDELINE.



May I ask, I'm not familiar with sonic, is there a pronounced physical difference between the adult characters in sonic compared to the underaged ones? If this is not so it disestablishes the statement that the adult characters are acceptable but the underaged ones not, but if it is so it disproves the assertion that sonic characters cannot be 'aged up' in the cartoon style- because if there is a pronounced difference that change can surely be applied to the other characters.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> May I ask, I'm not familiar with sonic, is there a pronounced physical difference between the adult characters in sonic compared to the underaged ones? If this is not so it disestablishes the statement that the adult characters are acceptable but the underaged ones not, but if it is so it disproves the assertion that sonic characters cannot be 'aged up' in the cartoon style- because if there is a pronounced difference that change can surely be applied to the other characters.



Aside from some VERY SPECIFIC exemptions, and the nature of the exemptions means it's pointless to enumerate them in the rules, there is no visible design difference between 'adult' and 'underaged' in the original sonic style.


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> May I ask, I'm not familiar with sonic, is there a pronounced physical difference between the adult characters in sonic compared to the underaged ones? If this is not so it disestablishes the statement that the adult characters are acceptable but the underaged ones not, but if it is so it disproves the assertion that sonic characters cannot be 'aged up' in the cartoon style- because if there is a pronounced difference that change can surely be applied to the other characters.



There actually isn't.

Looking at the comics and some of the games, they have gotten older (as in the number beside the word 'AGE' in their profile has gone up) but I remember in the Archie comic that Sonic had a child or something and stopped being friends with Tails for like, years. I'm talking like a decade or something.

And they looked the same as they did when they were eight years old running around in Green Hill during the plots/stories based off the first game.

So no, there isn't.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> No. What differences there are - and a lot of that can be attributed to artists not deisgn - are too minor for any sort of guideline, guidepost, or anything.
> 
> No. Zero. Zilch. You cannot age up the official styles. Either stop posting porn of the unengaged characters to FA, or learn how to draw in alternative styles. You'll grow as an artist.


Wow, way to be judgmental!

Ok, as I previously stated a couple of times in here, I DO -NOT- HAVE -ANY- SONIC PORN IN MY GALLERY!

Secondly, please don't try and tell me to draw differently.  I am a 25 year old woman with art qualifications; I draw Sonic (and fan-art in general) as a matter of choice.  I can draw antho stuff and realistic stuff with ease, I just choose not to.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 8, 2012)

Why do you all insist on arguing? Why do you all insist there were changes or desire some form of announcement? The rules have not changed. I said this before and I will say this again...the only thing that changed is a sudden influx of tickets new and old being handled. That's it.

Remember it doesn't really matter what any of of us Admins/Staff/Mods feel on the matter of underage content. Our feelings are just as irrelevant as are yours. Sad isn't it? It doesn't matter if we like or dislike the content. What matters is how it is looked at/seen by the outside world. If it looks like it can be mistaken as underage there is often a really good case for it to go. It really comes down to...do you want FA to be up? Surely you all do because you care enough to come here and ask questions. If we don't try to find a way to deal with the under-age content, the gray areas, etc (not matter how difficult and frustrating it is for everyone) than we don't have an FA. If you want FA to exist try to understand that the rules we have are for the benefit of the continued existence of the site. No amount of argument changes the facts. So please don't nettle us for something outside of our control.


----------



## Soline (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I'll say it once more and not again:
> 
> THERE WERE NO DESIGN CHANGES, ONLY PROP CHANGES. THERE IS NO PHYSICAL WAY TO TELL THE OLDER VERSION FROM THE YOUNGER VERSION WITHOUT PROPS. CLAIMING OTHERWISE IS DISINGENUOUS, AND FALLS AFOUL OF THE SHIPPO "HES REALLY SIX HUNDRED YEARS OLD I SWEAR" GUIDELINE.



Just googled Shippo, and it looks like a little cub boy thing. I'm guessing from your mention of him, he's not allowed in porn because he looks underaged, despite the official franchise claiming him as six hundred?

Then why is MLP allowed, they look like little pony girl things, and are frequently referred to as 'ponies', child horses. If Shippo and 'older version Sonic' is not allowed because they look young despite franchise information to the contrary, then why is MLP allowed? particularly when the franchise information is much less spotty than the former two.

(Again, not an anti-MLP thing, they're just the easiest example to come to mind)


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Aside from some VERY SPECIFIC exemptions, and the nature of the exemptions means it's pointless to enumerate them in the rules, there is no visible design difference between 'adult' and 'underaged' in the original sonic style.



Then this comes down the triviality I was hoping it didn't, the rather arbitrary age connoted to the character by the franchise. Imagine if instead the ages given were randomly swapped by the franchise, imagine that people producing sexual imagery, that would never exist in the sonic universe, might not be adhearing to the arbitrary age demograph.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> ....
> 
> ....
> 
> I've already started to lose my temper, Ebony. Don't push me, especially when you know that what you're asking an official statement for is... the status quo. The current state of affairs. There are no changes in policy on this issue. None. Zero. Zilch. Zip.



Well clearly it isn't the status quo if we're having this conversation in this thread and when the previous discussion by then admin Sciggles told people to age up the character. You in this  thread have added a new element to the discussion when you say it is not possible for artist to use the official  or canon styles to "age the characters up" even if they copy the canon style when they were shown to be so. So I think it's a fair question to ask that there be an official statement made for all of FA, not just those who happen upon this thread on the forum, to eliminate any other confusion in the future from other artist who currently are drawing in that style. Surely you don't want to be receiving tons of TT from people now reporting artist due to your statements and leave artist not aware of this thread in a situation where they are suddenly seeing their artwork disappear.

A front page note of this needs to be made.


----------



## Soline (Sep 8, 2012)

Jen, I'm fairly sure he wasn't talking -to- you in the slightest. As with most of Summer's other comments, they've been re-stating the rules/what everyone can and can't do, and based on your quote not a single line of the rules were actually aimed at you.


----------



## Jameless (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> May I ask, I'm not familiar with sonic, is there a pronounced physical difference between the adult characters in sonic compared to the underaged ones? If this is not so it disestablishes the statement that the adult characters are acceptable but the underaged ones not, but if it is so it disproves the assertion that sonic characters cannot be 'aged up' in the cartoon style- because if there is a pronounced difference that change can surely be applied to the other characters.




i'm just popping in with a quick google search (i don't know much about sonic, sorry) but here's a difference

http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/30100000/Amy-sonic-and-amy-30140905-238-298.png  <--- no boobies

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2493/rouge2.gif <--- big boobies


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

Jameless said:


> i'm just popping in with a quick google search (i don't know much about sonic, sorry) but here's a difference
> 
> http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/30100000/Amy-sonic-and-amy-30140905-238-298.png  <--- no boobies
> 
> http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2493/rouge2.gif <--- big boobies



AKA: The only character in the entire series that actually has a chest, no matter how much older the other females in the series get.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Soline said:


> Just googled Shippo, and it looks like a little cub boy thing. I'm guessing from your mention of him, he's not allowed in porn because he looks underaged, despite the official franchise claiming him as six hundred?
> 
> Then why is MLP allowed, they look like little pony girl things, and are frequently referred to as 'ponies', child horses. If Shippo and 'older version Sonic' is not allowed because they look young despite franchise information to the contrary, then why is MLP allowed? particularly when the franchise information is much less spotty than the former two.
> 
> (Again, not an anti-MLP thing, they're just the easiest example to come to mind)



Because Shippo, despite his 'age', looks like a kid compared to the rest of the characters in his setting. Draw him as a physical adult and you're gravy - IE the inverse of my Shippo Rule is the Eustace Is A Dragon rule, in which an underaged character (Eustace, from Voyage of the Dawn Treader) is turned into an adult dragon. This came up because there was hottub Aslan/EustaceDragon porn (It totally makes sense if you've read the book).

MLP, the characters are adults and look adult compared to other adults. Further, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony A pony is a small horse, not a baby/young/immature horse.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> The rules have not changed. I said this before and I will say this again...the only thing that changed is a sudden influx of tickets new and old being handled. That's it.



*And this is one of the issues I have right now. Someone's throwing their toys out of the pram because it's Sonic related adult content.*


----------



## Jameless (Sep 8, 2012)

DarkMettaur said:


> AKA: The only character in the entire series that actually has a chest, no matter how much older the other females in the series get.




yeah again i don't know much about sonic.


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

Again, may I mention Rai, who is at risk of being banned _*even though he made distinct physical changes to the characters to "age them up"*_ as demonstrated in http://www.furaffinity.net/full/5456025/

I feel that this whole drama is caused by a personal vendetta slash attempt to completely alienate a certain sector of FA's userbase.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Well clearly it isn't the status quo if we're having this conversation in this thread and when the previous discussion by then admin Sciggles told people to age up the character. You in this  thread have added a new element to the discussion when you say it is not possible for artist to use the official  or canon styles to "age the characters up" even if they copy the canon style when they were shown to be so. So I think it's a fair question to ask that there be an official statement made for all of FA, not just those who happen upon this thread on the forum, to eliminate any other confusion in the future from other artist who currently are drawing in that style. Surely you don't want to be receiving tons of TT from people now reporting artist due to your statements and leave artist not aware of this thread in a situation where they are suddenly seeing their artwork disappear.
> 
> A front page note of this needs to be made.



Again. Nothing is new. At all. Further, just because someone opens up a TT on something does not mean we remove it. We do have judgement, y'know.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> May I ask, I'm not familiar with sonic, is there a pronounced physical difference between the adult characters in sonic compared to the underaged ones? If this is not so it disestablishes the statement that the adult characters are acceptable but the underaged ones not, but if it is so it disproves the assertion that sonic characters cannot be 'aged up' in the cartoon style- because if there is a pronounced difference that change can surely be applied to the other characters.


Some of the female characters look different, yes.  Rouge the Bat is an 18 year old character who is a bit curvy, with slightly shapely legs and eye make-up.  Amy Rose is a 12 year old character who isn't shapely, has skinny little legs and doesn't wear make-up.  Cream the Rabbit is 6, she's extremely short with small arms and legs.

With the male characters it's usually in the height and proportions, so that's more of a grey area.  Sonic is 15/16/17 depending on the canon, he's tall with long arms and legs.  Tails is 12, he's short and has short arms and legs.  His facial expressions and general attitude exude innocence as well, whereas Sonic behaves more maturely.


----------



## Fallowfox (Sep 8, 2012)

Jameless said:


> i'm just popping in with a quick google search (i don't know much about sonic, sorry) but here's a difference
> 
> http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/30100000/Amy-sonic-and-amy-30140905-238-298.png  <--- no boobies
> 
> http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2493/rouge2.gif <--- big boobies



So if the characters have adult sexual organs, they're adults yes?


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Soline said:


> Then why is MLP allowed, they look like little pony girl things, and are frequently referred to as 'ponies', child horses.


*Headdesk*

... ponies.  Are not.  Child horses.  Ponies.  Are.  Ponies.  The definition of a "pony" is simply "a horse of a small breed".  "Fillies" are young female horses (Apple Bloom, Sweetie Belle, Scootaloo, etc.)  "Colts" are the male equivilant.  "Foals" are younger horses of either gender.

"Ponies," however, are of any age.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Aside from some VERY SPECIFIC exemptions, and the nature of the exemptions means it's pointless to enumerate them in the rules, there is no visible design difference between 'adult' and 'underaged' in the original sonic style.




Devil's Advocate:

If there is not difference visually in teen characters verses adult characters in Sonic art be it video game or comic,they why bother even having the conversation and just assume when one uses the Sonic (Adult) tag in submission that the characters in question are indeed adult save for the obvious exception of Cream and Tails?


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

GamerFox said:


> Again, may I mention Rai, who is at risk of being banned _*even though he made distinct physical changes to the characters to "age them up"*_ as demonstrated in http://www.furaffinity.net/full/5456025/
> 
> I feel that this whole drama is caused by a personal vendetta slash attempt to completely alienate a certain sector of FA's userbase.



It's nice that you feel that way, but it is actually not related to anything in fact. This is one of our admins dealing with trouble tickets, or rather, one specific one that had one thousand links in it.

...one. Thousand. Links.

And I complain when we have 50+ links.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> How does "Don't claim to have rights you actually don't" equal "Don't ask to be treated fairly?" Are you unable to grok the difference there?
> 
> I try my best (I'm a flawed human, so sometimes I fail) to treat everyone with respect and to deal with everyone fairly under our rules. People who claims freedom of speech are challenging the rules and our authority to make and enforce those rules. THAT is what grinds my gears.
> 
> ...


I see whats going on, it makes sense now that we can't get through to one another - we're not talking about the same things.
The funny thing about this fiasco is we both agree, Summer. There are rules in place about what can be posted and you as an administrator are entrusted with the responsibility to uphold them. It is ridiculous when people dont expect or are angry when the are punished for breaking the rules that are set forth, I agree with you completely.

My first comment was not in relation to the AUP or breaking rules however it was directed at the (flawed) phrase of "Its our site, we do what we want. The users have no right here." thats what my entire argument has been about, just that phrase. Bravo on you and the rest of the admins for doing you jobs, keep up the good work and such.


----------



## Jameless (Sep 8, 2012)

Fallowfox said:


> So if the characters have adult sexual organs, they're adults yes?




you would figure the easy way to not get banned would be to follow that statement, yes. obviously in real life AND sonic that isn't the case


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

Soline said:


> Just googled Shippo, and it looks like a little cub boy thing. I'm guessing from your mention of him, he's not allowed in porn because he looks underaged, despite the official franchise claiming him as six hundred?
> 
> Then why is MLP allowed, they look like little pony girl things, and are frequently referred to as 'ponies', child horses. If Shippo and 'older version Sonic' is not allowed because they look young despite franchise information to the contrary, then why is MLP allowed? particularly when the franchise information is much less spotty than the former two.
> 
> (Again, not an anti-MLP thing, they're just the easiest example to come to mind)



As much as I hate defending MLP, there are age differences between characters unfortunately.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/_...Play_Time!.png/1000px-S02E13_-_Play_Time!.png

Ugh.

Someone disinfect me now, I had to crawl through their horrible wiki for that.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Devil's Advocate:
> 
> If there is not difference visually in teen characters verses adult characters in Sonic art be it video game or comic,they why bother even having the conversation and just assume when one uses the Sonic (Adult) tag in submission that the characters in question are indeed adult save for the obvious exception of Cream and Tails?



Because that would be incorrect.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> MLP, the characters are adults and look adult compared to other adults. Further, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony A pony is a small horse, not a baby/young/immature horse.



I believe my wife Jen also posted this earlier http://comments.deviantart.com/1/223684344/1770555388



> fyre-flye - They are young adults, but with a maturity level of anywhere from 12 - 18. I guess I sort of justify it in my head that in real life, horses are adults by the time they are 2 or so. MLPs are horses with human brains, so they grow up fast, but mature slower....?
> 
> It's imprecise, but that's kind of what I'm thinking. At the end of the day, they need to be relatable to younger kids, but stories about going to school and dealing with parents isn't what I wanted to do so, there you have it.


----------



## Delta (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> *Headdesk*
> 
> ... ponies.  Are not.  Child horses.  Ponies.  Are.  Ponies.  The definition of a "pony" is simply "a horse of a small breed".  "Fillies" are young female horses (Apple Bloom, Sweetie Belle, Scootaloo, etc.)  "Colts" are the male equivilant.  "Foals" are younger horses of either gender.
> 
> "Ponies," however, are of any age.



I think this is known, most people are just unsure about how old the MLP cast is.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> Why do you all insist on arguing? Why do you all insist there were changes or desire some form of announcement? The rules have not changed. I said this before and I will say this again...the only thing that changed is a sudden influx of tickets new and old being handled. That's it.
> 
> Remember it doesn't really matter what any of of us Admins/Staff/Mods feel on the matter of underage content. Our feelings are just as irrelevant as are yours. Sad isn't it? It doesn't matter if we like or dislike the content. What matters is how it is looked at/seen by the outside world. If it looks like it can be mistaken as underage there is often a really good case for it to go. It really comes down to...do you want FA to be up? Surely you all do because you care enough to come here and ask questions. If we don't try to find a way to deal with the under-age content, the gray areas, etc (not matter how difficult and frustrating it is for everyone) than we don't have an FA. If you want FA to exist try to understand that the rules we have are for the benefit of the continued existence of the site. No amount of argument changes the facts. So please don't nettle us for something outside of our control.




 I feel you, but you are incorrect. The rules have changed in this very thread. Sciggles when mod told artist to age up the characters. Here however it is said that it's impossible to age up a Sonic character in it's on model style> That is definitely a change that people should probably be made aware of from the site, least they risk having work deleted left or right because of thinking they were following the previous rule while having admin operating under this current interpretation.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 8, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> *And this is one of the issues I have right now. Someone's throwing their toys out of the pram because it's Sonic related adult content.*



Not quite sure what you mean by this. Clarify please?



Ebony_Leopard said:


> I feel you, but you are incorrect. The rules have changed in this very thread. Sciggles when mod told artist to age up the characters. Here however it is said that it's impossible to age up a Sonic character in it's on model style> That is definitely a change that people should probably be made aware of from the site, least they risk having work deleted left or right because of thinking they were following the previous rule while having admin operating under this current interpretation.



I'm not interested in getting drawn into an argument of where people throw about semantics and potentially take things out of context or blow things out proportion. Prior to site going down I took a look into the rising issues people were having with the sonic content. From this I gleaned this information:

Many artists were the target of tickets about under-age characters. This includes characters that are part of the Sonic world. There were instances of old works buried under mountains of submissions, forgotten in scraps, or new ones where the users usually age up things well but a few they ended up falling short. Of the people contacted by an admin some of them responded back for clarification and got that information. They understood and all was well. Some did not contact the staffer, asked for no clarification, and jumped to conclusions. Some of these people acted in ways that were not in their best interest (or ours). Attempts at civil discussion and an acceptable resolution failed because the artist refused to cooperate. Some people who acted in ways they should not have got in trouble. Some of them had histories that worked against them.

At the end of the day from what I can see protocol was followed, nothing has changed. I do strongly believe the sonic thing needs to be revisited and where we stand needs to be restated in a way that is concise for all users. However there is a question of there is even a point if we are going to be met with strong opposition, tantrums, people taking things out of proportion, playing semantics games, playing "find a loop hole" so and so forth. If the sonic community wants understanding than they need to be willing to work with us instead of grabbing their pitchforks and torches to roast the staff that are only enforcing the rules and doing what is in the best interest of the user-base and the site as a whole.


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> It's nice that you feel that way, but it is actually not related to anything in fact. This is one of our admins dealing with trouble tickets, or rather, one specific one that had one thousand links in it.
> 
> ...one. Thousand. Links.
> 
> And I complain when we have 50+ links.



Again, I feel that this is a sign of a personal vendetta, or at least a troll with too much time on his hands


----------



## CannonFodder (Sep 8, 2012)

I just got on this thread and have no idea what's going on.

So let me take a couple wild guesses-
Is there wild accusations that the staff is taking down all of sonic art?
Is there wild accusations that the staff are discriminating against users?
Is there "well if you ban <x> then you have to ban <y> also" arguments?
Is there arguing about what constitutes as "aged up" and claiming that because the sonic characters don't grow taller in canon style that canon style porn should be allowed?
Also for bonus points has someone argued that how the mainsite is down at the moment has something to do with this conspiracy theory?


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> I just got on this thread and have no idea what's going on.
> 
> So let me take a wild guess-
> Is there wild accusations that the staff is taking down all of sonic art?
> ...




Congratulations, you win the thread.

tl;dr: Yes. Exactly that.


