# Provocation of FA members for political reasons.



## catcam (Feb 28, 2009)

Provocative approaches like junk submissions by agents of what I'd call the austrian anti-democratic shade government, contribute to a loss on charme and quality of FurAffinity. Those contain low-quality obscene doodles and allusions to childporn material. I consider such to be an offence against the users of FurAffinity and suggest to sanction those troublemakers and shut them out.
There are new cases of physical torture before a background of racism in this country, and one of the psychological thumbscrews applied against political internet writers is the assumption of involvement into "childporn circles." http://derstandard.at?id=1234508180551


----------



## Whitenoise (Feb 28, 2009)

I think we should so the opposite of that, also way to stick it to the babyfags Australia  .


----------



## catcam (Feb 28, 2009)

Thanks for democracy.


----------



## MissEbony (Feb 28, 2009)

So they think this site is obscene, or they do obscene things?

I hate when "important people" can't differentiate between FICTION and REALITY and things done FOR PURE FUN...


(or maybe I've just misunderstood what was the point of this thread... English is not my mother tongue, so I apologize in advance ^^U)


----------



## krisCrash (Feb 28, 2009)

I have no idea what this is about. Care to explain?


----------



## SnowFox17 (Feb 28, 2009)

Whitenoise said:


> I think we should so the opposite of that, also way to stick it to the babyfags Australia  .



Austrian not Australian you tit lol.


----------



## catcam (Feb 28, 2009)

I have no idea what they think, all I know is what they'd like to construct.


----------



## catcam (Feb 28, 2009)

It's about that small country of Austria in the heart of the European Union.


----------



## Dragoneer (Feb 28, 2009)

catcam said:


> Provocative approaches like junk submissions by agents of what I'd call the austrian anti-democratic shade government, contribute to a loss on charme and quality of FurAffinity. Those contain low-quality obscene doodles and allusions to childporn material. I consider such to be an offence against the users of FurAffinity and suggest to sanction those troublemakers and shut them out.
> There are new cases of physical torture before a background of racism in this country, and one of the psychological thumbscrews applied against political internet writers is the assumption of involvement into "childporn circles." http://derstandard.at?id=1234508180551


Uhm, I don't see where that article has anything to do with Fur Affinity. At all.

Second, while we allow _cub art, _I will re-iterate that any link to real human porn (adult or child) is prohibited and will result in action being taken against your. When it comes to pedophilia, it is prohibited hands down on the site. Any user engaging in the trade of pedophilia will have thier account closed instantly to preserve logs and you will be be reported to the FBI.

Again, I don't see a link between FA and this.


----------



## WarMocK (Feb 28, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> Uhm, I don't see where that article has anything to do with Fur Affinity. At all.


Simple answer: The EU has enforced a law against child and youth pornography that is so squishy and inaccurate that drawn art (hentai or cub) is now considered illegal by some judges who are not familiar with art, and thus start sueing artists drawing this kind of stuff for producing and distributing CP. -.-
And now those morons start round-house kicks all over the web, no matter where the servers are. :-(


----------



## PriestRevan (Feb 28, 2009)

Haha, babyfurs hath been struck down.


----------



## Repiotou (Feb 28, 2009)

Sounds like another drop in an ocean of stupidity and panic to me. Granted of course, pedophilia is morally and socially wrong, what I can't wrap my head around is how this applies to furry art exactly, aside from the rather *ahem* "Non-Typical" subjects a large part of the Art that FurAffinity has in its database, I see no reason for suing artists.

That is of course assuming that they also rule against any piece of art of any genre that looks so much as a bit like what they are inaugurating into illegality.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Feb 28, 2009)

The problem is a precedent/consensus hasn't really been established yet internationally on this issue.


