# A clarification on sonic/underage



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

*Cannon Fanart:*

Any character who is stated to be under age in canon, is off limits when drawn in the canon style (Aka Drawing Tails as he appears in the games/comics but attempting to state he is 18.) However, you can age the characters up, and make them look 18 and you will still be fine. (This means a slight style shift and the ability to show the character as mature.

What is Mature? fully developed sexual organs, hips on females, slightly broader shoulders on males (including femme boys) this will have to be looked at case by case as it's going to be very difficult to define.

Same applies for the opposite way around. If a character is stated to be 50 years old but looks like they are 5-6 years old, then they too are off limits unless "Aged" Up. (aka Drawing Shippo as he appears in canon Inuyasha)

* Personal artwork *

This is going to be judged, again on a case by case basis. But the biggest thing we are judging is our base gut reaction. We can't argue semantics here unfortunately. We are going to be judging this by how other people would view it. If someone's first gut reaction is "Holy shit that's a kid" that's when we will have problems. We can not risk loosing FA due to someone's character being stated as 18 when in reality they look like they are 10-12. Stylistic opinions aside it's not something we are willing to risk at this point.

* Feral, Pokemon, Digimon,  ect. *
The cub ban does not apply to these characters due to the fact that they are considered beast and there is no true way to say "HEY THAT CHARACTER IS UNDERAGED." That is the long and the short on that.

* enforcement *

Also need to reiterate here, we aren't going to be ban happy (holy shit that coming from me must mean the Apocalypse is right behind the corner). If the next two weeks go by and someone has something in their gallery that has been there before the ban that's against the rules, we will just remove it, nothing will be done to the user becuase it is not the users fault that the rules have changed. We will note them to let them know it has been removed.

I will try to answer questions as best as I can, but we are still trying to figure out and solidify everything on our end so there will be questions I can't answer yet.

Again sorry for the confusion on the forums last night, I was sleepy and I didn't finish my thoughts properly. Me, Dragoneer, and the rest of the staff are standing in line together in this.




*Keep the thread to questions and answers please. I want this place to be clean as possible so people can look through it and actually find the answers to questions they have instead of having to surf through moral and ideological debates. I will remove any posts that are off topic. *


----------



## Redregon (Dec 6, 2010)

and, umm... what's Neer's opinion on all this?


----------



## sonishi (Dec 6, 2010)

> If someone's first gut reaction is "Holy shit that's a kid" that's when we will have problems.



Then we really have a biiig problem... Some people just see what they see and this you cannot change... Oh dear...


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

So basically, the clarifications stated in this thread is exactly what was said back on the 24th what would probably be implemented.

*sigh*


----------



## CerbrusNL (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Me, Dragoneer, and the rest of the staff are standing in line together in this.





Redregon said:


> and, umm... what's Neer's opinion on all this?


I suggest you read the OP again.



sonishi said:


> Then we really have a biiig problem... Some people just see what they see and this you cannot change... Oh dear...


 
You are assuming "People" will be the ones deleting the art. No. Admins will, and they aren't just gonna delete art because  there might possibly be a hint of cub in there.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Redregon said:


> and, umm... what's Neer's opinion on all this?




 He agrees and I am sure he will be around here at some point to give his two cents XD (he is at work right now and I am not sure what he is or isn't able to access)


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

CerbrusNL said:


> You are assuming "People" will be the ones deleting the art. No. Admins will, and they aren't just gonna delete art because  there might possibly be a hint of cub in there.



We are actually debating on extending the deadline to the 1st of January becuase we need to make sure that once we go in to enforce this we are all perfectly on the same page (that and it seems like this has taken a while for users to let this info sink in... so they may need some extra time.)


----------



## MasterSkadu (Dec 6, 2010)

The problem I keep seeing is people art style itself. They might not be as skilled. Also, if the "people" are checking galleries, will we get a warning before they pull the artwork off incase we need to (re)save?


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 6, 2010)

I still disagree with that canon underage thing.
Seriously, look at some sonic art and tell my with that gut reaction of yours if what you see is a "cub". And don't just focus on that darn fox, look at all of them.
You shouldn't really lump that together with things in diapers screaming "daddy". I bet most sonic artists would take great offense for being called a "pedophile".
This isn't about semantics and "official age lists" (which 90% of people do not know anyway. So why are they such a big deal?), this is about symbols and proportions and... gut reaction.

Oh boy.
But good to know that digi and pokemon are "safe" no matter what (so long as they aren't altered, right?).


----------



## sonishi (Dec 6, 2010)

Actually the admins are kinda forced by "the people" on PayAlert... this is what I mean. I mean society in general because furry porn always will be "more disgusting" to society (so it will be harder to fight for that) than normal porn...


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

MasterSkadu said:


> The problem I keep seeing is people art style itself. They might not be as skilled. Also, if the "people" are checking galleries, will we get a warning before they pull the artwork off incase we need to (re)save?


 
Per our TOS regarding storage: We provided storage for our users to keep and maintain their data on the site. However, Fur Affinity IS NOT a backup service, and we are not responsible for long term archival of user data or loss of files. We encourage users to keep regular backups and archives of their data using a service and/or storage media intended for that purpose.

Please back up all your files now, as when this happens, if you do not go through and have your submissions saved and you have violations they will be removed without warning (as the letter on the cub ban IS the warning you should have more then enough time to backup your files)


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

9_6 said:


> I still disagree with that canon underage thing.
> Seriously, look at some sonic art and tell my with that gut reaction of yours if what you see is a "cub". And don't just focus on that darn fox, look at all of them.
> You shouldn't really lump that together with things in diapers screaming "daddy". I bet most sonic artists would take great offense for being called a "pedophile".
> This isn't about semantics and "official age lists" (which 90% of people do not know anyway. So why are they such a big deal?), this is about symbols and proportions and... gut reaction.
> ...



We are not calling them Pedophiles and I would highly suggest you restrict your use of such language. This is not a Moral issue, and apparently people can't get that through their heads. This is a financial one. We would never ever label sonic artists as such and I actually feel bad for them for you even suggesting such.


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> We are not calling them Pedophiles and I would highly suggest you restrict your use of such language. This is not a Moral issue, and apparently people can't get that through their heads. This is a financial one. We would never ever label sonic artists as such and I actually feel bad for them for you even suggesting such.


 
I am aware of that and frankly, seeing that term getting thrown around that much sickens me more than any "cub porn" ever could.
Other people will happily label them as such if their art gets removed though because that in itself can be "seen as a proof" for that.
Because "the rules say this is cub porn" and "cub porn = pedo".
That's what I meant. I didn't mean to say you would call them that.


----------



## Chaoman16 (Dec 6, 2010)

Better bust out those Non-Sonic style depictions of Amy and Sally now.


----------



## Taralack (Dec 6, 2010)

The fact that this needs yet another thread clarifying really just speaks about the mentality of the fandom...


----------



## Chaoman16 (Dec 6, 2010)

Toraneko said:


> The fact that this needs yet another thread clarifying really just speaks about the mentality of the fandom...



I don't consider myself a member of the fandom and I feel there would not be enough webspace to do that justice.

I see quite a few stubborn people trying to dig there heels into the dirt on this.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

Toraneko said:


> The fact that this needs yet another thread clarifying really just speaks about the mentality of the fandom...


 
Is it wrong to request clarification on a really subjective issue? This single ruling alone will wipe out hundreds of galleries on FA, effectively discouraging the artist AND their watchers.

And I don't just mean pure Sonic artists either.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Keep the thread to questions and answers please. I want this place to be clean as possible so people can look through it and actually find the answers to questions they have instead of having to surf through moral and ideological debates. I will remove any posts that are off topic.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

Question:

Would you consider Sonic the Werehog as more anthro or more feral beast? I met a few people who consider him as some feral beast (sometimes to the point where they would consider Sonic in his Werehog form pairing up with say... uh... Rouge as bestiality).

The Werehog has crazy amount of hair/fur, long canines, and runs on all fours.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> Question:
> 
> Would you consider Sonic the Werehog as more anthro or more feral beast? I met a few people who consider him as some feral beast (sometimes to the point where they would consider Sonic in his Werehog form pairing up with say... uh... Rouge as bestiality).
> 
> The Werehog has crazy amount of hair/fur, long canines, and runs on all fours.



The warehog itself looks much more mature then sonic does. So while not beast it would still be allowed.