----------



## Jameless (Sep 8, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> I just got on this thread and have no idea what's going on.
> 
> So let me take a couple wild guesses-
> Is there wild accusations that the staff is taking down all of sonic art?
> ...



all of the above except.....

OH GOD THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE AWAY MY PR0NZ BY SHUTTING DOWN THE SITE!!

ok now, yes. all of the above :3


----------



## Ozriel (Sep 8, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> I just got on this thread and have no idea what's going on.
> 
> So let me take a couple wild guesses-
> Is there wild accusations that the staff is taking down all of sonic art?
> ...




God dammit CF, I owe you 10 dollars.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Delta said:


> I see whats going on, it makes sense now that we can't get through to one another - we're not talking about the same things.
> The funny thing about this fiasco is we both agree, Summer. There are rules in place about what can be posted and you as an administrator are entrusted with the responsibility to uphold them. It is ridiculous when people dont expect or are angry when the are punished for breaking the rules that are set forth, I agree with you completely.
> 
> My first comment was not in relation to the AUP or breaking rules however it was directed at the (flawed) phrase of "Its our site, we do what we want. The users have no right here." thats what my entire argument has been about, just that phrase. Bravo on you and the rest of the admins for doing you jobs, keep up the good work and such.



But it IS our site, and we CAN do what we want.

We *try* not to lay down the law without discussion,t hough. This thread is example of it. I could stop it at any time and say "Look, no more discussion. Sonic porn of canon-underaged characters sn't allowed. Period. no more discussion, suspensions/bans for anyone who tries to argue this."

THAT would be disrespecting the users, and frankly, a bad idea. I *like* Sonic the hedgehog art, for goodness sakes, the same way I like plenty of things. However, just like some of the things I like (custom Magic the Gathering cards), StH porn in the original style isn't allowed(with caveats). 

However, what I did when I was told "No more Magic the Gathering custom cards" (I used to make 'em for people), I went and made my own CCG so I could keep making random cards for people. Surely other artists could try expanding their own horizons a  bit and explore options? Also, nobody is saying they can't draw it. Draw it to your hearts content! Just don't post it to FA, the same way that we ask that you not post 4000 photos of your cat, or text-only images, or photos of your desktop work station, or game screenshots, etc.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> I just got on this thread and have no idea what's going on.
> 
> So let me take a couple wild guesses-
> Is there wild accusations that the staff is taking down all of sonic art?
> ...



The only thing you missed was the last point, but people have been saying that, and one person even asked another admin that. So, half the bonus points are penalized due to incorrect venue


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Again. Nothing is new. At all. Further, just because someone opens up a TT on something does not mean we remove it. We do have judgement, y'know.



I really don't mean to argue, seriously, but you have indeed added something new. Your statement here does not match up with those of Sciggles in her previous ruling on the matter (If I could link the journal right now I would but can't due to the site being down). 

I'll restate, if what is being discussed here is really old news, this journal wouldn't exist and the question by others here wouldn't currently be asked with confusion. If you feel that thismatter is indeed old hat, then it's clear the old hat was not clearly made and established to prevent confusion and people currently being banned or having their work deleted when they at least believe they were operating under the rules.

Just saying, when a picture doesn't look clear, you erase and go back over your lines.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> I really don't mean to argue, seriously, but you have indeed added something new. Your statement here does not match up with those of Sciggles in her previous ruling on the matter (If I could link the journal right now I would but can't due to the site being down).
> 
> I'll restate, if what is being discussed here is really old news, this journal wouldn't exist and the question by others here wouldn't currently be asked with confusion. If you feel that thismatter is indeed old hat, then it's clear the old hat was not clearly made and established to prevent confusion and people currently being banned or having their work deleted when they at least believe they were operating under the rules.
> 
> Just saying, when a picture doesn't look clear, you erase and go back over your lines.



Have you considered that perhaps your interpretation is off?


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> Not quite sure what you mean by this. Clarify please?


Sorry that was a bit British. What I'm trying to say is it seems some people are suddenly having a tantrum about seeing Sonic related adult content on FA when this was never an issue in the past.


----------



## CannonFodder (Sep 8, 2012)

Ozriel said:


> God dammit CF, I owe you 10 dollars.


The only way you could potentially stop any future drama about this is to make a site announcement going, "dude guys, chill out.  The cub porn ban only applies to cub porn and characters that look like kids.  Anybody that states all adult looking porn is getting banned is full of shit".


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> But it IS our site, and we CAN do what we want.
> 
> We *try* not to lay down the law without discussion,t hough. This thread is example of it. I could stop it at any time and say "Look, no more discussion. Sonic porn of canon-underaged characters sn't allowed. Period. no more discussion, suspensions/bans for anyone who tries to argue this."
> 
> ...



Frankly, that's EXACTLY what you should do. The only reason you all are getting these threads and issues like this in the first place is the unwillingness to be specifically frank and to the point about what you do and don't want, thus leaving things vague enough for confusion that leads to people having their work deleted or themselves banned for "multiple violations" when they may thinkthey have met the standards you set.

If you don't want sonic styled adult art. Just say you don't want sonic style adult art, and then make it publically known site wide that this is now the case, erasing previous statements of "Just age them up". 

Trust me, you'll only be doing yourself a favor.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Have you considered that perhaps your interpretation is off?



I think i've proven I'm pretty good at communicating in a calm, direct way, so perhaps it's the message that needs more clarification to eliminate people's off interpretations. Just saying.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 8, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> Sorry that was a bit British. What I'm trying to say is it seems some people are suddenly having a tantrum about seeing Sonic related adult content on FA when this was never an issue in the past.



It's fine. Technically this has always been an issue since the ban on cub porn. We have made multiple attempts to clarify things and it just doesn't seem to end too well. People are upset because they see what is going on and many of them have drawn false conclusions. I don't blame them for it but that is why were are all talking now. We are trying to clarify and explain why suddenly so many sonic artists are hit at once. There is an increase in man-power and that means more tickets being handled. More tickets being handled means more violation being taken care of. That said if you don't understand why you are being asked to take something down a civil message back to staff asking for clarification is always welcome.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> I think i've proven I'm pretty good at communicating in a calm, direct way, so perhaps it's the message that needs more clarification to eliminate people's off interpretations. Just saying.



Or your interpretation was off.


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

You can tell when an argument is going to stop between people when they start nitpicking the way they do and explain things instead of the actual topic on hand. This is a good thing.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

DarkMettaur said:


> You can tell when an argument is going to stop between people when they start nitpicking the way they do and explain things instead of the actual topic on hand. This is a good thing.



Pretty much. At this point, two lines of arguements "Sonic style ageup" and "Rule changes" have been played out.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Or your interpretation was off.



Shrug, Fine. You know better than me, you are an admin afterall. Then I'll concede that I am incorrect in believe that the Sonic art style, prior to now, was not banned and that artist just had to age them up. I'll agree that you are right when you say the Official Sonic art style has always been banned for adult use on FA and that all artist who've been drawing in that style have been intentionally violating the AUP/TOS and should therefore be banned/suspended or have their work deleted for blatantly violating these rules. Clearly I have miss read previous statements made by other admin on this matter. I apologize for my lack of being able to correctly interpret the clearly stated rules of operation for Furaffinity. Fortunately, neither affects me anyway, but wish you good luck in bringing the rules into full enforcement as you go through the site and remove violators of FA standards.


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

Horray! Things have ended rationally and politely.

Now Kith.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 8, 2012)

Uh huh...I'm gonna go ahead and make that body chart....Give me a sec. I'm certain this thread will still be up.


----------



## Flippy (Sep 8, 2012)

Well might as well open this can of worms....

I agree in not having anthro prostitots around FA if the site is against underage sexual content. If those are the rules those are the rules. Go else where for it if you want it. If Sonic is overage then sure by all means it is allowed.  I don't have to like it but those are the rules & I'll have to deal. I think he started off as a teen & well has been around for 20 years so he's had to have grown up by now. Personally I don't like Sonic porn at all due to it being one of the reasons for not telling my boyfriend about being a fur for years. He mentioned to me about how horrible it was that people where drawing art of his favorite childhood video game. I mentioned rule 34 & that people where allowed to draw art of if they wanted & post it so long as it allowed on that site. This became a heated argument but in the end Sonic porn was still an annoyance for him & gave me a bad platform to jump off of into telling him about this hobby. I've told him about being a fur since then but mehhh, Sonic porn just picked up some negative baggage for me. Yeah sure I have the option to block all porn from FA but I shouldn't have to just cause little Tails is taking it in the tail by Dr. Eggman. If Sonic & Dr. Eggman are doing naughty things then I'll just ignore it. I welcome something I don't like not being on a site that I do like. Rules have reason.


----------



## Kesteh (Sep 8, 2012)

Even though Sonic has existed for nearly 20 years his age is still that of a teenager. Sonicteam/Sega keeps interpreting him and his friends at a pre-adult age, give or take a different voice actor.


----------



## Flippy (Sep 8, 2012)

Flippy said:


> Well might as well open this can of worms....
> 
> I agree in not having anthro prostitots around FA if the site is against  underage sexual content. If those are the rules those are the rules. Go  else where for it if you want it. If Sonic is overage then sure by all  means it is allowed.  I don't have to like it but those are the rules  & I'll have to deal. I think he started off as a teen & well has  been around for 20 years so he's had to have grown up by now.  Personally I don't like Sonic porn at all due to it being one of the  reasons for not telling my boyfriend about being a fur for years. He  mentioned to me about how horrible it was that people where drawing art  of his favorite childhood video game. I mentioned rule 34 & that  people where allowed to draw art of if they wanted & post it so long  as it allowed on that site. This became a heated argument but in the  end Sonic porn was still an annoyance for him & gave me a bad  platform to jump off of into telling him about this hobby. I've told him  about being a fur since then but mehhh, Sonic porn just picked up some  negative baggage for me. Yeah sure I have the option to block all porn  from FA but I shouldn't have to just cause little Tails is taking it in  the tail by Dr. Eggman. If Sonic & Dr. Eggman are doing naughty  things then I'll just ignore it. I welcome something I don't like not  being on a site that I do like. Rules have reason.





Kesteh said:


> Even though Sonic has existed for nearly 20 years  his age is still that of a teenager. Sonicteam/Sega keeps interpreting  him and his friends at a pre-adult age, give or take a different voice  actor.


Good to know. I thought he would have grown up by now.  So if that's the case then Sonic shouldn't be on FA unless they age  them up or use one of the characters that is of age.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 8, 2012)

There we go...I know it's pretty quick and dirty, probably will need more revisions too. But these are the body types I've seen used the most. Now which seems more aged up?

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/125/sonicbodychart.jpg

A,B,C, or D?


----------



## RottenNekomata (Sep 8, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> There we go...I know it's pretty quick and dirty, probably will need more revisions too. But these are the body types I've seen used the most. Now which seems more aged up?
> 
> http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/125/sonicbodychart.jpg
> 
> A,B,C, or D?



I have to say it all comes down to hands, head, eyes, feet, etc that determines it for me as there are females with small breast/rump.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/125/sonicbodychart.jpg


Cuuuuuurves~  X3

I think I've seen you use B and C yourself, X.  Those look pretty aged-up to me, but then I'm not an _FA_ admin, so...  XD


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Cuuuuuurves~  X3
> 
> I think I've seen you use B and C yourself, X.  Those look pretty aged-up to me, but then I'm not an _FA_ admin, so...  XD



Forget the "aged up" statement. Pretend like it was never mentioned. That statement is retconned. Bottom line is, if you're going to draw adult Sonic art, Do Not draw it in a style that looks like the official art style. Period.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

See now, I think that's basically all anyone wanted to hear!  Or... read!  Something easy and simple to understand.

Immediately followed by "don't like it?  Lump it!"  X3


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> See now, I think that's basically all anyone wanted to hear!  Or... read!  Something easy and simple to understand.
> 
> Immediately followed by "don't like it?  Lump it!"  X3


 That's all I was saying before. There's no parsing in that statement it's to the point. Though, I still think there needs to be an official journal/statement made about this just like that so there will once and for all  be no confusion for those artist that do draw in that style and who do do adult art in it.


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

Really? Wasn't this whole "cub ban" enacted because AlertPay would cut off FA's funding? And as I recall, the whole "sonic age-up" crisis was enacted because an admin hated Sonic art and basically used the ban to enact her vendetta, so someone else had to make that "age-up" rule to act as a loophole. Now we're being told that no matter how hard the artists try to make the characters appear over 18, they're still underage if the art style so much as remotely resemble the "canon" Sonic styles? Next thing you know it's gonna be a blanket ban on the characters no matter what style is used, and really, this turns into a slippery slope.

Since when did dA admins start working here?


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> That's all I was saying before. There's no parsing in that statement it's to the point. Though, I still think there needs to be an official journal/statement made about this just like that so there will once and for all  be no confusion for those artist that do draw in that style and who do do adult art in it.


I agree!  A nice, big, official announcement would be spiffy so people will know.  Also, a little something in the AUP wouldn't hurt.  That would most definitely scale back on the confusion, I'd like to think, since this seems to be a big enough issue to where it'd warrant an AUP... clause?  Is that the right word?  'cuz as it stands right now, there ain't a single word in the AUP about _Sonic_ stuff.  x:


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

Come on, add a blanket ban to all Sonic characters and the Sonic "style" in the AUP. I dare you.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 8, 2012)

At the end of the day, the only things I do is general fur, fan-characters, fan-art, and any adult content I do draw is "aged up". My only concern was to make sure I'm not one of these people that might get targeted because someone might not like what I've got regardless. And if that totally isn't going to be the case, then I have nothing more to discuss here. It's all peaches and cream.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

GamerFox said:


> Come on, add a blanket ban to all Sonic characters and the Sonic "style" in the AUP. I dare you.


Once again, this would only apply to _Sonic_ *porn* drawn in the game/comic style (stringy limbs, tiny bodies, giant heads...), not clean images.  :B


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Once again, this would only apply to _Sonic_ *porn* drawn in the game/comic style (stringy limbs, tiny bodies, giant heads...), not clean images.  :B



Blanket bans on Sonic have been done before.


----------



## Aetius (Sep 8, 2012)

God dammnit, not these threads again. I swear I thought that this issue was dead and done with.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 8, 2012)

Hey, I'm gonna let you finish, but I've got the best new avatar of all time.

OF ALL TIME


----------



## brine (Sep 8, 2012)

What it comes down to is the Imagination police. 
there they go policing our thoughts. 
none of these characters are REAL or exist, so to be offended that they appear naked,
is to literally be offended by something that Does not exist. 
That being said we are literallydiscussing the "AGE" of FICTIONAL characters that COULD NEVER EXIST.
 this is the most retarded line of logic. 


i have a silly scenario that Brings us full circle to where you can understand EXACTLY what i'm saying.


1st Books are written, they are not censored works of art/literature although their graphic detail
exceeds everything else in tangible format. The reason for that is because its YOUR mind that conjours
the images written by the author. Because its written and you have to IMAGINE it, its not real, it doesn't exist.


when you have Art/Drawn/Renders/movies, you have VISUAL stimulation which then makes the FANTASY
TANGIBLE and to some EXTENT "REAL"... 


So lets Say there's a monster Attacking downtown, you and i are best friends you want to fight the monster
and i'm like NO i'm getting the hell out. Would you be offended that i'm a coward ? now lets say that this is
the real world where monsters don't exist, would you be upset at me that i wouldn't go into battle hypothetically??
No, because its not Real, and things that are FANTASY are designed to amuse and should not upset or offend any
rational human being... BECAUSE ITS NOT REAL.


 ok There's a author who obsesses about SLAUGHTERING poor little Chocobo's and Moogles. (or Unicorns and Lochness monsters)
thats ALL he writes about, well some one wants to make a cartoon about it... would that offend people?
well those offended people would be retarded because Chocobo's (unicorns) AREN'T REAL. 


And now to the main point and i'm out:


 Images of a sexual Nature are touchy indeed, but when you have cartoon characters, pokemon, Sonic, digimon....
THEY ARE NOT REAL, There is no chance they exist or could ever exist, so pornography of them is not offensive
to sane logical adults.  Same thing with cub porn, ok yeah its an "underaged character" THAT DOESN'T EXIST. 
laws against Child porn (photographic images) do not apply to cub art because the law is to protect children from
exploitation. Drawing Togepi, digimon, Amy from sonic, a made up fox cub does not exploit children in anyway. 


personally i don't care if we Ban cub art. i wouldn't draw it anyways. but lets draw the line at this sillyness of
deletion based on a Hypothesised/perceived Age. lets take the artists at THEIR word, its their Creation, and its not REAL.
 Cus this AGED furry art nonesense... i mean lets Draw people that commission us how they REALLY look. 
no more babyfursif you're Fat, then you're not magically Trim. and if you're a bean-pole girl you can't have D-cup breasts.


Its Fantasy folks and we're all victoms of the imagination police. Lets get real, and get back to pretend...


----------



## Arshes Nei (Sep 8, 2012)

here we go again.

Here we go round the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush the mulberry bush...


----------



## Aetius (Sep 8, 2012)

brine said:


> What it comes down to is the Imagination police. there they go policing our thoughts. none of these characters are REAL or exist, so to be offended that they appear naked,is to literally be offended by something that Does not exist.



FA isnt the thought police, and the most important thing about being a business is to not offend your primary sources of funding (advertisting). Advertising companies frown VERY HEAVILY at animated underage porn.


----------



## DarkMettaur (Sep 8, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> here we go again.
> 
> Here we go round the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush the mulberry bush...



It's the song that never ends, it goes on and on my friends~


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 8, 2012)

brine said:


> Wall of text



Would it kill you to add some line breaks?


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 8, 2012)

GamerFox said:


> Would it kill you to add some line breaks?


For once, I agree with you.  Jesus, what an unorganized pile of text!  D:


Summercat said:


> Hey, I'm gonna let you finish, but I've got the best new avatar of all time.
> 
> OF ALL TIME


Eh.   I liked it better as a still image for some reason.  XD

_[user was banned for this post]_


----------



## Jameless (Sep 8, 2012)

brine, that's all cool that you took the time to write a giant skyscraper of text about how these characters aren't real, but Alertpay obviously didn't give a crap when they threatened to cut ties with FA unless underage porn was removed from the site.

So bottom line: all underage porn (including anything in the sonic franchise that may be misinterpreted as such) is banned for reasons involving money, not personal feelings.


----------



## brine (Sep 8, 2012)

ah, money... now it makes sense... thanks jameless~!
as far as line breaks i tried to insert them but they FAILed everytime... i think its the coding...


----------



## Jameless (Sep 8, 2012)

hmmmm I don't know... I always just hit space a bunch of times and that usually works


----------



## GamerFox (Sep 9, 2012)

AlertPay is Canadian, isn't it? They have stronger porn laws there...


----------



## Butters Shikkon (Sep 9, 2012)

Aetius said:


> FA isnt the thought police, and the most important thing about being a business is to not offend your primary sources of funding (advertisting). Advertising companies frown VERY HEAVILY at animated underage porn.



My thoughts exactly. Isn't the whole point of banning certain sonic porn because of legal issues that could harm (drag down) the site? FA isn't a country it's a business. If people want the site to exist isn't the banning of "sonickidporn" a godsend?


----------



## RailRide (Sep 9, 2012)

GamerFox said:


> AlertPay is Canadian, isn't it? They have stronger porn laws there...



Specifically, Canadian laws consider drawn depictions of kiddie porn to be just as bad as the real thing.

When AlertPay was "alert-ed" to the presence of cub porn on FA, they insta-perma-banned the account--with (four-figure amount of $$) still in it. It's not clear if FA ever got that money back.