----------



## Dragoneer (Feb 28, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Simple answer: The EU has enforced a law against child and youth pornography that is so squishy and inaccurate that drawn art (hentai or cub) is now considered illegal by some judges who are not familiar with art, and thus start sueing artists drawing this kind of stuff for producing and distributing CP. -.-


This is the EU, too, the group suing Microsoft for Windows 7 because Internet Explorer 8 is installed by default. They're arguing that since IE8 is default it "stifles" competition (despite the fact OSX comes default with Safari, their rule ONLY applies to Microsoft). I'm not a Microsoft fan, but the EU's logic is fucking retarded. Like this.

I don't see shit like this lasting too long because there are too many loopholes (e.g. what about artists who draw in a "chibi" or cutesy style?). I can name half a dozen artists off the top of my head on FA who draw art that looks under age (teens) but hate cub art.


----------



## WarMocK (Feb 28, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> This is the EU, too, the group suing Microsoft for Windows 7 because Internet Explorer 8 is installed by default. They're arguing that since IE8 is default it "stifles" competition (despite the fact OSX comes default with Safari, their rule ONLY applies to Microsoft). I'm not a Microsoft fan, but the EU's logic is fucking retarded. Like this.
> 
> I don't see shit like this lasting too long because there are too many loopholes (e.g. what about artists who draw in a "chibi" or cutesy style?). I can name half a dozen artists off the top of my head on FA who draw art that looks under age (teens) but hate cub art.


Tell me about it. 
It's times like these where I definitely hate it that we have little to no control over the guys we "elect" for the european parliament. >_<


----------



## Dragoneer (Feb 28, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Tell me about it.
> It's times like these where I definitely hate it that we have little to no control over the guys we "elect" for the european parliament. >_<


The EU seems especially sue-happy for anybody outside of the EU, and overtly controlling for anybody within. This is not to say they don't do some good things (they do!) but... they seem almost totalitarian at times with what they allow or don't allow. And again, I'm all for protecting kids, but... I dunno.

If the want to make the Great Firewall of the EU, that's fine. There will always be ways around it.


----------



## WarMocK (Feb 28, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> The EU seems especially sue-happy for anybody outside of the EU, and overtly controlling for anybody within. This is not to say they don't do some good things (they do!) but... they seem almost totalitarian at times with what they allow or don't allow. And again, I'm all for protecting kids, but... I dunno.
> 
> If the want to make the Great Firewall of the EU, that's fine. There will always be ways around it.


Seriously? If most european countries didn't have constitutions that ban cencorship and stuff like that we probably would have worse conditions than the chinese. You wouldn't believe what tricks the NeoCons here in Germany came up with to find a way around these bans they could not wipe off our constitution (banning cencorship and other principles of free speech are summarized in the first articles of our constitution which can NEVER be altered or removed. ;-)).


----------



## Dragoneer (Feb 28, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> You wouldn't believe what tricks the NeoCons here in Germany came up with to find a way around these bans they could not wipe off our constitution (banning cencorship and other principles of free speech are summarized in the first articles of our constitution which can NEVER be altered or removed. ;-)).


Oh, you mean like Germany's proposed government mandated spyware that had to be installed on all computers to allow surveillance?

arschraub.exe


----------



## WarMocK (Feb 28, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> Oh, you mean like Germany's proposed government mandated spyware that had to be installed on all computers to allow surveillance?
> 
> arschraub.exe


Partially correct. They wanted to go into your house and install the trojans by hand since they knew that no terr would be stupid enough to fall for their puny tricks (data security finally started to become an important issue for many people around here).
Fortunately the high court stopped this madness and made online searches virtually impossible (suck my ass, Schaeuble!).
Next stop: data preservation! :twisted:


----------



## Carenath (Feb 28, 2009)

I cant see a link between that and FA either... though FA probably shouldnt allow cub porn if they want to err on the side of caution.



Dragoneer said:


> This is the EU, too, the group suing Microsoft for Windows 7 because Internet Explorer 8 is installed by default. They're arguing that since IE8 is default it "stifles" competition (despite the fact OSX comes default with Safari, their rule ONLY applies to Microsoft). I'm not a Microsoft fan, but the EU's logic is fucking retarded. Like this.