----------



## ChaosCroc (Dec 6, 2010)

Right, here's my question. What defines 'adult'? Would basic nudity or suggestive clothing fall under that? Or is it simply towards the 'yiffage'? Simply saying 'adult material' is a broad phrase, as it could be said for anything. If I draw a Sonic character in a dominatrix outfit, or bondage, does that count as adult? And if so, where do you draw the line?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

ChaosCroc said:


> Right, here's my question. What defines 'adult'? Would basic nudity or suggestive clothing fall under that? Or is it simply towards the 'yiffage'? Simply saying 'adult material' is a broad phrase, as it could be said for anything. If I draw a Sonic character in a dominatrix outfit, or bondage, does that count as adult? And if so, where do you draw the line?


 
Any sexual situation that would be considered adult (Tied up, bondage, that kinda thing). That includes fettish clothing and the like (Latex straps, bondage gear, ect) Suggestive clothing like a low cut dress or a skirt that's abnormally short wouldn't fall into that category as it's not necessarily a fetish by normal standards. Neither would bathing suits so long as the focus is on the character themselves and not the fact that they are wearing the suit to create an illicit reaction.

Also I realize some people are turned on by odd things (there is some lady over in France that wants to marry the eifle tower becuase she thinks it's the sexiest thing on the planet...) But we are more going for general consensus on what could be considered Adult.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

So we can't have bondages or tied up situations involving under 18ers?
Or is the tie up/bondage scenario isn't allowed if it's going to imply that an adult act is to follow shorty?
Would you consider these SFW submissions of mine borderline?

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4429020
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4385909


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> So we can't have bondages or tied up situations involving under 18ers?
> Or is the tie up/bondage scenario isn't allowed if it's going to imply that an adult act is to follow shorty?
> Would you consider these SFW submissions of mine borderline?
> 
> ...



Yes, borderline. Which means we would have to discuss it as a team to see what our course of action would be. Again as I have stated before there will be allot of case by case issues. I can't make any solid desision now becuase I am just one person and the whole team would need to discuss it. I can only solidly answer what I am absolutely sure on. (And this is one of those cases where I am not)


----------



## Chaoman16 (Dec 6, 2010)

Clarification please. Regarding the Pokemon/Digimon being exempt...does this extend to anthro variations, or only to ones in cannon style?

I know it sounds like a stupid question, but you never know how it is with people and loophole abuse.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Chaoman16 said:


> Clarification please. Regarding the Pokemon/Digimon being exempt...does this extend to anthro variations, or only to ones in cannon style?
> 
> I know it sounds like a stupid question, but you never know how it is with people and loophole abuse.



Anthro variations need to be 18+

the beast rules only apply to the characters in their canon style


----------



## Arcanis_Solanum (Dec 6, 2010)

What's getting to me about this whole Sonic age thing is that the ages list that was given was from Sonic Heroes.

Sonic Heroes was released 7 years ago. Even if the timeline was only... half of what realtime takes, that adds 3 1/2 years onto their ages. I seriously doubt that games like Shadow The Hedgehog, Sonic Riders, Zero Gravity all happened within the same year!


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

I'm almost certain that the official ages the FA staff are/should be going by at the ones stated on Sonic Channel. Which only saves Rouge.

And by the way Sonic Riders follows its own timeline.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Arcanis_Solanum said:


> What's getting to me about this whole Sonic age thing is that the ages list that was given was from Sonic Heroes.
> 
> Sonic Heroes was released 7 years ago. Even if the timeline was only... half of what realtime takes, that adds 3 1/2 years onto their ages. I seriously doubt that games like Shadow The Hedgehog, Sonic Riders, Zero Gravity all happened within the same year!


 
Sonic characters are like Simpson's characters. They don't age. We will not be arguing semantics on this. They are canonically stated to be underage. Thus they are. You will  have to phisicaly age them up yourself and make them look older in order to post porn of em.


----------



## Ozzy_Olivers_Cat (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> *Cannon Fanart:*
> 
> What is Mature? fully developed sexual organs, hips on females, slightly broader shoulders on males (including femme boys) this will have to be looked at case by case as it's going to be very difficult to define.


 

Sooooo, I draw my heads to big? http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4874396
Or the shoulders aren't broad enough?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Ozzy_Olivers_Cat said:


> Sooooo, I draw my heads to big? http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4874396
> Or the shoulders aren't broad enough?


 
As of right now in my opinion yes. But as we know mine isn't the only one that matters. They look like kids. They look specifically in the Japanese Shota style (Which I know you said you didn't like to label them as) I am not sure what the other admins will say on the matter but to my eyes they look to young.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

Alrighty, some NSFW examples:

If something were to be stylized in a way that it's more of a conceptual/abstract kind of thing, is it borderline?
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3710093 (yes that's the original title of the submission)

If I draw Sonic females with hips breasts, non-noodley arms and legs like these, would they be still look under 18 in the general public/staffs' eyes?
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4378852


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 6, 2010)

Question:

Is this as you see it right there a "cub"? Or is it "feral"?
I tried to give it muscular definition without making it a master of the universe but 3d is kind of a bitch in that regard.
Or more like I fail at it.
What if I depicted it on all fours? Would it be "feral" then?

I'll probably make the head a tad smaller. I tried that earlier and it had quite jarring effects on "perceived age".
But I wanted to know if this would or would not be regarded as "feral" right now, as it is standing straight on 2 legs anyway cause that is kinda what it is supposed to be.
Or more generally asked: How many non-human features does it take to "de-anthrosize" something?
That thing has weird wings, a tail, long feet, 4 fingers, walks on toes and a weird, non-human head after all.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

9_6 said:


> Question:
> 
> Is this as you see it right there a "cub"? Or is it "feral"?
> I tried to give it muscular definition without making it a master of the universe but 3d is kind of a bitch in that regard.
> ...


 
Feral... 

Kangaroos stand on 2 legs :3


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> Alrighty, some NSFW examples:
> 
> If something were to be stylized in a way that it's more of a conceptual/abstract kind of thing, is it borderline?
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3710093 (yes that's the original title of the submission)
> ...


 
For the first one yes.

For the second one, the characters have been aged up to the point where they no longer look like kids. So they are perfectly peachy


----------



## monkeyxflash (Dec 6, 2010)

Ah, got some questions myself.

Does this image fall under borderline: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1973089/

Also would these pass for the "barely legal" Just turned 18 status?

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1068094/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1076226/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1161043/


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

monkeyxflash said:


> Ah, got some questions myself.
> 
> Does this image fall under borderline: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1973089/
> 
> ...


 
First image is perfectly safe.

the last ones all have the marks of being adult, breasts and hips. So they are good.


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Feral...
> 
> Kangaroos stand on 2 legs :3



Thank god.
Now I can finally relax.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> First image is perfectly safe.
> 
> the last ones all have the marks of being adult, breasts and hips. So they are good.


 Cool beans. Also I know this next one doesn't fall under sonic art, but what about impish type characters who can be adults? Such as Moogles from Final Fantasy or Midna From Twilight Princesss?

Moogle design: http://blog.gaming-goddess.com/public/ffta2-moogle.jpg

My Art: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1373803/ 
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1373803/

Midna: http://cruiseelroy.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/midna.jpg

Oh, this is a Sonic one:http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4205606/

This is my last question on the subject.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

monkeyxflash said:


> Cool beans. Also I know this next one doesn't fall under sonic art, but what about impish type characters who can be adults? Such as Moogles from Final Fantasy or Midna From Twilight Princesss?
> 
> Moogle design: http://blog.gaming-goddess.com/public/ffta2-moogle.jpg
> 
> ...



As long as moogles, if drawn anthro, are drawn with Hips and such you are fine. 

Midna is represented as a child throughout most of the game. And she DOES have an adult form (as seen at the end) so she would be labeled as a child unless drawn in that adult form.


----------



## Chaoman16 (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Midna is represented as a child throughout most of the game. And she DOES have an adult form (as seen at the end) so she would be labeled as a child unless drawn in that adult form.


 
Midna has a sealed form (the one shown most in the game) and her true form. I don't think sealed Midna is a kid at all. I don't know any child with those hips, so I'd like a second opinion on that from someone higher up on the ladder, please.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Chaoman16 said:


> Midna has a sealed form (the one shown most in the game) and her true form. I don't think sealed Midna is a kid at all. I don't know any child with those hips, so I'd like a second opinion on that from someone higher up on the ladder, please.