I recall Dragoneer stating (in the initial thread announcing the cubporn ban) that he spoke with a number of payment processors that deal with adult websites. All of them had no problem with any of the porn FA hosted--_except_ the ones involving cub or otherwise underage-looking characters. None of the companies contacted would open an account while FA hosted that kind of material. 

---PCJ


----------



## Zenia (Sep 9, 2012)

It always grinds my gears a bit when people try to defend cub porn by saying things like "it is just drawings! they aren't even real so why does it matter?!" ... Sure, they aren't real, but they are still images of child characters having sex. CHILD. That is horribly disturbing that people get off to depictions of children... no matter what they look like. Even more so when they try to defend themselves.


----------



## kandlin (Sep 9, 2012)

Whelp, I can honestly say, and I think most here can agree with me, that this as not proven to be helpful in the slightest regarding the questions at hand. 

Discussions on 'freedom of speech' vs. private site terms, aged up characters against industry set cannon, events from one year ago apparently being completely incorrect in popular assumptions, and an unrelenting ire between mod and user that is both stagnate and well worn. And above all else, vagueness on top of vagueness. 

As fun as it has been to wade through the twelve pages of repeating and off kilter arguments  [/sarcasm], I really don't think there has been anything anyone can take away from this aside from mild irritation and slightly elevated blood pressure, leaving the thread on par with many prescription medications. As one of the individuals receiving the notice, I'll just wait until FA is back online and muddle though what can be figured out then. And the only helpful advice I can give to others right now is to turn off the computer for the next 20 minuets and put in some old Monty Python's Flying Circus. 

Now THAT'S some funny s#!t.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

Hey 'Lin, did you try as Summer suggested and ask the mod who issued the note what images were in violation?  Rather, did you get the chance to before one of _FA_'s hard drives crapped out?

And on that note, I think the people who got notes should get a reprieve due to these obviously *not-easy-to-repair* technical issues.  It's only fair.  What's one more day (or however long it takes), right?


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> And on that note, I think the people who got notes should get a reprieve due to these obviously *not-easy-to-repair* technical issues.  It's only fair.  What's one more day (or however long it takes), right?



Yeah, we're not exactly going to be passing out bans for people for not removing stuff when the site was down. Warnings to perform an act within x days assumes x days of uptime.


----------



## Smelge (Sep 9, 2012)

The aging up rule is pretty dodgy and wide open to misinterpretations which can cause friction and drama, so I think all Sonic art should be banned just to play it safe.

And ponies.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (Sep 9, 2012)

Smelge, what took you so long? I've been dying for one of your post in this...


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

brine said:


> Wall of text...



That's nice and all, but this is legality we're talking about. If you want to change the state of the laws, pay attention to who you elect.


----------



## Smelge (Sep 9, 2012)

Butterflygoddess16 said:


> Smelge, what took you so long? I've been dying for one of your post in this...



There are some clusterfucks it's safer to stay away from, and when you want a good old fashioned clusterfuck, there's none more aggravating than one caused by obese manchildren defending their rights to view images of underage deformed hedgehogs getting fucked by fat elderly inventors.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Yeah, we're not exactly going to be passing out bans for people for not removing stuff when the site was down. Warnings to perform an act within x days assumes x days of uptime.


You guys and gals are dolls!  You know that?


Smelge said:


> And ponies.


Your signature, first quote bubble.  The "pony" situation has been explained countless times in this thread.


----------



## Smelge (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Your signature, first quote bubble.  The "pony" situation has been explained countless times in this thread.



What, that bronies should be smacked up the side of the head and told to grow the fuck up?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Smelge said:


> And ponies.



[video=youtube;SIaFtAKnqBU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIaFtAKnqBU[/video]


----------



## Butters Shikkon (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> creepy internet video...



O^O I will never sleep again...


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

Smelge said:


> What, that bronies should be smacked up the side of the head and told to grow the fuck up?








 "_Perhaps_ the same could be said of _all_ religions..."


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 9, 2012)

Hmm...I think this thread has reached the "limit of questions".


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> Hmm...I think this thread has reached the "limit of questions".



If you have any actual new questions, not just repeats or rephrasings, then feel free :3


----------



## thedesertwolf (Sep 9, 2012)

One word. Cupcakes. 

You know what I mean.


----------



## kandlin (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Hey 'Lin, did you try as Summer suggested and ask the mod who issued the note what images were in violation?  Rather, did you get the chance to before one of _FA_'s hard drives crapped out?



A note was sent off shortly before the crash. But when I originally posted my journal regarding this, someone commented that I should contact Dragoneer to ask for his help on the issue. My response was a kin to "would it really matter?"
This thread has only cemented my opinion on such.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

kandlin said:


> A note was sent off shortly before the crash. But when I originally posted my journal regarding this, someone commented that I should contact Dragoneer to ask for his help on the issue. My response was a kin to "would it really matter?"
> This thread has only cemented my opinion on such.



I would suggest talking with the admin who sent you the note. Ask for examples and clarification. IIRC half your amy rose stuff in your scraps was questionable - as in, needed to be looked at more closely.

I was about to have an aneurism at the time so I didn't want to look too closely.


----------



## ArtemisZiebenwolf (Sep 9, 2012)

Ozriel said:


> Not the art, just the porn.
> 
> If you see any underage porn on FA, report it instead of throwing a tizzy of "if so-and-so is doing it then it must be okay for me to do it".


Funny, because when I ticketed something that had an under age character holding her bleeding crotch and sobbing, the admins did jack squat about it.
They closed my ticket, because the character was not under age... when... she very. VERY clearly was.

The priorities here are getting a little upside down.


----------



## kandlin (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I would suggest talking with the admin who sent you the note. Ask for examples and clarification. IIRC half your amy rose stuff in your scraps was questionable - as in, needed to be looked at more closely.
> 
> I was about to have an aneurism at the time so I didn't want to look too closely.



Again; pointless at this juncture and additionally so for future proceedings.


----------



## Kaeko (Sep 9, 2012)

actuallyi have a question.

i dont draw sonic art like at all. But in a stream the other day things were brought up, and i was challenged to give it a try.

Now i was even hesitant to post it. Because i wasnt sure what was fact and was flak. 

so here is the image..i know its not porn, but i havent fully finiished the image. WOuls you say my style of sonic art would be questionable?

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/51/blazethecat.png/
may be consider nsfw


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Kaeko said:


> actuallyi have a question.
> 
> i dont draw sonic art like at all. But in a stream the other day things were brought up, and i was challenged to give it a try.
> 
> ...



It looks perfectly fine to me.


----------



## Kaeko (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> It looks perfectly fine to me.



so if i were ti use my own style as such, id be safe from warnings and suspensions? :/

id rather be safe than sorry, the comments i got on the image didnt help either. 

other comments, positive ones were more like requests of other characters of the sonic-team


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Kaeko said:


> so if i were ti use my own style as such, id be safe from warnings and suspensions? :/
> 
> id rather be safe than sorry, the comments i got on the image didnt help either.
> 
> other comments, positive ones were more like requests of other characters of the sonic-team



You may be pinged from time to time, but A) Do not panic, B) Do not panic, C) Do not panic, and D) Work with whomever pinged you.


----------



## ChaosCroc (Sep 9, 2012)

Here's my issue with the whole thing.

This entire ordeal seems to come up 2-3 times a year, for the past couple of years or so. I swear, you could set your watch to it. Some popular Sonic fan artist who draws porn gets banhammered, and the ENTIRE ARGUMENT starts up all over again. Internet drama is a wonderful thing, isn't it? The admins argue that this is a privately owned site, so they can ban whatever they deem is questionable, and the artists start complaining that their free speech is being stomped upon. Same old, same old, every single time. It's insane.

My message to the FA admins is a simple one: you can't ban an art style. You can't, I'm sorry. It's impossible to do so, as each artist tends to add their own spin on things. Some people add muscle structure, others shrink the head, some even slap the head on anthro bodies. It's not even remotely possible to ban an art style from anything. The only thing you could do is to ban Sonic art in general, which you'd be losing a good chunk of your FA userbase in doing so. Cry all you want, furries, but Sonic art IS considered to be furry art as well. Fanart, yes, but also anthropomorphic in nature.

I get the whole underage porn thing, and yes, a lot of times, you can't go by the book. But I know there's also artists out there who do NOT draw porn, and HAVE aged up the characters, and are STILL getting banned. That sends the message, "Oh hey, look, something in the Sonic style. DELETE! EXTERMINATE!". Now, if it's a rogue admin trying to be a loose cannon on here or something, you guys need to handle that.

Personally, I like FA. A lot of my watchers on here are a little more mature than on DeviantART, and I can post things here that I'd be nervous about posting on there. While I don't draw porn, I do imply it in my art. But personally, I'm getting a little sick of this popping up every few damn months. There needs to be an answer, and there needs to be one fast. Either ban Sonic art all together, or stop banning the artists for the style they draw in.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Smelge said:


> And ponies.


Considering this seems to be most prominent example, if adult content Sonic material was to be blanket banned, so should adult content of MLP.

Let's not forget that faithful quote from Lauren Faust [Here] people seem to be ignoring still.



> *They are young adults, but with a maturity level of anywhere from 12 - 18.* I guess I sort of justify it in my head that in real life, horses are adults by the time they are 2 or so. MLPs are horses with human brains, so they grow up fast, but mature slower....?
> 
> It's imprecise, but that's kind of what I'm thinking. At the end of the day, they need to be relatable to younger kids, but stories about going to school and dealing with parents isn't what I wanted to do so, there you have it.



And before anyone says otherwise, unless you can give concrete proof from the horses mouth (no pun intended) that the MLP characters are 18 and over (and if so, which ones?) as oppose to young adults which could mean anything, then I'm to assume the staff members are giving one franchise a free ride and not the others.

*In short, links to prove MLP characters are 18+ or it didn't happen.*


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Ok. To try and take this discussion slightly I away from the drama (difficult due to how disgusted I also am with these censorships), let me ask the staff some questions. If Dragoneer or some mod reads this, please do reply. I think this is an important part some people are missing out.

I think I read some posts above saying that only porn of the canon characters (which are known to be of a certain age, if people insist on comparing that to human age) is disallowed. That is logical and at least makes sense. But if that's not the case and this applies to any character drawn in the Sonic artistic style, even someone's own fursona when it's clearly stated they are adults, then please specify the following:

What are your criteria by which an artistic style is automatically considered cub, even against the artist mentioning the character is not? Do you have a measurement unit by which the head shouldn't be larger than the body? Must the head have a specific shape, is there a maximum size for the eyes? Should the voice (in case of a video) be limited to a specific pitch, if that can be measured in octaves or something? Should height be limited to a specific value compared to an adult character, if both are visible in the same scene? Should clothing be specific? Yes, those are actual questions.

If you wish to have such bans in the rules, I believe there needs to be clear criteria of what falls into them. By any logic, simply saying "cub porn is not allowed" means characters which are obviously cubs beyond doubt (looks, circumstance, etc). But if you're talking about an art style in which everyone looks more cub-ish, that's a totally totally different story. Simply saying "Sonic porn is banned" will not help either, because artistic styles are both infinite (anyone can invent one and each person's differs) and can relate to each other. For example, what if an artist draws in an art style between Sonic characters and realistic traditional art (just a random idea)? Further more: If none of the official characters are drawn, is it even considered Sonic art any more just because the shape of characters is similar? Not to mention that countless art styles look even more cub-like than Sonic, and if they all got banned by this logic nearly half of FA would disappear. General chibi art can be one example... half-sized micros can also look like cubs, and much more.

My personal suggestion (which no one will give a damn about) is: If it's obviously cub porn, then it's obvious and action can be taken. If it's just chibi art, interpretable, and not obviously cub, then please let it be. There's absolutely no reason to make artist's lives hard as well as provoke those of us who dislike censorship (especially when done blindly and badly).


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea - I totally agree with you.

Clearly someone here lacks the capable know-how to distinguish art. Period.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

ChaosCroc said:


> I get the whole underage porn thing, and yes, a lot of times, you can't go by the book. But I know there's also artists out there who do NOT draw porn, and HAVE aged up the characters, and are STILL getting banned.



Send me a PM with details on this, please - If an artist is not drawing porn/nudes, then this issue should not be impacting them.


----------



## ChaosCroc (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Send me a PM with details on this, please - If an artist is not drawing porn/nudes, then this issue should not be impacting them.



I'll do so once the site is back up. I don't know the usernames off the back of my hand, sorry. ^^;; I do know it's because of someone named 'ModGoat'. I don't know if that's a generic moderator name, or someone in particular, but I remember seeing that name flashed around as the admin/mod authoring the tickets.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

ChaosCroc said:


> I'll do so once the site is back up. I don't know the usernames off the back of my hand, sorry. ^^;; I do know it's because of someone named 'ModGoat'. I don't know if that's a generic moderator name, or someone in particular, but I remember seeing that name flashed around as the admin/mod authoring the tickets.



Yes, that's one of our admins on her admin account. She's the one handling the 1k+ link ticket that's the immediate trigger for all of those. Thus far, I"m only aware of two people being suspended on this issue, and both have had a history of prior warnings.

But yes, I always take claims of people being banned despite them not breaking any rules very seriously.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat: Have you seen my last post above as well? Since you're one of the mods if I'm correct, I was curious if the team has a list they can make public about "what automatically qualifies an art style as cub". It's an idea I personally don't understand and haven't seen before, and since FA is one of the sites I use most frequently I'd like to know about it more precisely.

Sonic-looking art can't be the only exception among the many possible drawing styles. So if porn of a specific style can be banned, I'd imagine there are points which qualify it as wrong. If this is the path mods wish to take in decisions of allowing / disallowing art, I'd kindly request someone who's part of the team that's also an artist to post a reference sheet in the rules section, specifying the size limit the head and eyes must have, how exactly the voice may or may not sound, how short / long the body and limbs need to be, etc. before the character is automatically assumed to be a cub.

If not, this sort of ban can be interpreted as moderators removing images based on their own interpretation, which would no longer be a site rule but personal justice based on the team's preference. Members of the staff can easily say "this looks too Sonic-like and I don't like the image, I'll remove it and say it looks like cub porn cuz I had a rough day at work and I'm pissed". From what I know, FA is the first site to ban porn over artistic style... so in this case it would also need to be the first site to contain a reference sheet in the AUP saying "those are the body parts and design limits a character must adhere to be displayed in a porn image, and if the character's head exceeds this radius in PI compared to the radius of the body we'll assume it's cub porn even when you state otherwise and remove it".


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Can someone also kindly answer this question I asked Here earlier with genuine links to back your answer please? That post was by no means a statement. Staff members, Summercat, anyone?

Give me the concrete facts and I'll leave it be.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> Summercat: Have you seen my last post above as well? Since you're one of the mods if I'm correct, I was curious if the team has a list they can make public about "what automatically qualifies an art style as cub". It's an idea I personally don't understand and haven't seen before, and since FA is one of the sites I use most frequently I'd like to know about it more precisely.
> 
> Sonic-looking art can't be the only exception among the many possible drawing styles. So if porn of a specific style can be banned, I'd imagine there are points which qualify it as wrong. If this is the path mods wish to take in decisions of allowing / disallowing art, I'd kindly request someone who's part of the team that's also an artist to post a reference sheet in the rules section, specifying the size limit the head and eyes must have, how exactly the voice may or may not sound, how short / long the body and limbs need to be, etc. before the character is automatically assumed to be a cub.
> 
> If not, this sort of ban can be interpreted as moderators removing images based on their own interpretation, which would no longer be a site rule but personal justice based on the team's preference. Members of the staff can easily say "this looks too Sonic-like and I don't like the image, I'll remove it and say it looks like cub porn cuz I had a rough day at work and I'm pissed". From what I know, FA is the first site to ban porn over artistic style... so in this case it would also need to be the first site to contain a reference sheet in the AUP saying "those are the body parts and design limits a character must adhere to be displayed in a porn image, and if the character's head exceeds this radius in PI compared to the radius of the body we'll assume it's cub porn even when you state otherwise and remove it".



Porn. Of specific characters. In a specific style. In which style they are specifically stated to be underaged. Is not allowed. Because they are underaged. Because the style itself does not allow aging up. Because if you try to age them up you end up in a different style. 

You can have your OCs in the same style fucking each other's brains out all you want.

" "this looks too Sonic-like and I don't like the image, I'll remove it and say it looks like cub porn cuz I had a rough day at work and I'm pissed"." Yeah if an admin ever did that, and I mean ever did that, I would be up and down tearing them a new one.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> Can someone also kindly answer this question I asked Here earlier with genuine links to back your answer please? That post was by no means a statement. Staff members, Summercat, anyone?
> 
> Give me the concrete facts and I'll leave it be.



I'm not answering any questions about ponies because I've already done so. They're adults. Deal.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Okay, since I'm starting to get REALLY overly snippy... probably time for a cranky otter to go to bed.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I'm not answering any questions about ponies because I've already done so. They're adults. Deal.


Prove it then please dude.  My husband and I have repeatedly linked to a comment from Lauren Faust which states they are YOUNG ADULTS between 12 and 18, what part of this means 18 and over?


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> I'm not answering any questions about ponies because I've already done so. They're adults. Deal.



I specifically asked for links to back your answer. You've not done it, so you're answer's invalid. Sorry. Can someone else tell me then please?


----------



## Scotty Kirax (Sep 9, 2012)

Even though I would love nothing more than a ban on MLP porn I have to mention that one's maturity level has nothing to do with their age. She said they were young adults which can mean ages ranging from 18-30~.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> Prove it then please dude.  My husband and I have repeatedly linked to a comment from Lauren Faust which states they are YOUNG ADULTS between 12 and 18, what part of this means 18 and over?



Physically adult, treated as adult, the same body shapes as adults. They're adults. End of discussion.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> I specifically asked for links to back your answer. You've not done it, so you're answer's invalid. Sorry. Can someone else tell me then please?



Good thing that I actually can just say "Nope, they're considered adults. End of discussion. Have a nice day."

Oh look, I just did. End of discussion.

Oh look, a photo of me. Right now. http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/065/a/2/twilight_on_fire_by_sdkfz186jagdtiger-d4rwv8n.png


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Scotty Kirax said:


> Even though I would love nothing more than a ban on MLP porn I have to mention that one's maturity level has nothing to do with their age. She said they were young adults which can mean ages ranging from 18-30~.


I've heard the expression "young adult" used to refer to people from around 16 and over in the past (could be a British thing, I dunno).  Even then, I'm extremely uncomfortable with the ambiguity of it.  They still don't have specific ages assigned to them.


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> I've heard the expression "young adult" used to refer to people from around 16 and over in the past (could be a British thing, I dunno).  Even then, I'm extremely uncomfortable with the ambiguity of it.  They still don't have specific ages assigned to them.



They still don't have specific ages assigned to them. 

Whereas Sonic characters do.


----------



## Calemeyr (Sep 9, 2012)

Why do we have to have these conversations about "adults in kids' bodies" or "aging up but not really?" Why do so many people look for loopholes? Why do internets people glorify rape? You know what? I think these people need to actually go outside for once. Maybe they'll become normal. /rant
Anyway good decision on the admins' part.


----------



## Morticia (Sep 9, 2012)

I really don't understand why someone won't just out with it in a position of power.

Why, if this is SUCH a wankery, won't someone (Neer, preferably, so everyone sees) just make a list of VERY SPECIFIC DOS AND DON'TS to Sonic art, and we can all just move along?

How is this hard?


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Good thing that I actually can just say "Nope, they're considered adults. End of discussion. Have a nice day."
> 
> Oh look, I just did. End of discussion.