I think their twisted logic is that, Microsoft controls a near total monopoly and they want to try and break it, EU companies like Opera and the smaller non-microsoft players in the EU market like Sun, are behind these kinds of moves, and appeal to the idea of "freedom from American corporate interests". They dont particularly care that Safari comes free on the mac, because the Mac doesnt have a large enough market share.



Dragoneer said:


> The EU seems especially sue-happy for anybody outside of the EU, and overtly controlling for anybody within. This is not to say they don't do some good things (they do!) but... they seem almost totalitarian at times with what they allow or don't allow. And again, I'm all for protecting kids, but... I dunno.
> 
> If the want to make the Great Firewall of the EU, that's fine. There will always be ways around it.


The agenda on the outside at least, seems to be targeting any non-EU companies that are bigger and more successful in the global market i.e. companies like Microsoft and Adobe who have monopolies. With the aim of promoting local businesses and companies by engaging in blatent market protectionism distorting the free global market in their favour. Honestly if I am to believe that, I cant say I am losing any sleep over it. The EU is also one of the only "countries" to tell mobile phone operators to stop the blatent profiteering by capping the charges they can levy on customers, and each other by extension for the price of calls made/received when roaming within the EU. Regulations are being put in place to cap the cost of text messages (which are already at an inflated price in local markets, to say nothing for roaming) and data.

The EU hasnt done much to build a firewall around itself with regards to banning or targeting FA users, though individual states may have. I know the UK has taken a few hundred steps backwards... the Home Office has made it a requirement for all UK ISPs to implement CleenFeed, a filtering system that utilises BGP-Shunt's to redirect suspect traffic through a filtering proxy, the proxy uses a blacklist supplied by the IWF, a private company unaccountable to anyone, who compiles this list based on sites submitted by the public. Individual users would not be aware that a site they visit is blocked, as the proxy returns a fake 404 error page, making the end user think the site was closed down.
Given the way this system works, it wouldnt take much for content on FA to end up on the list, and an ISP cock-up resulting in another incident like the infamous blocking of sections of wikipedia over an album cover.

The only thing the EU has done so far which has earned my resent, is fail to introduce an amendment that would outlaw such filtering systems on a government level and leave it to the ISPs to voluntarily use such systems at their discression, as well as an unrelated ammendment that would make it a crime for an ISP to disconnect its users arbitrarily (e.g. because of Frances' Three-Strikes system). Oh.. and then there is the bending over to the US interests and introducing our version of the DMCA, idiots.

If such attempts are made at introducing a national/supernational filtering system to filter users internet access under the false guise of protecting children, I will be one of those who finds a way around it...


----------



## Freehaven (Mar 1, 2009)

Carenath said:


> I cant see a link between that and FA either... though FA probably shouldnt allow cub porn if they want to err on the side of caution.



I'm not a fan of cub porn in any way, shape, or form, but if what they draw is not illegal to draw where that person lives, then I don't see why FA should block them from using their service just because the content may offend people who happen to stumble upon it.  If you find something offensive, don't pay attention to it and you won't have to worry about it.  Otherwise, you're going to spend all your time looking for the content you hate just to whine and complain about it, and then whose fault is it when you get offended?

(Yes, I realize the irony of the last couple of sentences, given the existence of a certain artist-centric board on my site.  No, I don't care.  )

So long as what the cubfurs are posting isn't illegal, there's no reason to outlaw it unless the administration wishes to outlaw it (and it is their right as the administration to prevent any content they want from being on their servers).  It's a legitimate form of Free Speech, however disturbing or offensive you find it.

"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise." ~ _Noam Chomsky_


----------



## Firehazard (Mar 1, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Seriously? If most european countries didn't have constitutions that ban cencorship and stuff like that we probably would have worse conditions than the chinese. You wouldn't believe what tricks the NeoCons here in Germany came up with to find a way around these bans they could not wipe off our constitution (banning cencorship and other principles of free speech are summarized in the first articles of our constitution which can NEVER be altered or removed. ;-)).