 
A good rule of thumb in this is "If it looks like a child, then we have to treat it as such" Midna looks like a child when not in her final form.

Again, as stated, we ran into the same case with Shippo from Inuyasha. He looks like a kid, he is 50, But first and formost, he looks like a kid. Same can be said for Midna.


----------



## Cxulubcah (Dec 6, 2010)

Small question, what if the age is never specified on a Sonic character, but they by all appearances look adult in terms of all the right places?  Example, a picture of a buff adult-looking Knuckles where, despite his canon age being 15, there is no specification of his age or canon in the picture, and his appearance is certainly not that of a teenager?

Also, semi-related on the case of Midna even if this is a picky point, isn't Midna more of an imp-like form than anything else?  I've never seen Midna listed under cub, and her appearance is more...well imp or chibi than anything else, as unlike Shippo, she doesn't look human enough to really be seen as a child, at least as far as I have known, if anything she's more beast-like in her initial form.

So would she be defined as under the cub rule as appearing too like a child, or is she considered to be just impish/chibi and is acceptable?  And how would this be for other imp-like characters, or small characters in generals like say, moogles?  Maybe they go under the feral category or so?
This is just a really shady ground here so I would really love some clarification on this issue.  I know there's a lot of technicalities with several characters but I really have to ask.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Cxulubcah said:


> Small question, what if the age is never specified on a Sonic character, but they by all appearances look adult in terms of all the right places?  Example, a picture of a buff adult-looking Knuckles where, despite his canon age being 15, there is no specification of his age or canon in the picture, and his appearance is certainly not that of a teenager?


 
if they look like an adult, then we will treat them as such.


----------



## Pikitsune (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> A good rule of thumb in this is "If it looks like a child, then we have to treat it as such" Midna looks like a child when not in her final form.
> 
> Again, as stated, we ran into the same case with Shippo from Inuyasha. He looks like a kid, he is 50, But first and formost, he looks like a kid. Same can be said for Midna.


 http://cruiseelroy.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/midna.jpg
I highly doubt a kid has huge hips, hourglass figure, and boobs. The only thing childlike about her is her height. She looks like an adult species of a fantasy creature, which she is. That's like calling a woman gnome a child. It doesn't work that way.


----------



## Quiet269 (Dec 6, 2010)

One question this does raise is in regards to characters that are feral, and obviously cub.

Would a character's feral appearance negate the cub aspect if it is known?

An example would be Simba, as it is well known what the character looks like throughout the various stages of life. It is quite easy to discern between Cub Simba and teen or adult Simba. 

Under the same scenario I would believe that the younger characters from The Land Before Time would be removed as well.

The Feral exception, as I understand it, really only affects those characters that do not change in appearance with age. Is that correct?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Pikitsune said:


> http://cruiseelroy.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/midna.jpg
> I highly doubt a kid has huge hips, hourglass figure, and boobs. The only thing childlike about her is her height. She looks like an adult species of a fantasy creature, which she is. That's like calling a woman gnome a child. It doesn't work that way.


 
Ok from the bigman's mouth:     For "mature"? Yes, allowed... clearly not entirely human/anthro -Dragoneer


----------



## Pikitsune (Dec 6, 2010)

alright, good, because I'd have a very irritated time trying to have my tiny characters who are adult, have hips and matured breasts, being called underage. That would have barred a good chunk of the small animal species'. >_>


----------



## Cxulubcah (Dec 6, 2010)

Quiet269 said:


> One question this does raise is in regards to characters that are feral, and obviously cub.
> 
> Would a character's feral appearance negate the cub aspect if it is known?
> 
> ...


I think they said the feral aspect overrides the cub aspect as PokÃ©mon and Digimon are allowed and there's quite a few small critters among them, so the same should apply to young non-anthro characters from Land Before Time, The Lion King and so forth.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Cxulubcah said:


> Small question, what if the age is never specified on a Sonic character, but they by all appearances look adult in terms of all the right places?  Example, a picture of a buff adult-looking Knuckles where, despite his canon age being 15, there is no specification of his age or canon in the picture, and his appearance is certainly not that of a teenager?
> 
> Also, semi-related on the case of Midna even if this is a picky point, isn't Midna more of an imp-like form than anything else?  I've never seen Midna listed under cub, and her appearance is more...well imp or chibi than anything else, as unlike Shippo, she doesn't look human enough to really be seen as a child, at least as far as I have known, if anything she's more beast-like in her initial form.
> 
> ...


 
Neer said she is on the good list... so to the good list she goes


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Quiet269 said:


> One question this does raise is in regards to characters that are feral, and obviously cub.
> 
> Would a character's feral appearance negate the cub aspect if it is known?
> 
> ...


 
Feral are feral, and so they shall remain that way. there won't be an exception to this unless something really fucked up happens. Simba is safe as are the dino's from Land before time.


----------



## Cxulubcah (Dec 6, 2010)

Thanks for the clarification :3 I really appreciate the work you're all struggling with to keep this site up for the majority and I wouldn't wanna start making mistakes because I was too lazy or scared to ask.


----------



## monkeyxflash (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Neer said she is on the good list... so to the good list she goes


Oh! Glad I brought that up then. :3

I seem to have one last question on the subject...Again. What about in comedic or innuendo situations such as this?
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4205606


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

monkeyxflash said:


> Oh! Glad I brought that up then. :3
> 
> I seem to have one last question on the subject...Again. What about in comedic or innuendo situations such as this?
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4205606


 
That is gonna be one I need to ask on


----------



## monkeyxflash (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> That is gonna be one I need to ask on


 Oh, fudge. o_o


----------



## Stinkdog (Dec 6, 2010)

I posted this on Neer's latest journal before I knew about this thread so I'll post the question here for confirmation:

So... what about something that's got adult content in it, but is clearly not meant to be pornographic? I'm talking something like one of the story lines from "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit" or something like the novel "Flowers in the Attic" which involves an incestuous relationship between an underage brother and sister. The former is considered modern entertainment while the later is considered classic literature.

In short, would I be banned for posting a story that had a description of the sexual abuse of a minor that was written to be disturbing and revolting (because the story is a horror story and disturbing things are constant themes throughout) as opposed to something that was written to be attractive and sexy?


----------



## Xenke (Dec 6, 2010)

Stinkdog said:


> I posted this on Neer's latest journal before I knew about this thread so I'll post the question here for confirmation:
> 
> So... what about something that's got adult content in it, but is clearly not meant to be pornographic? I'm talking something like one of the story lines from "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit" or something like the novel "Flowers in the Attic" which involves an incestuous relationship between an underage brother and sister. The former is considered modern entertainment while the later is considered classic literature.
> 
> In short, would I be banned for posting a story that had a description of the sexual abuse of a minor that was written to be disturbing and revolting (because the story is a horror story and disturbing things are constant themes throughout) as opposed to something that was written to be attractive and sexy?


 
Hang on Pinkuh, I got this.

The case with SVU: I've watched a lot of the show. While it may contain pornographic content, it's usually only touched upon and not delved into with specific and graphic detail. I should think that this would also be the case with submission on here. Now, if you post something on this subject, and eroticize it, then I should think it wouldn't be allowed.

As for the classic literature: It's classic literature. That's not going to happen on FA. I should think that as long as something is tasteful and is presented in a similar manner to what I described above, it should be fine.


----------



## Stinkdog (Dec 6, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Hang on Pinkuh, I got this.


 
Ok, so in the first chapter of said story I have viscerally described two people being murdered, which people who are into snuff could find erotic.  The abuse in the second chapter has been described to be horrific and disturbing, not erotic.  But people who are into rape and violence could view it as being erotic because of the visceral nature of the description.  Would said writing be removed in this case?

The only reason I brought up "Flowers in the Attic" is because it's a piece of mainstream, classic literature that contains underage sexual situations in order to disturb the reader (which is a similar goal I have for my story) not because I thought that anyone would actually be capable of posting classic literature on FA. =p


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Stinkdog said:


> Ok, so in the first chapter of said story I have viscerally described two people being murdered, which people who are into snuff could find erotic.  The abuse in the second chapter has been described to be horrific and disturbing, not erotic.  But people who are into rape and violence could view it as being erotic because of the visceral nature of the description.  Would said writing be removed in this case?
> 
> The only reason I brought up "Flowers in the Attic" is because it's a piece of mainstream, classic literature that contains underage sexual situations in order to disturb the reader (which is a similar goal I have for my story) not because I thought that anyone would actually be capable of posting classic literature on FA. =p


 
We are only removing instances of Sex or sexual situation with Cub characters. Murder ect isn't being effected.