What, so we're supposed to take your word for it just because you're a moderator are we?  I've been a regular at online forums for more than 10 years and have been an admin on large Sonic forums in the past.  I never treated my members in this way.  It's called respecting your userbase.

You're not linking to proof because you CAN'T prove it.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Good thing that I actually can just say "Nope, they're considered adults. End of discussion. Have a nice day."
> 
> Oh look, I just did. End of discussion.
> 
> Oh look, a photo of me. Right now. http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/065/a/2/twilight_on_fire_by_sdkfz186jagdtiger-d4rwv8n.png



Considering I was a moderator and an administrator to some of the biggest Sonic forums of it's time, what you've just done is unprofessional and immature. You've not given me any proof to back up your answer other than your word which is not law. Sorry.

I would rather have someone else answer my question please with links to back it up.


----------



## Morticia (Sep 9, 2012)

Marcus Stormchaser said:


> Why do we have to have these conversations about "adults in kids' bodies" or "aging up but not really?" Why do so many people look for loopholes? Why do internets people glorify rape? You know what? I think these people need to actually go outside for once. Maybe they'll become normal. /rant
> Anyway good decision on the admins' part. But I'm also wondering would, say, mlp characters be considered adults or children? I mean some of them have pretty child-like proportions.



Because the creator Lauren Faust gave them ages.
There's clearly a divide in the show among adults (Mane 6 who own their own houses, businesses, etc) and children (Cutie Mark Crusaders, kids in Cheerilee's class, etc.)


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> They still don't have specific ages assigned to them.
> 
> Whereas Sonic characters do.


And that's the problem. If no one knows their age, any one of them could be underage. That's why I keep banging that question out.


----------



## Calemeyr (Sep 9, 2012)

Morticia said:


> Because the creator Lauren Faust gave them ages.
> There's clearly a divide in the show among adults (Mane 6 who own their own houses, businesses, etc) and children (Cutie Mark Crusaders, kids in Cheerilee's class, etc.)


So any adult artwork involving, say, Apple Bloom would be banned, right? She's stated to be school-age. I mean she looks like a newborn horse with her proportions.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> They still don't have specific ages assigned to them.
> 
> Whereas Sonic characters do.



Except we were told, by Dragoneer himself, that the age of the characters would not matter as long as the characters were appropriately aged up in the artwork.

Which they have been, on numerous occasions. And yet it is STILL a problem. STILL a problem!

Not to mention, there are Sonic characters who are older than Sonic is, that are still the same height and size. Uncle Chuck is an excellent example of this; Rouge too.

Plus, to counter 'they're all kids'...Cream and Tails are children, and are decidely smaller. Heck, in the old Sat AM cartoon, when Sonic and Sally went back in time, all of them were about half the size they are now.

This ambiguity with their sizes, along with the ambiguity with the AUP and the site rules and how Admins and Mods are being taught to deal with others (or lack thereof in many of the cases) is a lot of the reason there's such hostility towards how you guys are handling this. We're told one thing, then you do another. One case is given free reign, while another isn't.


----------



## Scotty Kirax (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> What, so we're supposed to take your word for it just because you're a moderator are we?  I've been a regular at online forums for more than 10 years and have been an admin on large Sonic forums in the past.  I never treated my members in this way.  It's called respecting your userbase.


He has been the only one answering questions in this thread. He has been dealing with this for more than 3 hours, he has every right to drop the formalities.


jenhedgehog said:


> You're not linking to proof because you CAN'T prove it.


 Neither can you show any concrete proof that they're underaged, and no, a vauge description from the creator isn't evidence for either side. Until Faust comes out and gives exact ages for the main characters we're going to have to deal with the pony porn. You and your husband should really be focusing on the Digimon issue with the fact that anything below Champion is canonically a child.

*EDIT*
You and your husband just seem upset over the fact that your sonic porn has been banned and are trying to make it look like the administration is being unfair and picking which shows to block.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Scotty Kirax said:


> Neither can you show any concrete proof that they're underaged, and no, a vauge description from the creator isn't evidence for either side.


No, I can't prove they're underage.  But no-one can prove they ARE of age and that's the issue.  

It just annoys me that such stringent regulations are put into place for Sonic but for other franchises, no matter how vague it all is, no-one seems to give a shit about proving ages despite the styles making the characters appear extremely young.

EDIT: As I've stated like a million times in this topic, I HAVE ABSOLUTELY -NO- SONIC PORN IN MY GALLERY.  I just disagree with the double-standard.  A pony like looks like a kid?  Sure!  An aged-up Sonic character in Sonic style?  Nope!

I don't agree with underage porn either, it's sick.  I don't see a problem with aging-up no matter what the artist's drawing style though.


----------



## Scotty Kirax (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> No, I can't prove they're underage.  But no-one can prove they ARE of age and that's the issue.
> 
> It just annoys me that such stringent regulations are put into place for Sonic but for other franchises, no matter how vague it all is, no-one seems to give a shit about proving ages despite the styles making the characters appear extremely young.


Well you can blame SEGA for giving them exact ages then. The FA staff are making sure they can't get any flak for accidently hosting child/cub art.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Scotty Kirax said:


> Well you can blame SEGA for giving them exact ages then. The FA staff are making sure they can't get any flak for accidently hosting child/cub art.


...As I just said in my edit, I don't agree with cub shit or whatever you wanna call it.  One of my main issues is that people aren't allowed to age-up in the Sonic style because they still allegedly "look young", when other characters that "look young" are fair game.  It's too vague and ambiguous.


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

Ive been seeing this form about this banning on sonic style art for a little while....It's ironic  to me  that the Archie comics and Sega had the characters shown older 25 yrs later in the series... 
And yet...we still can not age them up cause of the "sonic style" and due to the fact that even sonic still looks the same 
as he was 17(with only having props in his adult age.) ...Our attempts with making any characters of the series as adult form be rendered Null no matter what..Cause  there's little to no change in the way they look physically because that's the style.
_*(ps. Im new at these forms...I had alittle trouble registering in ...But i got it now.I had an FA already.) *_


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Yeah if an admin ever did that, and I mean ever did that, I would be up and down tearing them a new one.



Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


----------



## Summercat (Sep 9, 2012)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?



According to Detritus, when Vimes found a child-killer who has kept a "memento" of his deed, it was all the troll could do to prevent him from killing the perpetrator. This all comes to light during the events of Thud! where Vimes' internal Watchman - which describes itself as existing to keep the darkness in rather than keeping it out- battles with the Summoning Dark for supremacy of his soul and is ultimately victorious in dispelling the evil entity from its attempts to use Vimes to kill for it. This can be illustrated by the fact that when asked 'quis custodies ipsos custodes' ('Who watches the watchmen?') Vimes's immediate reaction is 'Me'. When asked who guards him, he replies, 'I do that too.'


----------



## Ivorytigress (Sep 9, 2012)

Want my input? Stop crying like a little girl, and if you honestly don't like how the site is run THAT MUCH, just get off of FA so we don't have to listen to it anymore.


----------



## Scotty Kirax (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> ...As I just said in my edit, I don't agree with cub shit or whatever you wanna call it.  One of my main issues is that people aren't allowed to age-up in the Sonic style because they still allegedly "look young", when other characters that "look young" are fair game.  It's too vague and ambiguous.


Lets use MLP as an example seeing as you seemed so interested in it. The show has shown a difference in child ponies and not child ponies, and have even shown examples of characters aging with an actual difference in appearance.

The Sonic show/game may say the character has aged but they've never shown a difference with their style. Let me put it this way.

You cannot slap a dick on the canon version of Sonic and say he has aged.
I think what has alot of people confused about the aging up issue and the Sonic style is that giving the character longer legs, or a more defined chest would mean the character was no longer being draw in the same style.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Ivorytigress said:


> Want my input? Stop crying like a little girl, and if you honestly don't like how the site is run THAT MUCH, just get off of FA so we don't have to listen to it anymore.


As I said earlier in the topic.



> People are saying there are other sites one can go to if they don't like the way things are here now. Let me just say, *why should I pack up and move to some other site if something's bothering me here*. For one, my account on Fur Affinity which I'm still using to this day has been around for over 6 years now. I have very close friends here and some are only here. I refuse to join other art sites that won't allow human art for example. Even if I was to move to one that allows any art, I'm giving up my friends and audience who are watching me here.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Ivorytigress said:


> Want my input? Stop crying like a little girl, and if you honestly don't like how the site is run THAT MUCH, just get off of FA so we don't have to listen to it anymore.


By that logic, you could just get out of this topic if you don't wanna hear it (not trying to be rude or anything.


----------



## Ivorytigress (Sep 9, 2012)

Then you shouldn't complain.
What no one seems to understand is, this is not our website. It's Dragoneer's. He pays the upkeep. He works on the servers. Not us. 
At this point, it looks like you're just trying to beat a dead horse.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Scotty Kirax said:


> Lets use MLP as an example seeing as you seemed so interested in it. The show has shown a difference in child ponies and not child ponies, and have even shown examples of characters aging with an actual difference in appearance.


To be honest I'm kinda past the point of caring about the MLP stuff now, the fact that some staff members are bronies means nothing will ever change anyway.  They LOOK YOUNG, which is an argument being used against other franchises despite the actual ages.  But whatever.



> The Sonic show/game may say the character has aged but they've never  shown a difference with their style. Let me put it this way.
> 
> You cannot slap a dick on the canon version of Sonic and say he has aged.
> I think what has alot of people confused about the aging up issue and  the Sonic style is that giving the character longer legs, or a more  defined chest would mean the character was no longer being draw in the  same style.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Sonic_Generations_Logo.jpg  Young Sonic, older Sonic (aka Modern and Classic).  They look very different but are clearly the same character in the same style.

In the comics Sonic 25 years later looks almost the same as Sonic now.  But other characters like Tails, look different:
http://images4.fanpop.com/image/pho...later-miles-tails-prower-17329543-324-393.jpg Old Tails
His proportions are different (he's a lot taller), there are subtle things like messy tufts of hair on his ears and small wrinkles by his eyes.  So you can age-up in the Sonic style technically.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> According to Detritus, when Vimes found a child-killer who has kept a "memento" of his deed, it was all the troll could do to prevent him from killing the perpetrator. This all comes to light during the events of Thud! where Vimes' internal Watchman - which describes itself as existing to keep the darkness in rather than keeping it out- battles with the Summoning Dark for supremacy of his soul and is ultimately victorious in dispelling the evil entity from its attempts to use Vimes to kill for it. This can be illustrated by the fact that when asked 'quis custodies ipsos custodes' ('Who watches the watchmen?') Vimes's immediate reaction is 'Me'. When asked who guards him, he replies, 'I do that too.'



Marry me?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> People are saying there are other sites one can go to if they don't like the way things are here now. Let me just say, why should I pack up and move to some other site if something's bothering me here. For one, my account on Fur Affinity which I'm still using to this day has been around for over 6 years now. I have very close friends here and some are only here. I refuse to join other art sites that won't allow human art for example. Even if I was to move to one that allows any art, I'm giving up my friends and audience who are watching me here.



This has been covered, but your arguments are invalid. You have only the rights granted to you by the AUP, COC, TOS, etc. for the duration of the time you are in compliance with them. This is an AUP issue, so as long as you can comply with it you're gold.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> So you can age-up in the Sonic style technically.



This has also been covered. You cannot age up in the Sonic style sufficiently to provide a good margin for error. You can do so with the MLP style.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Scotty Kirax said:


> Lets use MLP as an example seeing as you seemed so interested in it. The show has shown a difference in child ponies and not child ponies, and have even shown examples of characters aging with an actual difference in appearance.
> 
> The Sonic show/game may say the character has aged but they've never shown a difference with their style. Let me put it this way.
> 
> ...



Here's the problem.

People HAVE DONE EXACTLY THAT, and STILL been told it's not acceptable and that the artwork needs taken down.

Tojyo gave Amy an extended torso, extended arms and legs, boobs bigger than she has ever had in canon in any of the media...and yet it was STILL NOT ACCEPTABLE.

And everyone is still ignoring the fact that Dragoneer did say that as long as they were aged up in the artwork, then canon-age wouldn't matter anyway.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> This has also been covered. You cannot age up in the Sonic style sufficiently to provide a good margin for error. You can do so with the MLP style.


I've actually shown examples of this being done successfully in some of my other posts.  If you're a competent artist, you can do it.  If you've seen people do this with MLP (which is even more cartoony and basic than Sonic), you can do it with Sonic.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Tojyo...



Had extenuating circumstances regarding his ban/suspension/whatever regarding lack of cooperation and past history. It's in the thread somewhere.

But yes, if 'Neer is saying something different than what's been covered in this thread, a simple site notice clarifying the issue would likely go a long way.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

I'm a little late on this, since I actually sleep sometimes.





jenhedgehog said:


> Prove it then please dude.  My husband and I have repeatedly linked to a comment from Lauren Faust which states they are YOUNG ADULTS between 12 and 18, what part of this means 18 and over?


Okay.  Let's try something:



> They are young adults, but with a maturity level of anywhere from 12 - 18.





> They are young adults





> *young adults*





> *young adults*


Also, *they are young adults*.
One more thing.  *They are young adults.*

I don't think it gets any more "legit" than "Word of God."


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> If you're a competent artist, you can do it.  If you've seen people do this with MLP (which is even more cartoony and basic than Sonic), you can do it with Sonic.



You don't have to age up MLP characters in the canon style. Adults and youth are very clearly distinguished (do they have a cutie mark and a discernible neck?) whereas the art style of Sonic has not changed in _significant_ ways over the decades. I'm reading Summercat's updates to say there is not a large enough gap between the canon styles to clearly portray a character as aged up. For the record, I happen to agree.


----------



## Scotty Kirax (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> They LOOK YOUNG, which is an argument being used against other franchises despite the actual ages.  But whatever.


They look like cartoon horses. They're 4 legged animals that can talk. You can't say they look young when you have nothing to relate them to.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

So the SatAM and Archie Comics series way of portraying young characters means jack diddly squat then considering SEGA owns the rights to these characters.


----------



## Thaily (Sep 9, 2012)

GamerFox said:


> And as I recall, the whole "sonic age-up" crisis was enacted because an admin hated Sonic art



Who is this admin, I want to buy her a drink :|


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> So the SatAM and Archie Comics series way of portraying young characters means jack diddly squat then considering SEGA owns the rights to these characters.



That's about the long and short of it.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> I'm a little late on this, since I actually sleep sometimes.Okay.  Let's try something:
> 
> Also, *they are young adults*.
> One more thing.  *They are young adults.*
> ...


*GASP* REALLY?!  Wow, thanks so much, I never would have figured that one out!

As I said before, I've heard that term used to describe people aged around 16 in the past.



> You don't have to age up MLP characters in the canon style. Adults and  youth are very clearly distinguished (do they have a cutie mark and a  discernible neck?) whereas the art style of Sonic has not changed in _significant_  ways over the decades. I'm reading Summercat's updates to say there is  not a large enough gap between the canon styles to clearly portray a  character as aged up. For the record, I happen to agree.


Oh my god, seriously?  You can just stick a mark on a pony's arse and lengthen the neck slightly and it's acceptable?  Yet you can't age a Sonic character - making them taller, changing their proportions around etc (and for the females, making them curvy and giving them a chest).  Sonic is taller than Tails and has different proportions.  Rouge is much more shapely than Amy, her body is a lot different.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> That's about the long and short of it.



It shouldn't because it's still technically canon within the Sonic Universe. Because you know, it belongs to SEGA.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> You can just stick a mark on a pony's arse and lengthen the neck slightly and it's acceptable?



Yes, because that's how that particular universe works. Watching any of the shows that concern the origin of the cutie marks should clarify this for you.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Had extenuating circumstances regarding his ban/suspension/whatever regarding lack of cooperation and past history. It's in the thread somewhere.
> 
> But yes, if 'Neer is saying something different than what's been covered in this thread, a simple site notice clarifying the issue would likely go a long way.



I'm not going to dig through 14 pages worth of hearsay to find something that MIGHT be true.

you know what would have helped? If Dragoneer, instead of just using his time to comment on a few journals and wiping out his shouts, had spent his time making a journal, detailing what happened.

Seriously, he's completely inept at times at his job. His Admins and Mods run over folks as if they were pavement, he has a site that can't keep itself steady for more than a few weeks, and when the users are in a frenzy...all he can do is take a lack-a-daisy approach to it.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> It shouldn't because it's still technically canon within the Sonic Universe. Because you know, it belongs to SEGA.



SEGA put ages on the characters. There's no major discernible difference or defining feature (aside from perhaps a moustache) on Sonic characters that demonstrates they have aged in the canon style. This has been explained.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> *GASP* REALLY?!  Wow, thanks so much, I never would have figured that one out!
> 
> As I said before, I've heard that term used to describe people aged around 16 in the past.


Whomever used that term that was used it incorrectly.  Since you guys are so fond of "citing sources," here's one of my own:





			
				Wikipedia entry on 'Young adult (psychology)' said:
			
		

> A young/prime adult, according to Erik Erikson's stages of human development, is generally a person aging from 20 to 40, whereas an adolescent is a person aging from 13 to 19, although definitions and opinions vary. The young adult stage in human development precedes middle adulthood. A person in the middle adulthood stage ages from 40 to 60. In maturity, a person is 60 years old or older.
> 
> *Source:* _Wikipedia_ - "Young adult (psychology)"


To be fair, I figured 18 was when "young adulthood" started, since that's the "legal age" in most of the United States.  But I guess not.


Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Yes, because that's how that particular universe works. Watching any of the shows that concern the origin of the cutie marks should clarify this for you.


To be fair _here_, the Mane Six all got their Cutie Marks while they were still *fillies*.  As did Twist, Apple Bloom's best friend, among other *fillies*.  Cutie Marks do not an adult make.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Seriously, he's completely inept at times at his job. His Admins and Mods run over folks as if they were pavement, he has a site that can't keep itself steady for more than a few weeks, and when the users are in a frenzy...all he can do is take a lack-a-daisy approach to it.



I'm sorry you feel that way. I disagree most wholeheartedly. This thread is mostly a few specific people trying desperately to find loopholes that aren't there, so it doesn't (at least in my opinion) accurately shed any light on how the site's ownership handles things.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Scotty Kirax said:


> They look like cartoon horses. They're 4 legged animals that can talk. You can't say they look young when you have nothing to relate them to.



They look young compared to OLDER horses, such as Shining Armor, Princess Candace, Princess Celestia, Princess Luna, so on...and on...and on.

In my opinion, I'd relate them to looking and acting through a spectrum of ages. Pinkie Pie reminds me of a young teenager, around 13 or 14...but someone like Rarity would be somewhat older. Twilight too.

As for everyone going "Good, get rid of teh Sonic artwork!"....what is wrong with you people? You're creating a divide here in your own little fandom that isn't necessary.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> SEGA put ages on the characters. There's no major discernible difference or defining feature (aside from perhaps a moustache) on Sonic characters that demonstrates they have aged in the canon style. This has been explained.


actually BOTH sega and Archie have their own ages hence why tails at one time had two different ages 6 and 8 between the two


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> I'm sorry you feel that way. I disagree most wholeheartedly. This thread is mostly a few specific people trying desperately to find loopholes that aren't there, so it doesn't (at least in my opinion) accurately shed any light on how the site's ownership handles things.



There's not a reason I SHOULDN'T feel that way. 'Neer makes false promises, lies to his user base (there's evidence out there about him admitting to the 'truth' behind the cub art ban.), his site staff has been abusive to users before....and NOTHING has been done to improve the situation from previous incidents.