The EU's charter also has a Bill of Rights of sorts that, IIRC, starts out saying all kinds of nice things about freedom of speech and the media.  If they're not following their written commitment to freedom, what's to say Germany's always going to follow theirs?  Governments can put whatever they want in their constitutions, but they're not a guarantee against jack.



Freehaven said:


> "If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise." ~ _Noam Chomsky_


There's a far more famous quote (well, alleged quote) by Voltaire that would fit there, but something in me loves that you chose to quote Chomsky in particular.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Mar 1, 2009)

Funny how back then, images of naked children imply innocence.

Woe is the conservative world. =/


----------



## Carenath (Mar 1, 2009)

Freehaven said:


> I'm not a fan of cub porn in any way, shape, or form, but if what they draw is not illegal to draw where that person lives, then I don't see why FA should block them from using their service just because the content may offend people who happen to stumble upon it.


The problem is not where the person lives, but where FA lives. Last I checked, FurAffinity is hosted at a data-center in Virginia, meaning it is subject to the laws of that state, and the Federal laws of the US. If Virginia state rules that cub-porn is illegal, then FA would have to remove it from its servers, or move the site to servers outside of Virginia (or the US in the case of a Federal law).


----------



## WarMocK (Mar 2, 2009)

Firehazard said:


> The EU's charter also has a Bill of Rights of sorts that, IIRC, starts out saying all kinds of nice things about freedom of speech and the media.  If they're not following their written commitment to freedom, what's to say Germany's always going to follow theirs?  Governments can put whatever they want in their constitutions, but they're not a guarantee against jack.


You missed one little detail: Germany has a constitution that was written down and the core articles are protected by an addition ISIDE this core that prohibits ANY alterations on it, no matter what the circumstances are (to prevent the constitution from being compromised like the one from the weimar republic). This has become a huge PITA for many conservative polititians who now frequently catch a bloody nose from the high court because their new laws are torn apart as soon as they are signed (newest example: the bavarian law that was supposed to legalize excessive monitoring of demonstrations without specific suspicion).
The UK, on the other hand, has NO real constitution at all (which is unique in the entire EU)! It's laws are based upon three priciples: division of power, supremacy of the parliament, and the statute law, which basically declares that the laws resolved by the british parliament are treated as some kind of "constitution" that can be altered as the parliament sees fit.


----------



## cutterfl (Mar 3, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> Oh, you mean like Germany's proposed government mandated spyware that had to be installed on all computers to allow surveillance?
> 
> arschraub.exe


 
Gober Bruder!


----------



## Whitenoise (Mar 3, 2009)

SnowFox17 said:


> Austrian not Australian you tit lol.



Australia is doing it as well, this is a very encouraging trend IMO :V .


----------



## SnowFox17 (Mar 4, 2009)

Whitenoise said:


> Australia is doing it as well, this is a very encouraging trend IMO :V .




It wont go ahead. The phone companies already know how much revenue they will lose and the PM will cop alot of flack because of it. They did a beta, and not only did professional Hackers get through, school children did.


----------



## WarMocK (Mar 5, 2009)

cutterfl said:


> GroÃŸer Bruder!


Fixed. 
I really wonder where you got that story about mandatory surveillance tools on our PCs from. Ã´O
Nobody EVER suggested that here, he would be accused of treason immediately. Our constitution (to be precise: the protected core articles) declare you as innocent until proven otherwise in court. Such tools would mean quite the opposite: you'd have to prove that you're not guilty.
What they actually TRIED to do was go into our houses and install the trojan by hand since 95+ percent of the users here have routers - so much for breaking into your system from the web. 
The final version of the law they eventually got through parliament (and which will most likely be stopped by the high court again ^^) says that they may ONLY try to install a trojan by making a terror suspect click an attachment of a mail - iow: the law is TOTALLY worthless. xD


----------



## Mogu (Mar 11, 2009)

I never cease to be amazed how, despite no real change in laws, people manage to do such a masterful trollbait of FA staff to eternally, perpetually, constantly, and nonstop revive the Cubfur debate fiasco.

Flameherders:  5,672
Staff:   1


----------