----------



## Xenke (Dec 6, 2010)

Stinkdog said:


> Ok, so in the first chapter of said story I have viscerally described two people being murdered, which people who are into snuff could find erotic.  The abuse in the second chapter has been described to be horrific and disturbing, not erotic.  But people who are into rape and violence could view it as being erotic because of the visceral nature of the description.  Would said writing be removed in this case?
> 
> The only reason I brought up "Flowers in the Attic" is because it's a piece of mainstream, classic literature that contains underage sexual situations in order to disturb the reader (which is a similar goal I have for my story) not because I thought that anyone would actually be capable of posting classic literature on FA. =p


 
Alright. As far as I know, graphic depictions of gore/violence/death are not against the AUP.

And as far as I know, what you're describing about the abuse doesn't seem like it would violate the AUP either.

Pinkuh, feel free to correct me if I'm off-base here.


----------



## Summercat (Dec 6, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Alright. As far as I know, graphic depictions of gore/violence/death are not against the AUP.
> 
> And as far as I know, what you're describing about the abuse doesn't seem like it would violate the AUP either.
> 
> Pinkuh, feel free to correct me if I'm off-base here.


 
Xenke, I appreciate the thought and the help, but better to leave the answering of questions to Pinkuh. She's the authority on the subject.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Alright. As far as I know, graphic depictions of gore/violence/death are not against the AUP.
> 
> And as far as I know, what you're describing about the abuse doesn't seem like it would violate the AUP either.
> 
> Pinkuh, feel free to correct me if I'm off-base here.



You are right on.


----------



## Xenke (Dec 6, 2010)

Summercat said:


> Xenke, I appreciate the thought and the help, but better to leave the answering of questions to Pinkuh. She's the authority on the subject.


 
True...

Sorry about that, I've been a little... off.


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> sexual situation


 
Okay, what exactly is that anyway?
I think that should be cleared up too since it's a major factor here.
From less obvious to blatant:

-"Nudity" without showing genitals or sexual organs
-A suggestive pose, no genitals
-2 characters hugging. Kissing.
-Implied sex without actually showing genitals, facial expressions and poses only.
-Nudity, showing genitals.
-Blatant sex showing everything.

Where is the bar?

Also what about scale?
This pic (NSFW) would be a good example for how size difference can make something look like a "cub" while it is actually not.
Will you listen to your gut reaction or to what the artist says in those cases?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

9_6 said:


> Okay, what exactly is that anyway?
> I think that should be cleared up too since it's a major factor here.
> From less obvious to blatant:
> 
> ...


 
Nudity - allowed if the characters don't have any parts drawn (like most sonic characters)
Suggestive poses-if fully clothed-allowed
2 characters huggling/kissing- ok if innocent. Mother and child, someone in the same age range, no sexual overtones ect.
Implied Sex- Not allowed
Nudity with genitals- not allowed
Sex showing everything - not allowed.

with the picture, the character herself while short and tiny DOES have adult characteristics. The biggest being her face, her hips, and her chest (when you see the character from the front. We wont discriminate against small or short folks XD


----------



## NightWolf714 (Dec 6, 2010)

First off, I'll admit that I'm too lazy to read the three pages (I'm suppose to be doing chores around the house right now, after all). So I apologize if this is already asked. 

What about Sonic the hedgehog characters and designs that are cannon to the Archie Comics. In that series, I believe that most of the characters are 18 and above. (Sonic and Sally, for example nearly got married and Bunny and Antoine did.) For some characters, like Bunny, there is a difference in appearance from the old cartoon and the comics. For Sonic, there is a difference from his original look although not from the current games. And some, like Tails, do not have much of a difference at all. I would assume that in the case of Bunny, if she reflects her comic book self she's okay. But what about the others? Is it a matter of just making sure they appear older or is saying that it's comic based enough?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

NightWolf714 said:


> First off, I'll admit that I'm too lazy to read the three pages (I'm suppose to be doing chores around the house right now, after all). So I apologize if this is already asked.
> 
> What about Sonic the hedgehog characters and designs that are cannon to the Archie Comics. In that series, I believe that most of the characters are 18 and above. (Sonic and Sally, for example nearly got married and Bunny and Antoine did.) For some characters, like Bunny, there is a difference in appearance from the old cartoon and the comics. For Sonic, there is a difference from his original look although not from the current games. And some, like Tails, do not have much of a difference at all. I would assume that in the case of Bunny, if she reflects her comic book self she's okay. But what about the others? Is it a matter of just making sure they appear older or is saying that it's comic based enough?


 
I really highly suggest that you read the thread becuase I will be deleting repeat questions. 

That being said, there are lists all over the net of their ages. Sonic is 15, tails is 8 ect ect.

Unless there is some list with official comicbook character ages, they all follow Sega's guide.


----------



## NightWolf714 (Dec 6, 2010)

Just read it. Sorry about that. 

I'm currently trying to locate an official list for the comics as they have different ages than Sega does. Most sites refer back to the Sega ages instead of the Archie Comics. I believe they may have been mentioned in the comic themselves, but I'm hoping to find another source online. If not, I can try and locate which issue of the comics it is and see if I can upload that small snipet or something. I do know that some are obviously adult such as Bunny and Ant who are married. In that case, would pictures of the two of them, based off the comic, be allowed?

EDIT: No luck finding an official source about the comics age. It's stated somewhere in the late hundreds where they start doing character profiles, but no idea which issue specifically they were in. The only source I can find is this one: Link which states Sonic's comic book age is 20. Unfortunately, it only has his age. >_<


----------



## Nemo (Dec 6, 2010)

I couldn't find any useful information in the several thousand angry punctuation-nitpicking posts in the other threads because I am not some sort of coal-powered word-excavator, so please bear with me, and find the mercy in your hearts to spare me from the wrath of your holy lightning.

Admins, Mods, I'm way tired of wordbattling people on IMs over this, and I don't think I'm the only one wondering. Does Alertpay, and by transition the AUP, give a shit about kink art of Sonic characters? Like we're not talking about cock vore or genital mutilation here, just the vanilla fatfurs/inflation/muscle/paw/pregnancy/transformation/vore/babyfur/macro/micro/bondage/watersports/digimon/pokemon/other/sonic categories in the Tame bracket. Judging from Alertpay's other clientele, I would guess not, but a clarification would be just awesome.

Like maybe just a link?  A link to the answered question would be fine, I just don't have the stamina to slog through literally hundreds of pages of angry furries to find something that's obviously common sense.  The current thread doesn't mention it, so if it's anywhere, it's somewhere deep, deep within the bowels of the two original cub/sonic art threads.


----------



## KatVixen (Dec 6, 2010)

It is not about "people" It is about what the people at Alertpay (non fury pencil pushers) sees. They are flowing the rules about children being depicted in any media in adult situations. It is a US law they have to follow in order to stay in busness. 

FA / InkB/ DA all have to do what there money handlers say. Because this site takes money to run. It is not about dragoneer or any of the other admins. It is about keeping the site up and following the rules. 

The people who run Alertpay are not going to take the time to here our opinion of how you feel about sonic's lack of mature features. They are going to look back on there kid watching sonic cartoons and judge that way. 

The people who run art galleries that allow porn have to take the same stance our wonderful staff here are. It has to look like adults doing adult things to the moguls. If it looks like a child doing adult things to the Moguls then FA/ Da/ InkB run the risk of being shut down. 

---

Just letting people know it is not the admins fault it is the interpretation of the law by normal non furry people.


----------



## Stinkdog (Dec 6, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Alright. As far as I know, graphic depictions of gore/violence/death are not against the AUP.
> 
> And as far as I know, what you're describing about the abuse doesn't seem like it would violate the AUP either.
> 
> Pinkuh, feel free to correct me if I'm off-base here.





Pinkuh said:


> You are right on.


 
Thank you both very much for taking the time to answer my questions. :]

By my new found understanding: A story can include a sexual situation that involves a minor as long as that situation is not described in an erotic way and is not intended by the author to be erotic at all.  Is this more or less correct?