Nothing.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Yes, because that's how that particular universe works. Watching any of the shows that concern the origin of the cutie marks should clarify this for you.


That's fair enough, but when all's said and done it's still a relatively small change to the character.  The Sonic Universe works in a similar way but concerning proportion and shape changes instead - these are also subtle in some cases but obvious enough if drawn by someone competent.  Surely judgement should be used on a case-by-case basis rather than "you can't age up in Sonic style period" when people have proved it's entirely possible to do this.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> They look young compared to OLDER horses, such as Shining Armor, Princess Candace, Princess Celestia, Princess Luna, so on...and on...and on.



I won't inject my own appraisal of the situation regarding the older ponies into this, but suffice it to say there are many stages of development that occur past puberty. I applaud the creators of MLP for being aware of this.



The Lunatic25 said:


> As for everyone going "Good, get rid of teh Sonic artwork!"....what is wrong with you people? You're creating a divide here in your own little fandom that isn't necessary.



It's not Sonic artwork that's in question here. It's Sonic porn/nudes. Just clearing that up.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> NOTHING has been done to improve the situation from previous incidents.
> 
> Nothing.



This has been covered in the thread. If "good enough" isn't good enough for you, there are other places to hang your hat.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Porn. Of specific characters. In a specific style. In which style they are specifically stated to be underaged. Is not allowed. Because they are underaged. Because the style itself does not allow aging up. Because if you try to age them up you end up in a different style.
> 
> You can have your OCs in the same style fucking each other's brains out all you want.
> 
> " "this looks too Sonic-like and I don't like the image, I'll remove it  and say it looks like cub porn cuz I had a rough day at work and I'm  pissed"." Yeah if an admin ever did that, and I mean ever did that, I  would be up and down tearing them a new one.



So if I understand right, it's only disallowed to draw porn of the official characters in the official style, but either drawing the official characters in a different style or your own OC (which is an adult) in the Sonic style is fine. That's some good news at least... hopefully this can be clarified for everyone.

Even so, this has a lot of issues in some parts, and will end up with many false negatives. Mainly because: Even if someone draws the original characters in the original style, it doesn't mean they're referring to the same story / world / timeline as the original series. Let's pretend someone draws a comic of the Sonic characters being 22 and having sex. In their story, the way they look at that age is the same way the characters look like in the series, but they're still 22. Does this mean age is assumed based on the official story and not the artist's own? They aren't underage in such a circumstance, but would still qualify as such.

Further more: Let's pretend that Sega decides to make a release in which the Sonic characters have aged, but they will surprise us by having them look the same, declaring it's the default appearance of their species (being small and having large heads). Does that mean FA would un-ban all Sonic art and say "We're sorry, we didn't predict Sega would do this, you can post last year's porn back since it's possible they might not be kids there". Also, has each character's age been officially stated at all since Sonic exists? I don't remember seeing that in either the games I played or the Sonic X show, and if not stated otherwise in canon then being underage is just an assumption. To me they look like they're 14 (Sonic specifically acts like he's 20), while I honestly estimate they'd look nearly the same once they're 18. That of course if on their world, people are considered adults when they're 18 like humans. Remember they're an alien race (least what I remember of Sonic X), their time span might be different with time still counted in human years. You said "the style does not allow aging up", but that doesn't mean the characters don't age by all other criteria... so then we'd no longer be banning an underage character. If there's an official video or screenshot proving otherwise (or stating their age) feel free to post it and correct this.

I think this is all silly, and I find it odd debates like this even exist. The only way I consider a character a cub is either if the artist states it is, or if physical appearance is very very very clear and leaves no room for interpretation (typically the character either looking like a baby, or wearing diapers and the like). Sonic is far from it, and unless age is stated officially we're somewhere around the "is that character 17 or 19" zone. Obvious cubs in diapers are the only thing I imagined would get banned when I heard of the first restrictions, but IMO this whole thing kinda descended into madness and goes way further than I think it rationally ever should.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> I won't inject my own appraisal of the situation regarding the older ponies into this, but suffice it to say there are many stages of development that occur past puberty. I applaud the creators of MLP for being aware of this.
> 
> It's not Sonic artwork that's in question here. It's Sonic porn/nudes. Just clearing that up.




All I'm saying in regards to the Ponies is that the same actually DOES apply to Sonic. Uncle Chuck and King Acorn are two examples that show there are a variety of ways that they grow and age.

...and you say it's just Sonic porn, but I'm addressing those in this thread that are going "Get rid of all Sonic fan art." It's a preposterous ideal, and beyond ignorant.

To which, anyway, the Sonic porn issue shouldn't BE an issue. It shows you how faulty the AUP is, and how horribly handled these situations have been by the staff.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> That's fair enough, but when all's said and done it's still a relatively small change to the character.



Again, watch the episodes regarding cutie marks. The appearance of one is a fundamental change in a character's life that defines who they are. It's more a matter of philosophy than art style, and it's a very clear, visible way to tell adult characters from minors.



jenhedgehog said:


> The Sonic Universe works in a similar way but concerning proportion and shape changes instead - these are also subtle in some cases but obvious enough if drawn by someone competent.  Surely judgement should be used on a case-by-case basis rather than "you can't age up in Sonic style period" when people have proved it's entirely possible to do this.



The mods have decided not to allow for any mistakes in interpretation. If you want to upload your own adult character in the Sonic style, that's fine. Just don't draw the canonly underage characters in the canon style and upload them to FA. Seems simple enough to me.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> This has been covered in the thread. If "good enough" isn't good enough for you, there are other places to hang your hat.



Again, I am NOT going to go through this thread and dig through 14-15 pages of stuff that is potentially hearsay.

And, again, NOTHING has been fixed from previous situations. Last time this came up, Dragoneer said that if you aged them up in the artwork, it wasn't going to be a problem.

BUt here we are, and it's a damn problem. The AUP is still murky and horribly written, despite promising last MARCH that they were going to update it; there are threats against users to be suspended or banned; but the users are not told which pieces are in violation, just told to 'clean up your gallery or you get punished.'

There's no clear set of rules, and it is left up to the judgement of either a Mod or Admin's discretion.

That right there is inexcusable.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> I'm addressing those in this thread that are going "Get rid of all Sonic fan art." It's a preposterous ideal, and beyond ignorant.



I agree. There's no reason beyond legalities to censor certain forms or styles of art from an objective standpoint. Sites will do as sites will do, though.



The Lunatic25 said:


> It shows you how faulty the AUP is, and how horribly handled these situations have been by the staff.



At the risk of coming across as flippant, this is more a matter of reading comprehension than how the matter has been handled.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Again, I am NOT going to go through this thread and dig through 14-15 pages of stuff that is potentially hearsay.



Or actual clear definitions by Summercat. If you review just his updates, it's pretty clear what the expectations are.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Requoting...



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Again, watch the episodes regarding cutie marks. The appearance of one is a fundamental change in a character's life that defines who they are. It's more a matter of philosophy than art style, and it's a very clear, visible way to tell adult characters from minors.





Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> To be fair _here_, the Mane Six all got their Cutie Marks while they were still *fillies*.  As did Twist, Apple Bloom's best friend, among other *fillies*.  Cutie Marks do not an adult make.



FYI - My wife and I are not trying to start some sort of war here. We're just trying get a clear understanding of the situation here as appears to be a weird double standard here and as some others have pointed out, the AUP isn't clear enough which is causing issues with people.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> At the risk of coming across as flippant, this is more a matter of reading comprehension than how the matter has been handled.



Minors in Sexual Situations

FA does not permit humanoid/anthro children under the age of 18 to appear in sexually explicit situations. Submissions containing characters of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration. Attempts to circumvent this policy is not acceptable, and will result in submissions being removed  without notice.

This is taken directly out of the AUP: http://help.furaffinity.net/article/AA-00205/0/Acceptable-Upload-Policy-AUP.html

"Submissions containing characters of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration."

See this part here? This is badly, badly written. What one person deems acceptable another will not. There is no guideline here; just a statement of 'use your best judgement' and that's that.

There's no way to mis-read this, this is how it is written. This is incredibly poor. THIS is why we are having the issues we are having.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Or actual clear definitions by Summercat. If you review just his updates, it's pretty clear what the expectations are.



With all due respect to Summercat, unless they are linking to the actual rules we have to guide us from the AUP and what not, then it still counts as hearsay.

Summercat doesn't make the rules, all Summercat can do is try to enforce them.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> Even if someone draws the original characters in the original style, it doesn't mean they're referring to the same story / world / timeline as the original series. Let's pretend someone draws a comic of the Sonic characters being 22 and having sex. In their story, the way they look at that age is the same way the characters look like in the series, but they're still 22. Does this mean age is assumed based on the official story and not the artist's own? They aren't underage in such a circumstance, but would still qualify as such.



From what I'm reading, there needs to be a clear, unequivocal, visual distinction between characters of sexual maturity and minority. That does not exist in the canon style of Sonic, and the mods are not willing to abide a gray area.



Mircea said:


> Further more: Let's pretend that Sega decides to make a release in which the Sonic characters have aged, but they will surprise us by having them look the same, declaring it's the default appearance of their species (being small and having large heads). Does that mean FA would un-ban all Sonic art and say "We're sorry, we didn't predict Sega would do this, you can post last year's porn back since it's possible they might not be kids there".



As non-staff, I can't say what would happen. I imagine the answer would be "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it."



			
				Desiderata said:
			
		

> But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.





Mircea said:


> Also, has each character's age been officially stated at all since Sonic exists?



As I understand it, yes.



Mircea said:


> I think this is all silly, and I find it odd debates like this even exist. The only way I consider a character a cub is either if the artist states it is, or if physical appearance is very very very clear and leaves no room for interpretation (typically the character either looking like a baby, or wearing diapers and the like). Sonic is far from it, and unless age is stated officially we're somewhere around the "is that character 17 or 19" zone. Obvious cubs in diapers are the only thing I imagined would get banned when I heard of the first restrictions, but IMO this whole thing kinda descended into madness and goes way further than I think it rationally ever should.



I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> Requoting...



What I expect to happen is that the Cutie Mark Crusaders will still be off-limits when they attain theirs unless they significantly change art style and mentality to match the adults. There are no characters yet portrayed in MLP that have a cutie mark but are not canonly adult. It's another "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it." thing.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Minors in Sexual Situations
> 
> FA does not permit humanoid/anthro children under the age of 18 to appear in sexually explicit situations. Submissions containing characters of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration. Attempts to circumvent this policy is not acceptable, and will result in submissions being removed  without notice.
> 
> ...



This was covered by Summercat. There are not always clear definitions of age, and they are falling back on the legal precedent of "I know it when I see it." I'm not sure the AUP needs to be cluttered with specific examples for every fandom canon out there. It'd be needlessly complex at that point.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> With all due respect to Summercat, unless they are linking to the actual rules we have to guide us from the AUP and what not, then it still counts as hearsay.



"I know it when I see it." is a valid legal precedent. That's the guideline the admins use, for better or for worse.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> So if I understand right, it's only disallowed to draw porn of the official characters in the official style, but either drawing the official characters in a different style or your own OC (which is an adult) in the Sonic style is fine. That's some good news at least... hopefully this can be clarified for everyone.



Yes. If you draw the sonic characters in your own style, and make them look like adults, they're ok in porn.



Mircea said:


> Even so, this has a lot of issues in some parts, and will end up with many false negatives. Mainly because: Even if someone draws the original characters in the original style, it doesn't mean they're referring to the same story / world / timeline as the original series. Let's pretend someone draws a comic of the Sonic characters being 22 and having sex. In their story, the way they look at that age is the same way the characters look like in the series, but they're still 22. Does this mean age is assumed based on the official story and not the artist's own? They aren't underage in such a circumstance, but would still qualify as such.


Drawn characters -have- to look like they're adults.
Just saying they're adults doesn't cut it. 

Simply put: 
If the character's drawn in it's original style, and he/she's canonically underage or looks underage, it's not allowed in porn.
If the character's drawn in the artist's own style, and he/she's canonically underage but looks to be of age, it's allowed in porn. (Say, draw Tails as if he were a grown-up)



Mircea said:


> Further more: Let's pretend that Sega decides to make a release in which the Sonic characters have aged, but they will surprise us by having them look the same, declaring it's the default appearance of their species (being small and having large heads). Does that mean FA would un-ban all Sonic art and say "We're sorry, we didn't predict Sega would do this, you can post last year's porn back since it's possible they might not be kids there". Also, has each character's age been officially stated at all since Sonic exists? I don't remember seeing that in either the games I played or the Sonic X show, and if not stated otherwise in canon then being underage is just an assumption. To me they look like they're 14 (Sonic specifically acts like he's 20), while I honestly estimate they'd look nearly the same once they're 18. That of course if on their world, people are considered adults when they're 18 like humans. Remember they're an alien race (least what I remember of Sonic X), their time span might be different with time still counted in human years. You said "the style does not allow aging up", but that doesn't mean the characters don't age by all other criteria... so then we'd no longer be banning an underage character. If there's an official video or screenshot proving otherwise (or stating their age) feel free to post it and correct this.



Let's not get into "What if's", here. 
Besides, It's not likely a company like Sega's suddenly going to change the age of it's characters.
Once again, just saying they're older doesn't cut it.



Mircea said:


> I think this is all silly, and I find it odd debates like this even exist. The only way I consider a character a cub is either if the artist states it is, or if physical appearance is very very very clear and leaves no room for interpretation (typically the character either looking like a baby, or wearing diapers and the like). Sonic is far from it, and unless age is stated officially we're somewhere around the "is that character 17 or 19" zone. Obvious cubs in diapers are the only thing I imagined would get banned when I heard of the first restrictions, but IMO this whole thing kinda descended into madness and goes way further than I think it rationally ever should.



There is a site that has the "official" ages listed for the Sonic characters. I believe only one or 2 of them were of age (Knuckles being one of them, possibly (This does not give you carte-blanche to drawn him in porn, I'm only saying he might be of age)).

I'm going to be blunt, here.
Frankly, what you consider to be cub doesn't really matter.
As long as we look at a image, and can't say with certainty that it's not a cub, it's probably not ok for it to be a mature / adult image.



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> What I expect to happen is that the Cutie Mark Crusaders will still be off-limits when they attain theirs unless they significantly change art style and mentality to match the adults. There are no characters yet portrayed in MLP that have a cutie mark but are not canonly adult. It's another "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it." thing.



This is correct. Although, if and when the fillies get their marks, and the only thing about their art style that changes is those marks, they'll still be off-limits.

I must say, We're not applying some blanket ban to either sonic or MLP art.
The rules in these categories haven't changed for months. It's just the porn of underage characters that's not allowed, and hasn't been for a long time already.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL - So Amy with Rouges body [Rouge being 18] and having a different body shape from Amy while in that Sonic style isn't going to cut it then?


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> This was covered by Summercat. There are not always clear definitions of age, and they are falling back on the legal precedent of "I know it when I see it." I'm not sure the AUP needs to be cluttered with specific examples for every fandom canon out there. It'd be needlessly complex at that point.



Specific examples are not necessary, but 'leaving it up to their discretion' isn't good, either. Again, it can vary from one person to another, and there's been several times now where stuff that SHOULD have been okay because of the extended torsos, limbs, etc....weren't, because someone goes "Well, they're said to be underage, so no MATTER what they look like, they are!"

See?

...and no, that's not a valid legal precedent. a precedent is something that was set down by previous examples, where it was judged one way or another.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> CerbrusNL - So Amy with Rouges body [Rouge being 18] and having a different body shape from Amy while in that Sonic style isn't going to cut it then?



I can't really give you a yes or no on that, since it depends a lot on how you draw it.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Specific examples are not necessary, but 'leaving it up to their discretion' isn't good, either. Again, it can vary from one person to another, and there's been several times now where stuff that SHOULD have been okay because of the extended torsos, limbs, etc....weren't, because someone goes "Well, they're said to be underage, so no MATTER what they look like, they are!"



If in the canon art style, there is not enough of a difference between minor and adult versions of a character, porn or nudes of canonly underaged characters in the canon style uploaded to FA is against the AUP. It can't really be refined further.



The Lunatic25 said:


> ...and no, that's not a valid legal precedent.



Actually...


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

To me the problem still lies that the admin team still dont have themselves a guideline, its all still up to the individual's view.
So I'm gonna ask, do you guys have a BASE guideline on this stuff cause that would GREATLY stop having you guys contradict one another really.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Verin Asper said:


> ...do you guys have a BASE guideline on this stuff cause that would GREATLY stop having you guys contradict one another really.



Not a mod, but this is the precedent that was cited earlier in the thread.

If you have to add a specific statement for every canon - or even for problematic canons - the AUP would become unnecessarily cumbersome.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

_Fur Affinity_ is kind of weird as far as what stays and goes sometimes.  One example is that "Flora" from _Twokinds_ looks and (somewhat) acts an adult Keidran, despite being 11 or 12 years old.  This is because Keidrans have a lifespan of around 20 years.  And yet, "Teemo" from _League of Legends_ despite looking like a baby badger-moogle, is an adult according to the lore of the game.
I think there was also some thingamabob from a _Final Fantasy_ game that looked like an infant, but was a mature adult.  But don't quote me on that.

As Summercat said several pages back, "It's impossible to cover everything."  So I guess it's technically left up to the admin's discretion as to whether or not something is genuinely "cub art."  Though, citing those two examples... I'd think those characters would be on the chopping block along side Sonic and crew, given they look *younger* than any given _Sonic_ character.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> I can't really give you a yes or no on that, since it depends a lot on how you draw it.


Alright. Here's a Link to Rouge the Bat. Say I swapped her head around with Amy Rose's (give or take the head makeup) and drew it in the exact style as shown there (as adult content). Would that be acceptable? I'm trying to make sense of this you see.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Verin Asper said:


> To me the problem still lies that the admin team still dont have themselves a guideline, its all still up to the individual's view.
> So I'm gonna ask, do you guys have a BASE guideline on this stuff cause that would GREATLY stop having you guys contradict one another really.



Can you come up with a guideline that -exactly- describes how a sonic character can and can not look in porn?


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> If in the canon art style, there is not enough of a difference between minor and adult versions of a character, porn or nudes of canonly underaged characters in the canon style uploaded to FA is against the AUP. It can't really be refined further.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...



Except that there IS a clearly defined difference between child and adult in Sonic's world.

Tails and Cream are clearly children, with Sonic's age hitting that mystical point at 16/17, and Uncle Chuck hitting somewhere much older.


Chuck and Sonic are almost IDENTICAL except for coloration, and the mustache. That's it.


Also, you said "I know it when I see it" is precedence. I argued that it is not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent

Because it isn't. It is a phrase used by a judge, who was setting precedent with his case. Not the same thing.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Can you come up with a guideline that -exactly- describes how a sonic character can and can not look in porn?



You cannot 100% cover EVERYTHING EVER, but a guideline would greatly reduce the number of occurances where we have people squabbling over what is or isn't acceptable.

Remember back last Spring, when Sciggles' uploaded that picture and there was a huge uproar? That was an attempt to establish a guideline.

It was handled poorly and then the idea dropped. Which was dumb as well, because there needs to be SOMETHING to judge against.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> You cannot 100% cover EVERYTHING EVER



And that's exactly the problem.
There will always be someone that'd want the rules to be more exact. But there will always be details that are overlooked.

We have a guideline:
"Submissions containing characters of questionable or indeterminable age"
Make sure there's no question about them being adult.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Not a mod, but this is the precedent that was cited earlier in the thread.
> 
> If you have to add a specific statement for every canon - or even for problematic canons - the AUP would become unnecessarily cumbersome.