Also, is there perhaps a committee or person I could send the submission to before posting it to make absolutely sure that it's not in violation of the AUP?  I'd just hate to post it, thinking I'm in the clear only to have it removed at a later date without warning after I've posted other chapters since the events I've mentioned and the second chapter as a whole are pivotal to the core story.

-SD


----------



## Asswings (Dec 6, 2010)

Since you're answering questions here, I figure I'll throw in mine.

My fursona is Androgyne. So she doesn't have boobs, or really much in the way of hips (most of the time). And since she's not a cuntboy, she doesn't have wide manly shoulders. However, seeing as she's just a representation of me, she is 20 years old, and stated as such whenever it comes up. Am I barred from posting any sort of 'porn' of my character, because of this? She's not a kid, nor drawn as one... She just doesn't have secondary sexual characteristics.

(Here's an example. Not drawn by me, but I don't actually draw my fursona as much as  commission stuff of her.)


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Nemo said:


> I couldn't find any useful information in the several thousand angry punctuation-nitpicking posts in the other threads because I am not some sort of coal-powered word-excavator, so please bear with me, and find the mercy in your hearts to spare me from the wrath of your holy lightning.
> 
> Admins, Mods, I'm way tired of wordbattling people on IMs over this, and I don't think I'm the only one wondering. Does Alertpay, and by transition the AUP, give a shit about kink art of Sonic characters? Like we're not talking about cock vore or genital mutilation here, just the vanilla fatfurs/inflation/muscle/paw/pregnancy/transformation/vore/babyfur/macro/micro/bondage/watersports/digimon/pokemon/other/sonic categories in the Tame bracket. Judging from Alertpay's other clientele, I would guess not, but a clarification would be just awesome.
> 
> Like maybe just a link?  A link to the answered question would be fine, I just don't have the stamina to slog through literally hundreds of pages of angry furries to find something that's obviously common sense.  The current thread doesn't mention it, so if it's anywhere, it's somewhere deep, deep within the bowels of the two original cub/sonic art threads.



We are no longer using Alert pay. However other company's we have approached in the past before this happened have outright rejected us becuase of Cub content. Do Company's give a shit if there is sonic kink art? Yes, yes they do. They care in that Sonic s characters appear young. Young=child in these peoples minds and if we are reported to them (Like what happened with alert pay) We will suffer becuase of it. 

Do they care about anything else? Who knows. The cub issue is the one they focused on. So as far as fetishes go we are in the clear and we should remain so.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Stinkdog said:


> Thank you both very much for taking the time to answer my questions. :]
> 
> By my new found understanding: A story can include a sexual situation that involves a minor as long as that situation is not described in an erotic way and is not intended by the author to be erotic at all.  Is this more or less correct?
> 
> ...


 
No the situation can be alluded to, aka you can say someone was raped. But you can not describe the act itself. Sorry for any confusion.

You can send the submission to me and I would happily give it a read


----------



## NightWolf714 (Dec 6, 2010)

If it's okay, I would like to drop this links here for aid of other artists. 

[url="http://www.idrawdigital.com/2009/01/drawing-the-human-form-proportions-from-child-to-adult/]Drawing the Human Form - Proportions From Child to Adult[/url]
[url="http://www.coachr.org/growth_and_development.htm]Growth and Development[/url]

These show specifically about males, but it helps to give a general idea as to what is "child" body proportions and what is "adult" body proportions.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Asswings said:


> Since you're answering questions here, I figure I'll throw in mine.
> 
> My fursona is Androgyne. So she doesn't have boobs, or really much in the way of hips (most of the time). And since she's not a cuntboy, she doesn't have wide manly shoulders. However, seeing as she's just a representation of me, she is 20 years old, and stated as such whenever it comes up. Am I barred from posting any sort of 'porn' of my character, because of this? She's not a kid, nor drawn as one... She just doesn't have secondary sexual characteristics.
> 
> (Here's an example. Not drawn by me, but I don't actually draw my fursona as much as  commission stuff of her.)


 

Your character looks properly adult. Another character I would group into this catigory is Wednesday by Sublimate. skinny little lieth athletic thing with hardly any boobs, and hips, but both characters still manage to look adult.


----------



## Willow (Dec 6, 2010)

Question about Pokemon:

What about certain Pokemon like pichu, riolu, and like several others? Are they okay to be shown in porn too?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Willow said:


> Question about Pokemon:
> 
> What about certain Pokemon like pichu, riolu, and like several others? Are they okay to be shown in porn too?


 
Please Read the origanal post on this thread.


----------



## Asswings (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Your character looks properly adult. Another character I would group into this catigory is Wednesday by Sublimate. skinny little lieth athletic thing with hardly any boobs, and hips, but both characters still manage to look adult.



Thanks!


----------



## Willow (Dec 6, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Please Read the origanal post on this thread.


 I reread it just to make sure I didn't miss anything on that, but that still doesn't clear up the discrepancy. 

They're obviously younger forms of evolved Pokemon. :|


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 6, 2010)

Willow said:


> I reread it just to make sure I didn't miss anything on that, but that still doesn't clear up the discrepancy.
> 
> They're obviously younger forms of evolved Pokemon. :|


 
They're considered "feral". No exceptions from what I have read so far.
Not even the things on 2 legs. None. As long as you do not "anthro-size" them.
"Age" doesn't matter if it's "feral".
Says so in the first post.


----------



## NiGHTS4life (Dec 6, 2010)

Here's my question:  What about Amy Rose?  Is she alright?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Feral is feral. No exceptions.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

NiGHTS4life said:


> Here's my question:  What about Amy Rose?  Is she alright?


 
if she is listed as under aged by Sega then she is not allowed unless she is aged up and given the features of an adult.


----------



## NiGHTS4life (Dec 6, 2010)

So like this? http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4661881


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

NiGHTS4life said:


> So like this? http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4661881


 
Yeah thats fine. She has hips and boobs


----------



## NiGHTS4life (Dec 6, 2010)

Oh thank you, thank you. *hugs real hard*


----------



## MasterSkadu (Dec 6, 2010)

*Sigh* There is still a problem with this. The biggest being the artist  style of drawing, your almost in a sense telling the artist they have to  change how they draw. With the Cub/Lolita/Shota ban, it was site wide  hit, not just one particular community, but with this its aimed towards  sonic style artist. The second hole is how it affect sonic but not  pokemon, I'm not trying to target the pokemon community for the love God please don't get me wrong, but their has to be a  level of quality not just those two but of the entire site.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4739385/
as a example if was anything adult but they look like this, I would see being in cub ban area, if was cream the rabbit that too, but with characters like sonic you can't really say they are "cub" just cause of the style its drawn, and if it starts getting to the point of how its drawn, why isn't any character drawn chibi in the ban list?


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

NightWolf714 said:


> First off, I'll admit that I'm too lazy to read the three pages (I'm suppose to be doing chores around the house right now, after all). So I apologize if this is already asked.
> 
> What about Sonic the hedgehog characters and designs that are cannon to the Archie Comics. In that series, I believe that most of the characters are 18 and above. (Sonic and Sally, for example nearly got married and Bunny and Antoine did.) For some characters, like Bunny, there is a difference in appearance from the old cartoon and the comics. For Sonic, there is a difference from his original look although not from the current games. And some, like Tails, do not have much of a difference at all. I would assume that in the case of Bunny, if she reflects her comic book self she's okay. But what about the others? Is it a matter of just making sure they appear older or is saying that it's comic based enough?


 
Archie Comics Age-wise, the only time Sonic, Sally, and the others were over 18 is in those Mobius XX Years Later Story arcs. Outside of those arcs, only a small handful of characters are CURRENTLY 18 or older. Antoine is slated as 19 and Bunnie is slated as 17 until further clarified/changed (happens all the time). Once the Who's Who Encyclopedia comes out in a few months, it should list the ages for the Sonic characters in the comics as of that book's printing.

Aaaand I have a digimon question this time. What if someone took Angemon/Angewoman and "shrunk" them to be more child-like/cherub-like for the purpose of being of similar size to someone like Impmon and having sex with him? Would this bring them out of the Digi-beast category?


----------



## Forte_Gigas (Dec 6, 2010)

Well I'm gonna ask this, doesn't matter to me directly but may help some others.   Sonic as he is drawn now is 15 (starting at Sonic Adventure to now)  According to the article mentioned on this page http://info.sonicretro.org/images/t...e.png/110px-Sonicchannel_sonic02_nocircle.png Sonic as he is drawn prior to SA1 was stated as "Approximate age: 18 (but it's kind of hard to tell)."  So if Sonic was drawn like http://info.sonicretro.org/images/thumb/6/6d/Sonic1.png/110px-Sonic1.png as apposed to http://info.sonicretro.org/images/t...e.png/110px-Sonicchannel_sonic02_nocircle.png  would that be able to fly since the first design is supposedly 18 and the second is 15?  And if the article isn't reliable enough due to them stating the source is unknown I understand why it will still be considered underage.


----------



## Summercat (Dec 6, 2010)

Relevant questions only, guys. This is NOT a discussion thread.

This post does not mean that posts upthread will not be removed later.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

Ignore this post


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

MasterSkadu said:


> *Sigh* There is still a problem with this. The biggest being the artist  style of drawing, your almost in a sense telling the artist they have to  change how they draw. With the Cub/Lolita/Shota ban, it was site wide  hit, not just one particular community, but with this its aimed towards  sonic style artist. The second hole is how it affect sonic but not  pokemon, I'm not trying to target the pokemon community for the love God please don't get me wrong, but their has to be a  level of quality not just those two but of the entire site.
> 
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4739385/
> as a example if was anything adult but they look like this, I would see being in cub ban area, if was cream the rabbit that too, but with characters like sonic you can't really say they are "cub" just cause of the style its drawn, and if it starts getting to the point of how its drawn, why isn't any character drawn chibi in the ban list?


 
First thing you need to do is READ the first post. Pokemon is not effected at all. It's concidered beast/Feral and is not affected by the cub ban. 

Second: yes we are in essence asking that artists that draw characters that look like children to draw them so they look like adults. That's the way the cookie crumbles. If something looks like a child then they need to shift it so it doesn't.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

Forte_Gigas said:


> Well I'm gonna ask this, doesn't matter to me directly but may help some others.   Sonic as he is drawn now is 15 (starting at Sonic Adventure to now)  According to the article mentioned on this page http://info.sonicretro.org/images/t...e.png/110px-Sonicchannel_sonic02_nocircle.png Sonic as he is drawn prior to SA1 was stated as "Approximate age: 18 (but it's kind of hard to tell)."  So if Sonic was drawn like http://info.sonicretro.org/images/thumb/6/6d/Sonic1.png/110px-Sonic1.png as apposed to http://info.sonicretro.org/images/t...e.png/110px-Sonicchannel_sonic02_nocircle.png  would that be able to fly since the first design is supposedly 18 and the second is 15?  And if the article isn't reliable enough due to them stating the source is unknown I understand why it will still be considered underage.


 
According to official Sega sources Sonic is 15, and thats what we will judge by.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> Archie Comics Age-wise, the only time Sonic, Sally, and the others were over 18 is in those Mobius XX Years Later Story arcs. Outside of those arcs, only a small handful of characters are CURRENTLY 18 or older. Antoine is slated as 19 and Bunnie is slated as 17 until further clarified/changed (happens all the time). Once the Who's Who Encyclopedia comes out in a few months, it should list the ages for the Sonic characters in the comics as of that book's printing.
> 
> Aaaand I have a digimon question this time. What if someone took Angemon/Angewoman and "shrunk" them to be more child-like/cherub-like for the purpose of being of similar size to someone like Impmon and having sex with him? Would this bring them out of the Digi-beast category?


 
That is a good question and I need to consult with neer on it.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> Ignore this post


 
Sorry I didn't mean to delete that one... I restored it


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

I see XD Hope we get a clearer explanation on these gray areas. I love drawing Sonic being tied up by a more dominant being =(

Thanks for taking the time to answer our questions!


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 6, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> I see XD Hope we get a clearer explanation on these gray areas. I love drawing Sonic being tied up by a more dominant being =(
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to answer our questions!



As long as you draw him looking adult then it's fine. All you need to do to do this is shrink his head a bit, widen his shoulders and add a little more definition so he looks like he has form instead of just a kid like shape


----------



## Grandpriest (Dec 6, 2010)

Seems I missed a lot in one weekend of being away. *looks how my thread jumped from an unlocked 6 page thread to a locked 23 page thread*
Well, I'm glad some FA Staff are clearing up some confusion on this.  Good to know it's being worked on. 
And I had a good laugh from certain people.
Edit: after reading some posts and seeing that Sega's official character aging counts, does anyone have a link to Sega's character profiles?


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

http://sonic.sega.jp/SonicChannel/chara/index.html

Click on the name to the left side (you may want to do a lot of clicking if Japanese is not your strong point).

The age is stated under the weight (number next to kg). For some people, age is not specified (like Dr. Eggman). I assume for these chars we base things on appearance, in which Dr. Eggman is in the adult zone.

If you want Archie Sonic chars, you are going to have to wait for the Who's Who Encyclopedia to come out.


And to emphasize, Rouge is *18* http://sonic.sega.jp/SonicChannel/chara/rouge/index.html


Oh yeah that brings me to another question: http://sonic.sega.jp/SonicChannel/chara/chip/index.html

Chip is a God. Does he qualify for the beast section?


----------



## Grandpriest (Dec 6, 2010)

Thank you, SEGAMew.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

No Problem. For a surprise, click on Wave's profile.


----------



## Orion928 (Dec 6, 2010)

Alright here are my questions, and quite honestly i could care less how this goes either way, but as a fan of the original sonic comics and games, i have to say im curious, how would you effectively "age up" a character, in cannon sonic, the artwork differences between ages is sometimes as minute as adding a moustache to the character design [i may argue using the case of sonics uncle chuck as an example].  

And also, how would this pertain to say, characters that whose age is unidentifiable, be it through being called many different ages throughout their franchises, or just not really having a stated age.  

last question i would like to know about is Chibi art.  on an extremly often basis, i see chibi art drawn, and while i dont feel like posting a definition of "chibi", i bet i could argue that a "chibified" character looks a lot like a child/cub/whatever you would like to call it.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 6, 2010)

Orion928 said:


> Alright here are my questions, and quite honestly i could care less how this goes either way, but as a fan of the original sonic comics and games, i have to say im curious, how would you effectively "age up" a character, in cannon sonic, the artwork differences between ages is sometimes as minute as adding a moustache to the character design [i may argue using the case of sonics uncle chuck as an example].



If you want to stick to the comic canon 100%, then there is no real effective way to "age" up the male characters. I'm sure you are aware that King 46 year old Sonic still looks like a 16 year old.
If you are willing to alter your style a bit, then add human characteristics like "broader shoulders, shrink the head a bit, etc" so he doesn't have such a kiddish body... I suppose.



> And also, how would this pertain to say, characters that whose age is unidentifiable, be it through being called many different ages throughout their franchises, or just not really having a stated age.


This would be a "gut feeling" type of scenario. If it screams "I'm a kid!" then it's red light. If they look reasonably like an adult to the general public, it's green light.




> last question i would like to know about is Chibi art.  on an extremly often basis, i see chibi art drawn, and while i dont feel like posting a definition of "chibi", i bet i could argue that a "chibified" character looks a lot like a child/cub/whatever you would like to call it.


Eeh..... I have no answer for that ^^;


----------



## The Other Half (Dec 7, 2010)

It's somewhat pathetic that the admin's here have gone this low.  There is no logical reason for a ban on mature Sonic work.  The main excuse I've seen has been "We need to consider what someone would think on seeing this."  

So let's get this straight; A mother walks in on her kid jerking it to Tails and Cream Fapping it.  Now a normal person would say, "What the hell, those are cartoons!"  Not, "What the hell those are kids".  Considering nobody even knows the age of Sonic characters without researching it, it's obvious that there's no appearance per age in the Sonic universe.  Take the 25 Years Later comic series.  They look exactly the same, just different clothes, and it's supposedly 25 years later.  

So can someone tell me, how do you plan on upholding a ban on a character who looks exactly the same no matter how old he/she is?

Now let's take the worst case scenario.  The Sonic porn ban is kept in effect.  Now tell me, when do you plan on banning all the porn of Looney Tunes, Animaniacs, and every other cartoon you find on here?  I can gaurantee you pretty much all of them fall in the same age category, seems a bit hypocritical to ban one and not the others.