The point of a base guideline though allows all admins to still be individuals but stopping the classic "One admin says its ok, months later another admin says no" because both admins have different self guideline.
Sciggles have actually started the baseline by pretty much going on about that the canon style is hard to show aged up characters, what happen this time that some folks who were hit by this removal dont draw in the canon style and had the chars aged up.


----------



## Smelge (Sep 9, 2012)

Summercat said:


> Physically adult, treated as adult, the same body shapes as adults. They're adults. End of discussion.



Excellent. I'm off down the local autism centre to get some. Wish someone had told me this shit earlier.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

I was wondering when someone would bring the "mentally disabled" into this discussion.

Thanks for not letting me down, Smelge.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Verin Asper said:


> "One admin says its ok, months later another admin says no" because both admins have different self guideline.



If a admin says it's OK, make sure that admin leaves a comment on the submission, or a entry on your account.
If a user can't prove his "He said it's ok!" claim, I try to access the admin in question, but more often than not, users make stuff like this up.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> I can't really give you a yes or no on that, since it depends a lot on how you draw it.





Orengefox said:


> Alright. Here's a Link to Rouge the Bat. Say I swapped her head around with Amy Rose's (give or take the head makeup) and drew it in the exact style as shown there (as adult content). Would that be acceptable? I'm trying to make sense of this you see.



Did you see my post earlier CerbrusNL?


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> And that's exactly the problem.
> There will always be someone that'd want the rules to be more exact. But there will always be details that are overlooked.
> 
> We have a guideline:
> ...



That isn't enough, though. Again, it causes this situation of "Well, I think it looks fine!" "Well, I say it doesn't! We gotta suspend them!"

You cannot cover everything, but you need SOMETHING to have to guide decisions with.

The way things are now, a mod or admin doesn't even need to discuss it with his fellow staff members...and that's wrong.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> Did you see my post earlier CerbrusNL?


The "Rouge the Bat/Amy Rose body swap" debate has been addressed elsewhere in the thread.  Likely, repeatedly.

She is unquestionably adult, both physically and age-wise.  So to answer your question, yes.  That would be acceptable. probably.  Maybe.

But then, you wouldn't be drawing Amy Rose "on-model" anymore, thus not using the original style.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> Alright. Here's a Link to Rouge the Bat. Say I swapped her head around with Amy Rose's (give or take the head makeup) and drew it in the exact style as shown there (as adult content). Would that be acceptable? I'm trying to make sense of this you see.



Not to butt in, but allow me to draft a simple flowchart that explains my understanding of the rules:


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Because it isn't. It is a phrase used by a judge, who was setting precedent with his case. Not the same thing.



At the time, the method used was a legal precedent. It's an old one, but nonetheless valid, at least as far as the mods are concerned. If you want to split hairs, split it with them, not me.


----------



## Smelge (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> I was wondering when someone would bring the "mentally disabled" into this discussion.
> 
> Thanks for not letting me down, Smelge.



I didn't need to bring the mentally disabled into the discussion. All the Sonictards and Bronies were here before I even arrived.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> You cannot 100% cover EVERYTHING EVER



THREAD OVER.


----------



## Smelge (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> The way things are now, a mod or admin doesn't even need to discuss it with his fellow staff members...and that's wrong.



Seems fair. Because what the admin team needs to do is discuss every single report they get in full detail for hours on end. because that's the Best Idea for getting through thousands of trouble tickets.


----------



## Quilmeleon (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Not to butt in, but allow me to draft a simple flowchart that explains my understanding of the rules:




They should put this flowchart in the AUP seriously. Easiest flowchart to follow ever


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> At the time, the method used was a legal precedent. It's an old one, but nonetheless valid, at least as far as the mods are concerned. If you want to split hairs, split it with them, not me.



It's not a precedent. It's also NOT that old, it's from the 60's according to that wikipedia article.

Precedent, as I said and then linked ot the wiki article about, is where there is a decision that has been called in the past, and can be used again now. It's how many cases are handled any more; it helps streamline the system.

The Mods and the Admins don't HAVE a precedent to base future judgments off of; because the rules and regulations keep changing. The AUP provides no help whatsoever for either users or staff, and the site owner is not taking care of this business himself..which he should be, seeing how this is at least the 3rd or 4th major time this has happened within a year.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Smelge said:


> Seems fair. Because what the admin team needs to do is discuss every single report they get in full detail for hours on end. because that's the Best Idea for getting through thousands of trouble tickets.



I didn't say it was the best idea, but if something is questionable, having a 2nd opinion from another staff member isn't a bad idea.

It's better then going "Gee...I can't tell. Let's just tell them to remove it, and not give them any details as to what is possibly in violation! Or better yet, I'll just remove it myself!"

That's how that fursuit incident occurred, you might remember...where pictures from Dragoneer himself were being deleted on his own web site. If someone had ASKED another person, we might not have had that.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> Did you see my post earlier CerbrusNL?


My answer remains unchanged, I'm afraid.



The Lunatic25 said:


> That isn't enough, though. Again, it causes this situation of "Well, I think it looks fine!" "Well, I say it doesn't! We gotta suspend them!"
> 
> You cannot cover everything, but you need SOMETHING to have to guide decisions with.
> 
> The way things are now, a mod or admin doesn't even need to discuss it with his fellow staff members...and that's wrong.



The fact we don't -have- to discuss it doesn't mean we don't.
When there's any doubt about a character's age, we usually ask for a second opinion.

And honestly, what makes everyone think we're suspending anyone that has a submission violation?
The only way to get a suspension out of submission violations is by re-uploading removed images (More than once, first time's usually a warning), or the obvious troll uploads like dicks and whatever.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> If a admin says it's OK, make sure that admin leaves a comment on the submission, or a entry on your account.
> If a user can't prove his "He said it's ok!" claim, I try to access the admin in question, but more often than not, users make stuff like this up.


that I know to be true, but please dont ignore the other part about how it seems some of you are ignoring the ground work/base
also please do not confuse a base/foundation for strict guidelines, I mean after all I manage to assist on making the baseline for the Secondlife ruling with Warmock, which allows flexiblity and room. Just by that I know anything can be given a foundation where there IS room. WHICH you guys did do with sciggles again showing that the canon artstyle should be avoid if doing porn. to which there were folks who were warned about cub porn even though they didnt draw in the canon style and had said chars aged up which confused me as we were given our own baseline.

Its like my jobs baseline on uniforms: black shirt, black pants, black footwear, black socks and if you work in the back of house you must wear a hat
I'm within that guideline even though at work I wear sandals, I can wear black Jeans cause the rule just says black pants, I wear a blue hat cause the rule just says a hat.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> ...but if something is questionable, having a 2nd opinion from another staff member isn't a bad idea.



You're assuming this doesn't happen. I'm not saying it is as I'm not on the "inside track" as it were, but that's an awfully big assumption.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> The Mods and the Admins don't HAVE a precedent to base future judgments off of; because the rules and regulations keep changing. The AUP provides no help whatsoever for either users or staff, and the site owner is not taking care of this business himself..which he should be, seeing how this is at least the 3rd or 4th major time this has happened within a year.



More documented facts and less opinions would help your case greatly on this one.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> My answer remains unchanged, I'm afraid.


This is why no one understands what's allowable. Even when we've described how we would draw it with clear cut examples, we're not getting clear answers.

I'm not trying to be rude, it's just that this situation is becoming frustrating. I wouldn't like to think the Sonic style is being discriminated here.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> You're assuming this doesn't happen. I'm not saying it is as I'm not on the "inside track" as it were, but that's an awfully big assumption.



I am not assuming, because it does and will happen.

The fursuit incident was caused by one guy, who didn't bother checking in, deleting things and paging folks that were thought to be in violation. It wasn't cleared up until 'Neer came on, found some of his stuff just GONE, and then had to put his foot down.



CerbrusNL said:


> My answer remains unchanged, I'm afraid.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And people believe this, because we've seen it happen numerous times. Norithics had a hell of a time, where someone paged him, told him to remove pieces (Didn't mention which ones) responded with that he wasn't going to just go through his gallery and clean it out without any more information...and was promptly suspended for 3 days.

Is was suspended, and then told he'd be okay to upload...then received the same treatment he had before, and was finally driven off the site by it.

This is why the Staff has a bad rep. Because of these type of things.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

I'll just leave this here.



CerbrusNL said:


> Can you come up with a guideline that -exactly- describes how a sonic character can and can not look in porn?


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 9, 2012)

Quilmeleon said:


> They should put this flowchart in the AUP seriously. Easiest flowchart to follow ever



I'm taking a look at this right now. This is actually a really good suggestion. Thank you Taigitsune-Kun for taking the time to make this. Something like this might need to be tweaked in one area though but that could potentially be put up somewhere for easy access for the user-base.



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> I'll just leave this here.


Again thank you. Something like this is actually very well thought out and useful. There may be a one or two things needing tweaking for accuracy but we could definitely put something like this up to help aid the user-base.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> More documented facts and less opinions would help your case greatly on this one.



I provided you with evidence of the AUP and where it is badly written; there's nothing else that needs to be said.

As for documentation, I can't document what I can't access at the moment, can I? The only other thing I can link you to would be the cub art ban announcement and the comments by Dragoneer from yesterday that shows he lied to us as to the reasons why the ban went into effect.

That doesn't have a bearing on our discussion here, so that's moot.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> ...we're not getting clear answers.



This is a matter of reading comprehension.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> Again thank you. Something like this is actually very well thought out and useful. There may be a one or two things needing tweaking for accuracy but we could definitely put something like this up to help aid the user-base.



I aim to please! I figured there'd be some tweaks (namely putting everything through the mod filter) but it was as close a draft as I could get with the information at hand. XD


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> This is a matter of reading comprehension.


No it is not.  He described -EXACTLY- how the character would be drawn and didn't get told if it was ok or not.  

Rouge is CLEARLY and BLATANTLY an adult Sonic character.  How many more times is this going to be said before someone gets it?  If someone drew Amy with Rouge's EXACT body then there should not be an issue, even if it's drawn in the Sonic style.  How many "cubs" have you people seen with curves, shapely legs and boobs?  Why can't anyone clarify if this would be ok?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> ...and didn't get told if it was ok or not.



At that point it's a matter of mod's interpretation, as explained. So yes there was an answer given, it's just not the answer that was being sought.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> I aim to please! I figured there'd be some tweaks (namely putting everything through the mod filter) but it was as close a draft as I could get with the information at hand. XD


and it was an example I was talking about to Cerbrus
there can be a guidline of sorts, you dont have to make it strict. People gotta stop thinking Guildline=strict ruling
Guidelines are often: Did you meet these minimal requirement?



jenhedgehog said:


> No it is not. He described -EXACTLY- how the character would be drawn and didn't get told if it was ok or not.





jenhedgehog said:


> Rouge is CLEARLY and BLATANTLY an adult Sonic character. How many more times is this going to be said before someone gets it? If someone drew Amy with Rouge's EXACT body then there should not be an issue, even if it's drawn in the Sonic style. How many "cubs" have you people seen with curves, shapely legs and boobs? Why can't anyone clarify if this would be ok?



...I can think of at least 1 user who does actually have such a char but is a cub...


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

I still feel inside this stuff is slightly rigged somewhere...But im still doing more reading and thinking of this than say something ill cause more ranting on here.
I understand abit enough why this is happening...and i still think most i read in this thread(to the ages of sonic characters or "cough" MLP .To the style being counted still as cu even if you aged them up.plus few character who look cub are of age and are fine to let by.) Are the most dumb and rigged reasons to ban it Ive ever heard in all my life...


----------



## muddypaws (Sep 9, 2012)

I've never thought of, nor been aware of any Sonic character to be "underage."  Pokemon, sure!  Lot's of the character's there are, in their original broadcast form, young Pokemon (or pocket-monsters as I believe the translation of the name implies).

Perhaps the confusion is indeed due to the standard form of a Sonic (or similar) character.  That is, oversized head, large eyes and smallish body.  Certainly the large eyes's are a common feature in RL young (this includes Avian, and Mammal species -- Including Human's).  This is actually, from what I've read and heard, a natural feature to endear young to the parents, etc.    It's why it's a feature also used in dolls;  Just look at the old porcelain dolls of the last 150 years.

But, Sonic should be thought of as "Adult" forms.  If there is any "childlike" feature of any Sonic character (beyond the aforementioned) it's general behavior. Some (Tails comes to mind) are a bit immature, and that maybe suggesting this "underage" classification.

If our FA staff does have some specifics on *why* they classify Sonic as "underage" they probably could specify it with key points.  This would make it clearer to all, and perhaps offer guidelines to those artists who wish to continue producing adult themed Sonic art?

That's my 2 Cents


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Darkzero779 said:


> I still feel inside this stuff is slightly rigged somewhere...But im still doing more reading and thinking of this than say something ill cause more ranting on here.
> I understand abit enough why this is happening...and i still think most i read in this thread(to the ages of sonic characters or "cough" MLP .To the style being counted still as cu even if you aged them up.plus few character who look cub are of age and are fine to let by.) Are the most dumb and rigged reasons to ban it Ive ever heard in all my life...



Hence the problem with interpreting laws. There's a lot of gray area, and the admins have to reduce as much of that as possible.


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> This is a matter of reading comprehension.


First off, I didn't ask for your answer (unless are you a member of staff). I asked a member of the staff for an answer because said staff didn't give a clear cookie cut answer. 

This is less a case of reading comprehension on my part and more a case of people not listening here.


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Hence the problem with interpreting laws. There's a lot of gray area, and the admins have to reduce as much of that as possible.



well all i say on that....No Chizz there..


----------



## YaoiMeowmaster (Sep 9, 2012)

Wait, Hasn't Sonic been canonly aged up by now? I mean, if I remember correctly in TAOSTH Sonic was 10 or 12 and Tails was 4. (4 1/2 at one point) Then in Sonic Hero's Tails was ...8 or 12 I think and Sonic was 14. Then in Sonic Chronicles they mentioned how it's been a while and everyone has matured a bit. 

Maybe I'm just derping out though.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

muddypaws said:


> I've never thought of, nor been aware of any Sonic character to be "underage."  Pokemon, sure!  Lot's of the character's there are, in their original broadcast form, young Pokemon (or pocket-monsters as I believe the translation of the name implies).
> 
> Perhaps the confusion is indeed due to the standard form of a Sonic (or similar) character.  That is, oversized head, large eyes and smallish body.  Certainly the large eyes's are a common feature in RL young (this includes Avian, and Mammal species -- Including Human's).  This is actually, from what I've read and heard, a natural feature to endear young to the parents, etc.    It's why it's a feature also used in dolls;  Just look at the old porcelain dolls of the last 150 years.
> 
> ...


Cause Sonic's Canon age is below 18
and to surprise Amy is actually 12


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

muddypaws said:


> If our FA staff does have some specifics on *why* they classify Sonic as "underage" they probably could specify it with key points.



Not staff, but staff have answered that the issue is with SEGA giving the characters multiple canon ages, and not providing any major visual cues to corroborate said change in age. Canonly, there isn't much visual difference between 16-year-old Sonic and any other age of Sonic - aside from a mustache, apparently.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> First off, I didn't ask for your answer (unless are you a member of staff). I asked a member of the staff for an answer because said staff didn't give a clear cookie cut answer.



More than one staff member has answered you. You are not comprehending their answers.


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

YaoiMeowmaster said:


> Wait, Hasn't Sonic been canonly aged up by now? I mean, if I remember correctly in TAOSTH Sonic was 10 or 12 and Tails was 4. (4 1/2 at one point) Then in Sonic Hero's Tails was ...8 or 12 I think and Sonic was 14. Then in Sonic Chronicles they mentioned how it's been a while and everyone has matured a bit.
> 
> Maybe I'm just derping out though.


Hes still 17 which is below 18 (and by technicality hes 16 due to not aging for his year in space) the games I think still list him as either 16 or 15


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

YaoiMeowmaster said:


> Wait, Hasn't Sonic been canonly aged up by now? I mean, if I remember correctly in TAOSTH Sonic was 10 or 12 and Tails was 4. (4 1/2 at one point) Then in Sonic Hero's Tails was ...8 or 12 I think and Sonic was 14. Then in Sonic Chronicles they mentioned how it's been a while and everyone has matured a bit.



That's the problem. Older Sonic looks nearly identical to younger Sonic, making interpretation of age in the canon nearly impossible.


----------



## YaoiMeowmaster (Sep 9, 2012)

Adult Sonic must be anorexic.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

YaoiMeowmaster said:


> Adult Sonic must be anorexic.



Or made of rubber. XD


----------



## Verin Asper (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> That's the problem. Older Sonic looks nearly identical to younger Sonic, making interpretation of age in the canon nearly impossible.


Even in the comics when they did the 30 years later arcs, he looks the same though with more wrinkles under the eyes


----------



## Orengefox (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> More than one staff member has answered you. You are not comprehending their answers.


What's there to fucking comprehend. Said staff *didn't give a clear yes or no answer* for freak sake.

You're not comprehending my post.


----------



## YaoiMeowmaster (Sep 9, 2012)

Verin Asper said:


> Even in the comics when they did the 30 years later arcs, he looks the same though with more wrinkles under the eyes



Isn't that the case with real animals too? All you really can do to determine age (if you're not a vet) is see how big they are and how they act.

And even so that's not accurate. My cat must be about 5 years old, but she's teeny for a tabby and acts like a kitten.


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

> That's the problem. Older Sonic looks nearly identical to younger Sonic,  making interpretation of age in the canon nearly impossible.


And finding a way to make him in a style not related to his is even more impossible (It makes me think of the FA artist Crystal-For-Ever. If her own art style don't count idk what would...idk yet rly ..If you ever seen her art.)


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Orengefox said:


> What's there to fucking comprehend. Said staff *didn't give a clear yes or no answer* for freak sake.





> FA does not permit humanoid/anthro children under the age of 18 to appear in sexually explicit situations. Submissions containing characters of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration.



This has been explained multiple times in multiple ways throughout this thread.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Darkzero779 said:


> And finding a way to make him in a style not related to his is even more impossible



Blame SEGA for that one. All this could've been avoided had they abstained from giving everyone ages throughout the canon.


----------



## YaoiMeowmaster (Sep 9, 2012)

So wait. To clarify, on FA if the character has been clearly aged up it's allowed?

Shoot, better than DA. They wouldn't care if you made Dora the Explorer 40 years old. They don't allow age ups.


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

> Blame SEGA for that one. All this could've been avoided had they abstained from giving everyone ages throughout the canon.


You have no idea how much I agree...again i think this crap is crooked...


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

YaoiMeowmaster said:


> So wait. To clarify, on FA if the character has been clearly aged up it's allowed?



The interpretation I'm getting is that the art style has to be quite distinct if the character has been aged up, and if it is sufficiently distinct you should be OK.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

For the love of god.  I'm sorry but this whole thing is a fucking joke.  If it's left to discretion then this is PRECISELY WHY there's an issue - because people don't know exactly what's acceptable and what's not.  How much clearer can you be than to give a very specific example and ask if the staff would accept it?  For the millionth time, YOU CAN MAKE SONIC CHARACTERS LOOK OLDER IN THE SONIC STYLE.  To say "you can't age-up in the Sonic style" is, quite frankly, ignorant.  I'm getting bored of this conversation now, I feel I might be better off talking to a brick wall at this point.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Hence the problem with interpreting laws. There's a lot of gray area, and the admins have to reduce as much of that as possible.



Which is what I've been arguing for, but everyone keeps going "NO, it's fine the way it is!"


----------



## YaoiMeowmaster (Sep 9, 2012)

To be honest, I support shotas and lolicons and whatever underage stuff in general. It is only a drawing to me. 

But yeah, with those silly things called laws and rules in place...


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

Jen.  Orange.  Listen.  No, better.  *Look*.

Here's "Sega" Sonic the Hedgehog
Here's "Archie" Sonic the Hedgehog.
Here's "Archie" Sonic the Hedgehog, X Years Later.
*Bonus Points:* Here's an alternate Future Sonic.

Now tell me, honestly.  *Do.  You.  See.  A.  Difference?*


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> That's the problem. Older Sonic looks nearly identical to younger Sonic, making interpretation of age in the canon nearly impossible.



Yer wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxQ1LiSug_8&feature=player_detailpage#t=897s

Bam.


----------



## YaoiMeowmaster (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Jen.  Orange.  Listen.  No, better.  *Look*.
> 
> Here's "Sega" Sonic the Hedgehog
> Here's "Archie" Sonic the Hedgehog.
> ...



Personally, the shading under his chin looks like a beard to me. Do not want and can not unsee.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Sep 9, 2012)

Look guys, I think at this point it would just be easier to put your Sonic pr0n on another site. This argument has been going in circles for days. And neither side can come to a compromise that both are satisfied with.

On another note outside of the current issue, I do find it rather disappointing how many people in this fandom (Furry) that is already the butt of a joke on the internet, in media and in real life have drawn lines of pure disdain for other communities WITHIN it's own fandom Sonic or otherwise (MLP, Hamtaro etc...). It's perfectly understandable for a fetish or style to not be in your particular tastes, but the out  right hatred is uncalled for. Again, this is mostly an observation on this particular subject in a general manner, and not directed primarily at this thread or the AUP rules and such. Since I have seen this kind of distaste in other sites as well.


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> Look guys, I think at this point it would just be easier to put your Sonic pr0n on another site. This argument has been going in circles for days. And neither side can come to a compromise that both are satisfied with.
> 
> On another note outside of the current issue, I do find it rather disappointing how many people in this fandom (Furry) that is already the butt of a joke on the internet, in media and in real life have drawn lines of pure disdain for other communities WITHIN it's own fandom Sonic or otherwise (MLP, Hamtaro etc...). It's perfectly understandable for a fetish or style to not be in your particular tastes, but the out  right hatred is uncalled for. Again, this is mostly an observation on this particular subject in a general manner, and not directed primarily at this thread or the AUP rules and such. Since I have seen this kind of distaste in other sites as well.


Yeah due to this being official...best to just do the stuff on So furry or Inkbunny...maybe Hentai Foundry?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> How much clearer can you be than to give a very specific example and ask if the staff would accept it?



You can do this by uploading a submission you think might be in the gray area, and waiting to see if it gets flagged or not. I wouldn't recommend doing that very often, though. Also:



CerbrusNL said:


> Make sure there's no question about them being adult.





jenhedgehog said:


> For the millionth time, YOU CAN MAKE SONIC CHARACTERS LOOK OLDER IN THE SONIC STYLE.  To say "you can't age-up in the Sonic style" is, quite frankly, ignorant.





CerbrusNL said:


> Can you come up with a guideline that -exactly- describes how a sonic character can and can not look in porn?



There's too much gray area, as has been stated repeatedly in this thread. The admins are trying to make this as easy as possible, and that means not allowing a gray area if it can be helped.



jenhedgehog said:


> I'm getting bored of this conversation now, I feel I might be better off talking to a brick wall at this point.



Darling, you have no idea.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Yer wrong.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxQ1LiSug_8&feature=player_detailpage#t=897s
> 
> Bam.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Darling, you have no idea.


It's nice to see that we've managed to come to an agreement on -something- then


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> Look guys, I think at this point it would just be easier to put your Sonic pr0n on another site. This argument has been going in circles for days. And neither side can come to a compromise that both are satisfied with.
> 
> On another note outside of the current issue, I do find it rather disappointing how many people in this fandom (Furry) that is already the butt of a joke on the internet, in media and in real life have drawn lines of pure disdain for other communities WITHIN it's own fandom Sonic or otherwise (MLP, Hamtaro etc...). It's perfectly understandable for a fetish or style to not be in your particular tastes, but the out  right hatred is uncalled for. Again, this is mostly an observation on this particular subject in a general manner, and not directed primarily at this thread or the AUP rules and such. Since I have seen this kind of distaste in other sites as well.



I'm mostly seeing this in relation to MLP on this thread. The Sonic issue is a legal matter at this point, and thus outside the influence of opinion.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> It's nice to see that we've managed to come to an agreement on -something- then



Yup. Seems like a lot of to-do about a non-issue.



jenhedgehog said:


> Ok, as I previously stated a couple of times in here, I DO -NOT- HAVE -ANY- SONIC PORN IN MY GALLERY!


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> For the love of god.  I'm sorry but this whole thing is a fucking joke.  If it's left to discretion then this is PRECISELY WHY there's an issue - because people don't know exactly what's acceptable and what's not.  How much clearer can you be than to give a very specific example and ask if the staff would accept it?  For the millionth time, YOU CAN MAKE SONIC CHARACTERS LOOK OLDER IN THE SONIC STYLE.  To say "you can't age-up in the Sonic style" is, quite frankly, ignorant.  I'm getting bored of this conversation now, I feel I might be better off talking to a brick wall at this point.



Can you give me a -good- example of a sonic character that looks older in sonic style?


----------



## kandlin (Sep 9, 2012)

monkeyxflash said:


> .... This argument has been going in circles for days. And neither side can come to a compromise that both are satisfied with.
> 
> .... I do find it rather disappointing how many people in this fandom (Furry) ... have drawn lines of pure disdain for other communities WITHIN it's own fandom Sonic or otherwise (MLP, Hamtaro etc...). It's perfectly understandable for a fetish or style to not be in your particular tastes, but the out  right hatred is uncalled for...



Agreed completely. But this fandom has always been self destructive by it's own nature. Even before Lulz, there was CrushYiffDestroy. Before FurAffinity, there was SheezyArt. I guess it's just the fate for those who are bullied to become bullies themselves.


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Can you give me a -good- example of a sonic character that looks older in sonic style?


All I can offer you is an official character (Rouge http://images.wikia.com/sonicencylopedia/images/6/6f/Rouge_the_Bat.png) until FA comes back online and/or I can have a go at drawing an example of aging someone up (I know how I'd do it, in a non-pornographic way, just to show the design differences or whatever).


----------



## kandlin (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> ...YOU CAN MAKE SONIC CHARACTERS LOOK OLDER IN THE SONIC STYLE.



Going to but in again with my 2 cents, but the 'age up' factor is exactly the problem with the note that I received regarding this. I DID feel that most, if not all, of the submissions I posted were aged up appropriately. But when the note I received regarding this did NOT state which images may have been a violation, and only pointed out that "most Sonic characters are underage" I think THAT is what drew out the drama, especially if the other people who complained about receiving notices got the same vague information. 

Again, since FA has been down since I replied for more clarification, it's not been possible to get more information or remove ANY or ALL of the images from my gallery, and while I do feel we should work with the moderators on this matter, I do also think a lot of confusion could have been avoided if I was given specifics on which images were offending from the first note. Then again, since at least five people I watch got the same notice within a few hour period, it's understandable that this would raise an eyebrow.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> All I can offer you is an official character (Rouge http://images.wikia.com/sonicencylopedia/images/6/6f/Rouge_the_Bat.png) until FA comes back online and/or I can have a go at drawing an example of aging someone up (I know how I'd do it, in a non-pornographic way, just to show the design differences or whatever).



Okay, I'd call that a reasonable example.
But now for male characters? (I know FA's down)

The problem is that the sonic style means large heads / hands / feet. Pretty much proportions of a underage person.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

jenhedgehog said:


> All I can offer you is an official character (Rouge http://images.wikia.com/sonicencylopedia/images/6/6f/Rouge_the_Bat.png) until FA comes back online and/or I can have a go at drawing an example of aging someone up (I know how I'd do it, in a non-pornographic way, just to show the design differences or whatever).


*Claps*  I've got it!  I understand how age works in the _Sonic_ universe now!

Age 6 -> Age 7 -> Age 12 -> Age 14 -> Age 16* -> Age 18 -> Age ??**
* Subjective
** A guess would be 18 + Cream's age of 6 (so, 24).  No one knows for sure.

It all makes so much sense now...  "Mobians" aren't *fully* grown until they're *over* 18!  O.O


----------



## jenhedgehog (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Okay, I'd call that a reasonable example.
> But now for male characters? (I know FA's down)
> 
> The problem is that the sonic style means large heads / hands / feet. Pretty much proportions of a underage person.


OK, I'll try to draw a male character and get it to you sometime next week if I can't find anything on FA (I've not really got much time right now).  Thanks for giving me a chance to show you what I mean, I appreciate it


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> SEGA put ages on the characters. There's no major discernible difference or defining feature (aside from perhaps a moustache) on Sonic characters that demonstrates they have aged in the canon style. This has been explained.



I keep seeing this statement made and I just want to point out (since most Americans are getting their Sonic Art styles from the Archie) that a human usually reaches their top height in their late teens. However, in regards to Sonic art style, the visual difference between 17 year old Sonic and 42 year old Sonic is, the artist does draw him just slightly taller looking and he has slight lines under his eyes. This is the same for Sally and Tails receives the most dramatic of visual change. He's taller, his fur is drawn with more of a ridge to it, and he too receives a visual change in his eye drawn design.

I'm not sure how many admin are actual artist and who see these visual differences, but they are there.

So, if the admin just simply doesn't want to see the Sonic style at all that's fine. If they don't feel there's a dramatic visual cahnge in teenage Sonic to middle age sonic design, that's fine too. Just stop saying there's zero change. Artistically that bugs me.


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> *Claps*  I've got it!  I understand how age works in the _Sonic_ universe now!
> 
> Age 6 -> Age 7 -> Age 12 -> Age 14 -> Age 16 (subjective) -> Age 18 -> Age ??
> 
> It all makes so much sense now...  "Mobians" aren't *fully* grown until they're *over* 18!  O.O



Oh! this is a interesting theory....but just this to say..Fully grown till over 18? What the Hell?!


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

I also found another monkey wrench to my theory: Wave the Swallow.

She's 18 and tall, but... she ain't got no boobs.  :B


----------



## Darkzero779 (Sep 9, 2012)

i see as well...She be still counted a cub even if she had a D cup size in her chest.
to my thought the makers of sonic

SEGA...You screwed some of us here big with this idiotic "Age" idea


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Trpdwarf said:


> I'm taking a look at this right now. This is actually a really good suggestion. Thank you Taigitsune-Kun for taking the time to make this. Something like this might need to be tweaked in one area though but that could potentially be put up somewhere for easy access for the user-base.
> 
> 
> Again thank you. Something like this is actually very well thought out and useful. There may be a one or two things needing tweaking for accuracy but we could definitely put something like this up to help aid the user-base.




Why a flow chart? I was assured yesterday that the rules had been previously clearly stated and that any confusion was solely on the fault of the user? Are you saying that the rules were either not clear or have evolved since that time and they now need public clarification and simplification? Surely that can not be the case.


----------



## Jessica U. Ingmann (Sep 9, 2012)

Wait wait, I got one for guys, too!  

*Male Mobian Aging Pattern*
6, 8, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20

Confused yet?  Now you see _FA_'s problem.  X3


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Why a flow chart? I was assured yesterday that the rules had been previously clearly stated and that any confusion was solely on the fault of the user? Are you saying that the rules were either not clear or have evolved since that time and they now need public clarification and simplification? Surely that can not be the case.



Or maybe we didn't think about using flow charts.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Or maybe we didn't think about using flow charts.


I was given the impression that flow chart wasn't even needed because the rules were already clear enough to not even warrant an official statement.  Summercat could have been misinformed though.. happens.


----------



## Kayla (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Okay, I'd call that a reasonable example.
> But now for male characters? (I know FA's down)
> 
> The problem is that the sonic style means large heads / hands / feet. Pretty much proportions of a underage person.



http://archiesonic.wikia.com/wiki/Maximillian_Acorn
http://archiesonic.wikia.com/wiki/Elias_Acorn
http://archiesonic.wikia.com/wiki/Amadeus_Prower
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091211203461/archiesonic/images/e/ed/Antoine_vs_Khan.jpg


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 9, 2012)

Kayla said:


> http://archiesonic.wikia.com/wiki/Maximillian_Acorn
> http://archiesonic.wikia.com/wiki/Elias_Acorn
> http://archiesonic.wikia.com/wiki/Amadeus_Prower
> http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091211203461/archiesonic/images/e/ed/Antoine_vs_Khan.jpg



Looks good, I'd say.


----------



## Fiz (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Let's not get into "What if's", here.
> Besides, It's not likely a company like Sega's suddenly going to change the age of it's characters.



Except they have done exactly this in the past!

Not delving into the Comics, Cartoons, etc. Just the games heres.

Charmy went from 16 (UK Knuckles Chaotix Manual) to 6 with very little design change.
Amy Rose went from 8 to 12 with a major design change.
Knuckles went from 15 to 16 with no design change, except the classic to modern style change.
Rouge was incorrectly marked as 17 in the Sonic Heroes English manual, and was then listed as 18 everywhere else. Not technically an age change, but still.

I also seem to remember Sonic and Tails' age changing, but I can't really find proof of that in my instruction manuals that I own. Some folk say that Sonic went from 16 to 15 and that Tails went from 10 to 8, or 12 to 8 starting in Sonic Adventure, but I don't have an original Sonic Adventure manual and I can't really be bothered to download one.

I also read that there were also plans of having Sonic Chronicles set 2 years in the future from the main series of games, but apparently that idea wasn't kept in the final version of the game. No idea if this is true or not, but I wouldn't doubt it. If this is true and was kept in the game, then Knuckles would have been 18, Sonic would have been 17, etc.

So, yes, Sega/Sonic Team has suddenly changed the ages of their characters.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Gah... so many new replies. To highlight and comment the most important quotes from CerbrusNL's response to my last post:



CerbrusNL said:


> Drawn characters -have- to look like they're adults.
> 
> Simply put:
> If the character's drawn in it's original style, and he/she's canonically underage or looks underage, it's not allowed in porn.
> ...



I believe this pretty much clears up how things work on this site.  When you draw a character, you must choose your drawing style carefully  and be ready to prove to the moderators that it's not cub. If it fails to prove it, then it automatically is and might be  deleted. Like you said directly, it doesn't matter if it looks cub to us or not (nor if it actually is or not), it matters how you (the team) feel and how you interpret things. Which from what we have noticed, can include a large percentage of the images on FA... simply because they are cartoon themed, chibi, etc.

A little reference to point out: In any normal leadership (either real life or internet), guilt has to be proven before it's concluded to exist. In fanatical leaderships, people go exactly the other way around, and assume guilt automatically exists unless proven otherwise. Eventually followed by doing everything possible to check people as thoroughly as they can, and even find guilt where there's no  suspicion. I know those things because I've been interested with the psychology of people who are in functions of leadership, due to nasty stuff happening in my country. I'm sorry to say this, but the people who are making the rules here are following the exact same pattern of mentality. The paranoid leader who's certain everyone on their turf is plotting against their rule, and everything other people are doing simply has to be a conspiracy to do something he dislikes or is afraid of.

In our case, you expect artists to form their style in such a way so that you can't get the feeling it looks like cub art. Even if many of them don't care (and might not even know) about this whole cub art drama. Yet every few weeks, there's a new journal where an artist states his art has been deleted for being cub porn, when it has nothing to do with it and he hasn't even imagined it. I got to see some of those images before they were taken down, and surely enough they indeed had nothing to do with it (there were exceptions too but more rarely). Even when the artist STATES the character is an adult, the team doesn't care... because the mentality that "it must be a plot against that thing we're paranoid about" sets in. I'm sorry... but most artists on FA don't know the team's preference in art, nor what they get the impression a cub picture looks like. They do not expect to have to prove anything to anyone, and as long as they don't break the rules they don't expect to be punished. Drawing porn that looks cub to a moderator while it doesn't to most normal people is not breaking any rule (from what I understand).

Until the team removes rules based on personal interpretation and replaces them with rules based on obviousness, the frustration and drama generated by those topics won't end. In fact, I can only see it getting worse. The only other way this can end is most artists leaving and the site becoming so empty that no one will care any more. Some have already left because of this, and I miss both their presence and art. Hope some mods are happy... after all, this lowers the risk of a brilliant mind plotting and subliminally sneaking in cub secks (because they have no better occupation).


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Fiz said:


> Except they have done exactly this in the past!
> 
> Not delving into the Comics, Cartoons, etc. Just the games heres.
> 
> ...



Sonic started in his first game at the age of 10. Then once What was it Sonic Heroes or Adventures for Sega Saturn he was upped to 15. I the animated Series, he was 15 and in the comic has progressed from 15 to 16 (current 17 due to time in space).


----------



## Fiz (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Sonic started in his first game at the age of 10. Then once What was it Sonic Heroes or Adventures for Sega Saturn he was upped to 15. I the animated Series, he was 15 and in the comic has progressed from 15 to 16 (current 17 due to time in space).



Is this in the manuals at all? I just looked at Sonic 1 and Sonic 2's manuals and I don't see a listed age. Though it might be in the European or Japanese manuals.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Sonic started in his first game at the age of 10. Then once What was it Sonic Heroes or Adventures for Sega Saturn he was upped to 15. I the animated Series, he was 15 and in the comic has progressed from 15 to 16 (current 17 due to time in space).



Which means that in one more year, he would be 18. Will he change his appearance visibly compared to how he looks like when he's 17 (the last case you mentioned)? No. Will it still be wrong to draw porn of him on FA? By all means yes... it must be cub porn, it just *has to*.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> Gah... so many new replies. To highlight and comment the most important quotes from CerbrusNL's response to my last post:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow, someone GETS it!

Except the problem is, artists who are clearly designing their subjects as adults (Hence, smaller heads compared to their bodies, longer limbs, breasts, etc.) are still getting harassed over this. :\

So, there's not only confusion on the part of the users, but the Staff as well. And the way it's being judged has been changed since it last came up.

It's injuring the site, which is amazing to me that anyone who has money in this thing would want.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Wow, someone GETS it!
> 
> *Except the problem is, artists who are clearly designing their subjects as adults (Hence, smaller heads compared to their bodies, longer limbs, breasts, etc.) are still getting harassed over this. :\*
> 
> ...



*This*
*This*
*This
**This
**This*
*This*
*This*


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> *This*
> *This*
> *This
> **This
> ...



Hahaha...feels good to have someone finally *get* why this is such a problem!

Shame that it doesn't seem to be bothering the majority of people.


----------



## Zenia (Sep 9, 2012)

Jessica U. Ingmann said:


> Age 6


lol Shows how well I can tell the ages of Sonic characters... When I still had my porn Tumblr, someone asked me to draw Cream the Rabbit humping my fursona. I did... but obviously I drew her as an adult. When the person said "You can make her older if you want!" I had assumed that the character was probably a teenager. XDDD


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Why a flow chart?



The flow chart was my doing, and it was an attempt to clarify the contents of this thread for people who didn't want to read the whole thing.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Summercat could have been misinformed though.. happens.


----------



## Kayla (Sep 9, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Looks good, I'd say.



So if Sonic grew some fuzz from what I just linked, it would be deemed acceptable for adult art?

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b43/TyrantGod/sonicfuxfx.jpg


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> Hahaha...feels good to have someone finally *get* why this is such a problem!