----------



## Xenke (Dec 7, 2010)

The Other Half said:


> So can someone tell me, how do you plan on upholding a ban on a character who looks exactly the same no matter how old he/she is?
> 
> Now let's take the worst case scenario.  The Sonic porn ban is kept in effect.  Now tell me, when do you plan on banning all the porn of Looney Tunes, Animaniacs, and every other cartoon you find on here?  I can gaurantee you pretty much all of them fall in the same age category, seems a bit hypocritical to ban one and not the others.


 
The policy is: if it looks like a child/underage, then it is treated as such and removed. It is subjective to the mods. End of story. This goes for everything.


----------



## The Other Half (Dec 7, 2010)

But how do you tell if something is a child if that's how they look their entire life?

Oh this is gonna be fun. X3


----------



## Xenke (Dec 7, 2010)

The Other Half said:


> But how do you tell if something is a child if that's how they look their entire life?
> 
> Oh this is gonna be fun. X3


 
You're thinking in the wrong perspective.

It's in the frame of whether or not something looks like a child with real world human-esque standards.

It's not looked at from the perspective of the source material.


----------



## The Other Half (Dec 7, 2010)

Hmmm, I have two ways to answer that, so I'll say both.

1. What about porn on the internet of 18+ girls with 18- bodies, so you're saying those are illegal just because of how they look?
2. Wait, did you just say Sonic characters are human-esque?  Cause I'm pretty sure that's what you said, and it's hilarious.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 7, 2010)

The Other Half said:


> 1. What about porn on the internet of 18+ girls with 18- bodies, so you're saying those are illegal just because of how they look?



Loli/Shota porn is already banned prior to the Cub Porn Ban on FA.



> 2. Wait, did you just say Sonic characters are human-esque?  Cause I'm pretty sure that's what you said, and it's hilarious.



 About as human-esque as Digimon. However Digimon are declared as Beasts and spared from the cub porn ban because they're deemed as (digital) *monsters*. Sonic characters are not monsters (aliens at the most in our perspective) and are treated as human-esque.

Well, that's how I try to see it.... trying really hard.


----------



## Xenke (Dec 7, 2010)

The Other Half said:


> Hmmm, I have two ways to answer that, so I'll say both.
> 
> 1. What about porn on the internet of 18+ girls with 18- bodies, so you're saying those are illegal just because of how they look?
> 2. Wait, did you just say Sonic characters are human-esque?  Cause I'm pretty sure that's what you said, and it's hilarious.


 
1) It doesn't matter what other sites do, they are not FA. Also, I never said illegal.
2) They are human-esque. Two legs with feet, two arms with hands, a torso and groin, standing upright, cranium, face with two eyes and a nose and a mouth, two ears on either side of the head, and a neck.



SEGAMew said:


> About as human-esque as Digimon. However Digimon are declared as Beasts and spared from the cub porn ban because they're deemed as (digital) *monsters*. Sonic characters are not monsters (aliens at the most in our perspective) and are treated as human-esque.


 
I am completely unfamiliar with Digimon, however from what I do vaguely recall that have far more non-human traits than Sonic characters.


----------



## The Other Half (Dec 7, 2010)

#1 referred to real life, not FA.  Oh well.

So you consider them humanesque because they have limbs?  You seem to be ignoring the fact that none of those limbs even look remotely human.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 7, 2010)

> I am completely unfamiliar with Digimon, however from what I do vaguely  recall that have far more non-human traits than Sonic  characters.


A few examples of Digmon

http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs15/f/2007/115/1/c/Angels_of_Light_and_Hope_by_Angemon.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a7/Sakuyamon.jpg
http://digipedia.db-destiny.net/encyc/images/beelzemon_blast.jpg

For some digimon, as they digivolve to higher stages, they gain more human attributes. I see Sonic chars as more align with Gatomon http://usuarios.lycos.es/cosplayers/cosplay/cosplayers/momoko/gatomon.jpg or Impmon http://media.animegalleries.net/albums/userpics/66934/Impmon.jpg in terms of amount of human-like traits. Especially Impmon. But since they're creatures of digital/fantasy, they're safe.



The Other Half said:


> #1 referred to real life, not FA.  Oh well.



If you're talking about real life examples, then those are banned/allowed depending on the country.



> So  you consider them humanesque because they have limbs?  You seem to be  ignoring the fact that none of those limbs even look remotely  human.


I personally consider them toons, not human at all. My opinion doesn't quite matter though since I'm not the one enforcing the new policy.


----------



## Xenke (Dec 7, 2010)

The Other Half said:


> #1 referred to real life, not FA.  Oh well.
> 
> So you consider them humanesque because they have limbs?  You seem to be ignoring the fact that none of those limbs even look remotely human.


 
I know what number one referred to. Regardless of real life laws, FA and other companies can set regulations to whatever they want. The whole reason FA had to change it's policy is because the policies of AlertPay did not allow cub porn.

And no, not just limbs. If you would like me to get into detail with limbs, however, let me start:

Let's see, arms... forearm and upper arm, attached by and elbow joint. Articulated wrists. Five-digit hands, with opposable thumbs. Legs... upper leg and lower leg, with a knee-like joint. Feet with shoes. Attached to the hip by the same means and orientation as a human.

Yep, looks human-esque.


----------



## Nishi (Dec 7, 2010)

I sorta had a more general, selfish question about being harassed about cub stuff. X3

I think I read harassment is when someone continues to say bothersome things, like over and over again? But if someone makes one comment about cub stuff, is that still a problem?

I reported someone who commented my work saying, *"I can't wait for the incest search results to not be 50% cub porn like this. What a great day it will be." *and so I'm not sure whether admins are just busy, or if this doesn't count as being harassed.


----------



## Athari (Dec 7, 2010)

Is it safe to name feral cubs "cubs" in the titles, descriptions and tags of submissions? Characters in question are from The Lion King, The Land Before Time etc.


----------



## ZoomSwish (Dec 7, 2010)

I'd like to know why it is that _all_ Digimon etc are safe, even the ones that look just as much proportionately like human kids as Sonic characters, but Sonic style is a no-no? I mean, an outsider (rep agency, payment processor etc) isn't going to know a Digimon from a Sonic character, so if they stumble upon, say, mature art of Gatomon, it's going to look just as cub-like as mature art of a Sonic-styled character.

If we're going entirely by child-like appearance and not just discriminating against Sonic style, then surely child-like Digimon/PokÃ©mon etc should be just as subject to the rules. Some of them look no more 'feral' than the Sonic cast (or, to reverse that, the Sonic cast look just as non-human as some Digimon/PokÃ©mon).


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

ZoomSwish said:


> I'd like to know why it is that _all_ Digimon etc are safe, even the ones that look just as much proportionately like human kids as Sonic characters, but Sonic style is a no-no? I mean, an outsider (rep agency, payment processor etc) isn't going to know a Digimon from a Sonic character, so if they stumble upon, say, mature art of Gatomon, it's going to look just as cub-like as mature art of a Sonic-styled character.
> 
> If we're going entirely by child-like appearance and not just discriminating against Sonic style, then surely child-like Digimon/PokÃ©mon etc should be just as subject to the rules. Some of them look no more 'feral' than the Sonic cast (or, to reverse that, the Sonic cast look just as non-human as some Digimon/PokÃ©mon).


 
i have to agree with this one. 

why not just use the duck rule? a lot simpler and a lot easier to enforce.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 7, 2010)

See this is what happens when I attempt to make sense out of everything.and fail.



Athari said:


> Is it safe to name feral cubs "cubs" in the  titles, descriptions and tags of submissions? Characters in question are  from The Lion King, The Land Before Time etc.



Those chars are feral and therefore safe.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

ZoomSwish said:


> I'd like to know why it is that _all_ Digimon etc are safe, even the ones that look just as much proportionately like human kids as Sonic characters, but Sonic style is a no-no? I mean, an outsider (rep agency, payment processor etc) isn't going to know a Digimon from a Sonic character, so if they stumble upon, say, mature art of Gatomon, it's going to look just as cub-like as mature art of a Sonic-styled character.
> 
> If we're going entirely by child-like appearance and not just discriminating against Sonic style, then surely child-like Digimon/PokÃ©mon etc should be just as subject to the rules. Some of them look no more 'feral' than the Sonic cast (or, to reverse that, the Sonic cast look just as non-human as some Digimon/PokÃ©mon).



The reason why is Dragoneer said so. He is the one that creates the rules, so we go by what he says.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

Redregon said:


> i have to agree with this one.
> 
> why not just use the duck rule? a lot simpler and a lot easier to enforce.