This is a situation where the user being harassed needs to seek out confirmation from other mods with documented proof. All that has been presented thus far is rumor perpetuated by the misinformed and uninvolved.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

One of the MANY oddities that surrounds this subject: If the age characters have in the official show matters (over their age in the artist's story / drawing), does that mean the FA team needs to know the age of each character in every show in the world? Like I said, I don't even remember any official statement from Sega as to the age of the characters, and even so we're seeing specific characters being banned from porn (lol). So many shows out there that porn can be drawn of... and so much confusing info and speculation in all of their fandoms. How can the mods be sure?

If I draw porn of a character that the FA team hasn't heard of, and there's no info online about age, does that mean I'm forcing the mods to watch the show so they can take a decision about my submission (or they decide based on misinformation)? Hmmm... I wonder what the most unpleasant cartoon out there is :3


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> If the age characters have in the official show matters (over their age in the artist's story / drawing), does that mean the FA team needs to know the age of each character in every show in the world?



Unless I'm mistaken If there's no information about canon age in the form of a number or relative maturity compared with other characters, it's unenforceable. That's why Pokemon and Digimon aren't an issue.


----------



## The Lunatic25 (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> This is a situation where the user being harassed needs to seek out confirmation from other mods with documented proof. All that has been presented thus far is rumor perpetuated by the misinformed and uninvolved.



That's really not true, when you can see artwork that was clearly an adult being deleted off the site.

And anyone on the site can see that.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

The Lunatic25 said:


> That's really not true, when you can see artwork that was clearly an adult being deleted off the site.



Was it your art? If not, encourage the artist to come forward with their case.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Unless I'm mistaken If there's no information about canon age in the form of a number or relative maturity compared with other characters, it's unenforceable. That's why Pokemon and Digimon aren't an issue.



Where's the official source stating their age? I never heard or seen one, but if someone has a link feel free to post it. Official source meaning a video showing a dialogue from a game or cartoon episode of someone mentioning their age, or info on an official web page stating something. I imagine this is unlikely because in different games and series, characters might have different ages, and they may represent different times.

Speaking of different times: How does one know the artist isn't drawing something that's taking place in the future compared to the show? I mean assuming that in one of the episodes the character is underage, what if the artist is drawing something that's taking place several years after? One of the many things the team is missing and ignoring with this weird thinking...


----------



## maxgoof (Sep 9, 2012)

There are so many aspects of this problem.

Laws differ from one country to another. Some countries ban all porn. Some ban none at all.

But the servers are here in the U.S., so for the most part U.S. Law prevails (much to the chagrin of Europeans). Until recently, the Supreme Court declared all pornography to be free speech,  except where the creation of such pornography violated other laws, such as those against murder, rape, etc. This is the reason why child pornography was banned, as a child had to be harmed in the process of making it.

However, cartoon depictions of minors does not harm a single child. So, why is it outlawed? The usual argument given is that it encourages the behavior. This actually flies in the face of other evidence that suggests it does not. Especially if such "minors" aren't even human.

The real problem comes in when we start getting very good at computer modelling, where human depiction with computer graphics becomes difficult, if not impossible to tell from the real thing. At that point, those who create actual child pornography will call it CGI.

So, what do we do?


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> Where's the official source stating their age? I never heard or seen one, but if someone has a link feel free to post it.



I believe it's been posted in this thread already. There are canon ages for all Sonic characters, however.



Mircea said:


> How does one know the artist isn't drawing something that's taking place in the future compared to the show?



Doesn't matter if the art style doesn't change significantly between minors and adults.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

maxgoof said:


> So, what do we do?



Vote in lawmakers that share our perspective on victimless crimes.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Fiz said:


> Is this in the manuals at all? I just looked at Sonic 1 and Sonic 2's manuals and I don't see a listed age. Though it might be in the European or Japanese manuals.




Sorry I take back the 10 years (that was from Ask.com and I"m not sure how accurate that was) but he did begin as 16 in some official art http://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_the_Hedgehog . The problem is Sega has fluxed him in games, from 15 to 16, in the comic as a response they have tried to keep up with these changes, especially when they did the visual redesign (and the whole 17 years old thing) but they never stay consistant. Regardless, he's still under 18 in all material regardless. HOWEVER, the comic once did state that Mobians matured and aged at a different rate than their Highlander/human counter parts so take that as you would.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> The flow chart was my doing, and it was an attempt to clarify the contents of this thread for people who didn't want to read the whole thing.


I was being more sarcastic after being told much earlier in the thread that my pointing out the inconsistencies of staff prior statements was my inability to fully understand their intent and I was misinterpreting their 'clearly' defined rules that didn't need to be changed because nothing in the previous ruling had, even though it did.

Hey, if they gotta use a flow chart, with pictures (I highly recommend pictorial examples and not just text) then so be it. As I stated before though, good luck for any FA user who's a Sonic artist in all of this because they're going to need it. They've just become the black sheep of FA on par to cub art, which I find very humorous.


----------



## kaskae (Sep 9, 2012)

This entire ordeal could have been avoided had people just realized that getting your jollies off through pornography of a CHILDREN'S SHOW, that contains characters that kids themselves relate to in terms of size, demeanor and innocence, isn't exactly kosher with a majority of people.

Needless to say, I'm being overly opinionated and cynical. What I'm getting at here is that it's not a battle to be fought.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

maxgoof said:


> There are so many aspects of this problem.
> 
> Laws differ from one country to another. Some countries ban all porn. Some ban none at all.
> 
> ...



If only everyone would think like you on this. And it's such a simple thing for anyone to understand... how does it not actually happen 



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> I believe it's been posted in this thread already. There are canon ages for all Sonic characters, however.



Ah, ok. It's a large thread so prolly hard to find it now. But if there's official reference it can at least be stated beyond doubt some characters are underage... although IMO this doesn't solve almost anything of the problem.



Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Doesn't matter if the art style doesn't change significantly between minors and adults.



But then it's no longer banning cub porn or underage characters. If eg: In the user's story, the art style is due to species and not age, so they are no longer kids. Which might actually be the case officially, I don't think that one's been stated nor do we know how older versions of the characters would look like officially. Telling the artist how to draw their art and which direction to take the story in when it's known the characters are adults is... wrong. That's saying "draw your character bigger, with longer limbs and a smaller head, just so you can prove you aren't drawing the same version as in the show where they're underage". Even just the logic behind it... what on Earth gives x_x


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Unless I'm mistaken If there's no information about canon age in the form of a number or relative maturity compared with other characters, it's unenforceable. That's why Pokemon and Digimon aren't an issue.



Actually digimon are an issue. Digimon are a BIG issue since each form of a digimon represents their age/maturity level in their evolutionary line. It doesn't matter how you happen to draw that particular level, the fact would remain that so long as they are in that form they fall under that maturity level.

http://digimon.wikia.com/wiki/Digimon_(creature)#Level



Fresh or Baby (å¹¼å¹´æœŸI _Younenki I_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Childhood I"), officially translated as "Baby I"
In-Training (å¹¼å¹´æœŸII _Younenki II_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Childhood 2"), officially translated as "Baby II"
Rookie (æˆé•·æœŸ _Seichouki_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Youth"), officially translated as "Child"
Champion (æˆç†ŸæœŸ _Seijukuki_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Adolescence"), officially translated as "Adult"
Ultimate (å®Œå…¨ä½“ _Kanzen-tai_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Perfect form"), officially translated as "Perfect"
Mega (ç©¶æ¥µä½“ _Kyuukyoku-tai_[SUP]?[/SUP], lit. "Ultimate form"), officially translated as "Ultimate

So, TECHNICALLY, digimon rookies like Renamon, Guilmon, Augomon, Veemon, for example, are considered Digimon children by the mechanics of that particular property. Think about that for a second.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> They've just become the black sheep of FA on par to cub art, which I find very humorous.



You do realize this is being done to ensure alignment with the laws of the United States, correct? Just wanted to make sure that was abundantly clear. Opinion is superseded by legality.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

kaskae said:


> This entire ordeal could have been avoided had people just realized that getting your jollies off through pornography of a CHILDREN'S SHOW, that contains characters that kids themselves relate to in terms of size, demeanor and innocence, isn't exactly kosher with a majority of people.
> 
> Needless to say, I'm being overly opinionated and cynical. What I'm getting at here is that it's not a battle to be fought.




It's not the characters in the fight I have an issue with it's the telling artist what style they can and can not draw what they want to draw in I have more of an issue with, personally. I could care less if Somebody wanted to draw Sonic, Amy, and Knuckles in a threesome or not.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> But then it's no longer banning cub porn or underage characters. If eg: In the user's story, the art style is due to species and not age, so they are no longer kids. Which might actually be the case officially, I don't think that one's been stated nor do we know how older versions of the characters would look like officially. Telling the artist how to draw their art and which direction to take the story in when it's known the characters are adults is... wrong. That's saying "draw your character bigger, with longer limbs and a smaller head, just so you can prove you aren't drawing the same version as in the show where they're underage". Even just the logic behind it... what on Earth gives x_x



No, it's saying "Don't get us shut down by the feds over child pornography laws." It's hard to blame them for being a little overly cautious considering what's at stake.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Actually digimon are an issue.



I saw this earlier in the thread and don't necessarily disagree. You might consider making a new thread inquiring about it, so it doesn't get lost among all the hullabaloo here.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> You do realize this is being done to ensure alignment with the laws of the United States, correct? Just wanted to make sure that was abundantly clear. Opinion is superseded by legality.



Oh please, you can't start talking LAW of the UNITED STATES, when the front page browse of FA on any given day is littered with MLP porn. Can't be holier than thou about laws of one subject if you're not going to be about ALL. This is purely about a style that is liked or not liked (since drawing the same characters in a different style is no issue).


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> You do realize this is being done to ensure alignment with the laws of the United States, correct? Just wanted to make sure that was abundantly clear. Opinion is superseded by legality.



Last I heard there was never a ban on any drawn art in the US. There are many US servers that host such art without any problem I think. With the authoritarian trends there though I wouldn't be surprised if even art might become illegal sometime... but so far I never heard of it.

FA's problem was their donation service which are complete dicks (I heard they're called AlertPay), and Neer had to choose between disabling donations or removing cub porn. Least that's the team's story... not unlikely for it to be a pretext on the other side, and that cub porn got banned because some people were offended. But that doesn't matter for now.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> It's not the characters in the fight I have an issue with it's the telling artist what style they can and can not draw what they want to draw in I have more of an issue with, personally.



It's not a matter of telling you what, who, or how to draw; it's a matter of telling you what can and cannot be uploaded to FA per the AUP.


----------



## kaskae (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> It's not the characters in the fight I have an issue with it's the telling artist what style they can and can not draw what they want to draw in I have more of an issue with, personally. I could care less if Somebody wanted to draw Sonic, Amy, and Knuckles in a threesome or not.



They're not telling you not to draw it. They have no issue with that whatsoever. Their problem is the fact that it's not acceptable to be uploaded to the FurAffinity servers. It's a privately owned website, and due to their trouble with underage pornography in the past, it doesn't surprise me in the least that this came about.

They're covering their own asses, and I don't blame them. I never even thought that Sonic pornography would be so prominent in furry fandom that it would grow to be this huge of a debate.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Oh please, you can't start talking LAW of the UNITED STATES, when the front page browse of FA on any given day is littered with MLP porn. Can't be holier than thou about laws of one subject if you're not going to be about ALL. This is purely about a style that is liked or not liked (since drawing the same characters in a different style is no issue).



Please read the whole thread. MLP has been covered completely.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Mircea said:


> Last I heard there was never a ban on any drawn art in the US. There are many US servers that host such art without any problem I think. With the authoritarian trends there though I wouldn't be surprised if even art might become illegal sometime... but so far I never heard of it.



FA takes donations to stay running. Those donations are sent via payment providers. Said providers will not handle FA's accounts as long as there's any suspicion of potential legal problems.


----------



## Fiz (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Sorry I take back the 10 years (that was from Ask.com and I"m not sure how accurate that was) but he did begin as 16 in some official art http://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_the_Hedgehog . The problem is Sega has fluxed him in games, from 15 to 16, in the comic as a response they have tried to keep up with these changes, especially when they did the visual redesign (and the whole 17 years old thing) but they never stay consistant. Regardless, he's still under 18 in all material regardless. HOWEVER, the comic once did state that Mobians matured and aged at a different rate than their Highlander/human counter parts so take that as you would.



I'm totally disregarding anything that isn't the games in my post.

My point was that yes, Sega/Sonic Team HAS and WILL suddenly change the ages of the characters.


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> FA takes donations to stay running. Those donations are sent via payment providers. Said providers will not handle FA's accounts as long as there's any suspicion of potential legal problems.



It's a problem of image in the case of donation providers, because no art has been deemed illegal in the US. There were attempts to do that in the UK... not sure what on Earth happened there eventually. Any art involving underage characters in porn is so controversial, that some people automatically assume it's illegal just to stay safer (and also to not ruin their image and pose as moral to clients). This is why I'm not that pissed at the FA team for banning any art, since I know it's not entirely their fault... it's the fault of human society being crap.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> It's not a matter of telling you what, who, or how to draw; it's a matter of telling you what can and cannot be uploaded to FA per the AUP.



Sure it is. If I for instance were inclined to draw Sonic like this http://ebonyleopard.deviantart.com/gallery/24084096#/d2a4avw in XXX situations I'd run the risk of the artwork being deleted and face possible suspension. BUT, if I draw Sonic and Tails like this http://ebonyleopard.deviantart.com/gallery/24084096#/d4s2lf4 I can have them in as many adult situations as I please. WHY because my style looks nothing like the official art style that the admin are now so afraid someone will see on the site and automatically think "They're children having sex!". It was previously stated in this thread by an admin that he felt it was impossible to draw Sonic in it's original style in adult situations and not have them still look like "Children (I.E. teenagers)", regardless if people 'age them up' or draw them in their canonical adult styles.  

So they are obviously telling people, in this case, how they can or can not draw the characters in this particular subject. IT's they're right, but call it what it is, is all I'm saying.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> Please read the whole thread. MLP has been covered completely.



Please read the context I bring MLP up. I"m not saying MLP violates U.S. Child laws (which technically, no drawn art does), but it does technically come into issues with US copyright/trademark laws (as all and any fanart would especially those who take commissions drawing canonical characters for money).


----------



## Mircea (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Sure it is. If I for instance were inclined to draw Sonic like this http://ebonyleopard.deviantart.com/gallery/24084096#/d2a4avw in XXX situations I'd run the risk of the artwork being deleted and face possible suspension. BUT, if I draw Sonic and Tails like this http://ebonyleopard.deviantart.com/gallery/24084096#/d4s2lf4 I can have them in as many adult situations as I please. WHY because my style looks nothing like the official art style that the admin are now so afraid someone will see on the site and automatically think "They're children having sex!". It was previously stated in this thread by an admin that he felt it was impossible to draw Sonic in it's original style in adult situations and not have them still look like "Children (I.E. teenagers)", regardless if people 'age them up' or draw them in their canonical adult styles.
> 
> So they are obviously telling people, in this case, how they can or can not draw the characters in this particular subject. IT's they're right, but call it what it is, is all I'm saying.



Totally quoted for truth, well said. I wish the FA team would see these points and make a minimal effort to try sharing them


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> So they are obviously telling people, in this case, how they can or can not draw the characters in this particular subject.



They are telling people what manner of art can be uploaded to FA, not how to draw. These are two very specific and very different things, and you appear to be confusing them.


----------



## Ainoko (Sep 9, 2012)

You know, when I first saw the title I was wondering what Sonic had to do with Smart Phones.
































My bad


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Please read the context I bring MLP up. I"m not saying MLP violates U.S. Child laws (which technically, no drawn art does), but it does technically come into issues with US copyright/trademark laws (as all and any fanart would especially those who take commissions drawing canonical characters for money).



That's not why Sonic porn is contentious. The issue is one of the portrayal of minors in a sexual context.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

kaskae said:


> They're not telling you not to draw it. They have no issue with that whatsoever. Their problem is the fact that it's not acceptable to be uploaded to the FurAffinity servers. It's a privately owned website, and due to their trouble with underage pornography in the past, it doesn't surprise me in the least that this came about.
> 
> They're covering their own asses, and I don't blame them. I never even thought that Sonic pornography would be so prominent in furry fandom that it would grow to be this huge of a debate.



Ok, then stop allowing underage (by their own canon) digimon art then. Begin the mass deletion of Renamon and Guilmon art and I'll take that particular argument seriously. 

LIke I said above, I care less about the porn itself, just the matter of telling an artist how to draw and what they should be drawing when they do draw it, FA, which more or less profits from this art, being privately owned or not. 

I'm one for whole sale equality in rule enforcement if you're going to make a rule about it, don't pick and choose based on personal preferences.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Ok, then stop allowing underage (by their own canon) digimon art then.



Starting a new thread would help your cause greatly.


----------



## Ainoko (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> Ok, then stop allowing underage (by their own canon) digimon art then. Begin the mass deletion of Renamon and Guilmon art and I'll take that particular argument seriously.
> 
> LIke I said above, I care less about the porn itself, just the matter of telling an artist how to draw and what they should be drawing when they do draw it, FA, which more or less profits from this art, being privately owned or not.
> 
> I'm one for whole sale equality in rule enforcement if you're going to make a rule about it, don't pick and choose based on personal preferences.



I agree.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> FA takes donations to stay running. Those donations are sent via payment providers. Said providers will not handle FA's accounts as long as there's any suspicion of potential legal problems.



This is technically correct. Laws are changing in the world sphere, and that does create a certain long term risk when it comes to underage fictional pornography of characters. That said that is not why we do not allow for underage porn. In order for Fur Affinity to continue running we cannot host any porn involving underage characters and characters that look like underage. It's as simple that. Again if you all want Fur Affinity to exist you will have to deal with the fact that to the best our ability under-age porn is going to be filtered out/removed.


----------



## Ebony_Leopard (Sep 9, 2012)

Taigitsune-Kun said:


> That's not why Sonic art is contentious. The issue is one of the portrayal of minors in a sexual context.



If that were really true. Then explain to me, why originally it was ok for people to draw these characters so long as they "Aged them up". BUT when artist did that, they still had their work deleted because it's been deemed even aged up, they, in their on model designs, STILL look too young and would create confusion, so they have now told people, you can still draw these characters screwing, but you just have to change the style in which you do it.

What else would you call that other than them telling you what style you can and can't draw this subject matter in?  There's no banning of the characters themselves, just in the HOW they are drawn.


----------



## Taigitsune-Kun (Sep 9, 2012)

Ebony_Leopard said:


> FA, which more or less profits from this art



{{Citation needed}}


----------



## Trpdwarf (Sep 9, 2012)

Thread closed. This argument is going circular. We have offered explanations for what has transpired, what is transpiring, and what isn't.

No new rules regarding Sonic Porn have been made. Existing rules are being enforced. Some artists were contacted, contacted back, got clarification and they were fine with it. Others contacted back and were rude, and or flat out refused to remove the individual submissions that were pointed at as not being aged up enough. Some people never contacted staff back and never asked for clarification but went public. Some people got in trouble for engaging in behavior not acceptable under the Code of Conduct.

If you don't want any of this to happen to you ask for clarification if you are asked to remove content if you don't understand, don't get snappy with the administration and give us a chance to work with you. *Any further threads on this matter will be closed.* It's a beautiful Sunday out depending on where you live. Go out and find something to do. Staff will continue to work on getting the site up as soon as possible and work on a few things to help further along clarification for the sonic artists who wish to continue to post sonic porn on Fur Affinity.

Also if you want to continue to ask for clarification or have concerns you can contact me privately via note and I will answer to the best of my ability and with what time I have. Uncivil notes will be ignored.


----------