 
Becuase Dragoneer says they are. Can't really elaborate becuase thats all I know.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

The Other Half said:


> But how do you tell if something is a child if that's how they look their entire life?
> 
> Oh this is gonna be fun. X3


 
Honestly if a character looks like a child their whole life? Then whoever wants to draw that character is out of luck. It's the LOOK of characters we are judging by. If something looks like a kid to us even though they are 50 (See Shippo from inuyasha) Then they are still a kid to all eyes involved.

We have re-stated this several times and I would highly suggest you read through the forums before asking a question as most of your questions have already been anwsered and I will be deleting repeat questions.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Becuase Dragoneer says they are. Can't really elaborate becuase thats all I know.


 
understood... thing is, with that as it is, i can see that being a very large loop hole. 

but hey, i guess it's all down to what the payment service says on the matter if it comes down to it.


----------



## ZoomSwish (Dec 7, 2010)

While I appreciate your responding, if you can't answer it then perhaps Dragoneer will show up here eventually to respond? It's a legitimate question, I think, that needs an answer. I do appreciate your making this topic, Pinkuh, very much so â™¥ But hopefully 'Neer will be able to elaborate on points such as the above, because otherwise it just looks like Sonic style is being singled out, whilst other fandoms with characters that look equally cub-like to the outside eye will still be fine to post pr0nz.

Edit: 



Pinkuh said:


> Honestly if a character looks like a child their  whole life? Then whoever wants to draw that character is out of luck.  It's the LOOK of characters we are judging by. If something looks like a  kid to us even though they are 50 (See Shippo from inuyasha) Then they  are still a kid to all eyes involved.



This is exactly why the above question is pertinent. If we are saying that Sonic characters can't be drawn that style because they LOOK like kids to 'all eyes involved', then I can't see how certain PokÃ©mon/Digimon could NOT be included. So if Dragoneer is saying that those are okay (despite looking as much like 'kids' as the Sonic cast), then we have an inconsistency that needs addressing :\


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

ZoomSwish said:


> While I appreciate your responding, if you can't answer it then perhaps Dragoneer will show up here eventually to respond? It's a legitimate question, I think, that needs an answer. I do appreciate your making this topic, Pinkuh, very much so â™¥ But hopefully 'Neer will be able to elaborate on points such as the above, because otherwise it just looks like Sonic style is being singled out, whilst other fandoms with characters that look equally cub-like to the outside eye will still be fine to post pr0nz.


 
The reasoning for the diffrence between pokemon and sonic is... Pokemon are all beasts/feral, Sonic is not. Sonic is anthro. That's really how neer views things. I hope he comes by this thread too, but work has him slammed at the moment @_@ You may have better luck posting in his journal about your question if you want him to answer it himself.


----------



## ZoomSwish (Dec 7, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> The reasoning for the diffrence between pokemon  and sonic is... Pokemon are all beasts/feral, Sonic is not. Sonic is  anthro. That's really how neer views things. I hope he comes by this  thread too, but work has him slammed at the moment @_@ You may have  better luck posting in his journal about your question if you want him  to answer it himself.



Digimon, however, are sentient and talk and many walk as 'human-like' as the Sonic crew. If you know the series well, you could argue that they are still 'battle monsters', but I doubt any rep from a payment processing agency etc is going to know that. Surely they will see no visual difference between a child-like bi-pedal sentient-seeming Digimon (or certain PokÃ©mon, for that matter, given how many artists show human-like PokÃ©s as fully sentient AND talking 'human', without changing their appearance) and a Sonic character.

If 'Neer is busy, I don't really want to pester him on his journal. I know he has a lot to deal with, which is why I'm happy this thread exists. Since I know you can't answer for him and I think I've put forward all points of the issue now, I won't repeat the question or elaborate any more, because asking over and over won't get him here any faster. So I'll shut up and just wait; hopefully he'll stop by eventually. Thanks again for answering to the best of your abilities in the meanwhile, anyway, Pinkuh


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

Athari said:


> Is it safe to name feral cubs "cubs" in the titles, descriptions and tags of submissions? Characters in question are from The Lion King, The Land Before Time etc.


 
Yes it's fine


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

ZoomSwish said:


> Digimon, however, are sentient and talk and many walk as 'human-like' as the Sonic crew. If you know the series well, you could argue that they are still 'battle monsters', but I doubt any rep from a payment processing agency etc is going to know that. Surely they will see no visual difference between a child-like bi-pedal sentient-seeming Digimon (or certain PokÃ©mon, for that matter, given how many artists show human-like PokÃ©s as fully sentient AND talking 'human', without changing their appearance) and a Sonic character.
> 
> If 'Neer is busy, I don't really want to pester him on his journal. I know he has a lot to deal with, which is why I'm happy this thread exists. Since I know you can't answer for him and I think I've put forward all points of the issue now, I won't repeat the question or elaborate any more, because asking over and over won't get him here any faster. So I'll shut up and just wait; hopefully he'll stop by eventually. Thanks again for answering to the best of your abilities in the meanwhile, anyway, Pinkuh


 
Pinkuh: Also got a couple people wanting to know why Digimon is concidered beast instead of anthro cause they talk and such
Dragoneer: They're not child and have no relative age.
Dragoneer: not children

And there ya have it


----------



## ZoomSwish (Dec 7, 2010)

I really REALLY appreciate you asking, but the question was extremely condensed and that answer doesn't actually answer the original question. If Shippo 'looks like' a child but isn't one yet is still banned, why are Digimon who 'look like' children but have no relative age okay?

The point is that surely this rule is meant so that OUTSIDE people (like payment processors etc) won't see anything that looks like cub. So the question still isn't answered.

Maybe if I get a set of pics from PokÃ©mon/Digimon/Sonic/other toons etc and put them side by side it will explain what I mean. They will all LOOK like cub. Dragoneer's answer assumes that the outside agencies will know that Digimon have no age and that Sonic characters have canon ages. But I doubt that. They will see a human-child-like Digimon in exactly the same light as a Sonic character.

Sigh. I would like Dragoneer to come look at this thread and answer the specifics because this is still making very little sense. On the one hand, he has said that it all comes down to how a character LOOKS (e.g. 46-year-old canon Sonic is still 'cub', as is Shippo), but then on the other he seems to be saying that even if a Digimon is very human-child-like and looks like cub, it's still okay because of canon agelessness.

So which is it? Entirely based on appearance, or does canon info count too?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

ZoomSwish said:


> I really REALLY appreciate you asking, but the question was extremely condensed and that answer doesn't actually answer the original question. If Shippo 'looks like' a child but isn't one yet is still banned, why are Digimon who 'look like' children but have no relative age okay?
> 
> The point is that surely this rule is meant so that OUTSIDE people (like payment processors etc) won't see anything that looks like cub. So the question still isn't answered.
> 
> ...


 
He will get to this thread eventually yes. (told me he was going to check it out after work) But I assure you he will give you the same answer and it still wont answer the question to your liking. It's best to just understand it as "Dragoneer says, it's his site, so we listen"


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 7, 2010)

Whether we like the answer or not, we would at least like an answer that makes sense, and it's reasonable to an outsider viewing into our works.


----------



## JanisXchambers (Dec 7, 2010)

This is going to be a nightmare.  How can we really put a metric to something that is entirely subjective?  I mean if the person out and out states it is underage then fine, but apart from that what is the difference between a mature but underdeveloped person and a child?  I can't remember the character off hand but I remember a pink mouse who was a flat chested woman, she was shown to be a grown up female who simply didn't develop breasts or very curvey hips but was otherwise an adult in behavior and story.  I fear that this debate on semantics and aesthetics is going to cause more than a few drama storms.  This really is the problem with trying to police thought crime and apply real-world rules on blatant fiction, it always comes down to a childish game of 'my reality is more true than your reality'.  If there really is anything we can call this folly it would be a "holy war".

Even with all that said it's very hard for me to defend some of the more graphic and disturbing bits of cub porn you can find on FA, I only remind myself that it's all just fiction ultimately and the denial of fantasy is the quickest way to bring dark impulses into reality, just look at any gay-hating preacher or politician and their corresponding hypocrisy for proof of that.  Ultimately this is FA's decision and we can't argue, it's not our sight, but this is going to be a very bumpy road before it's all over.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 7, 2010)

JanisXchambers said:


> This is going to be a nightmare.  How can we really put a metric to something that is entirely subjective?  I mean if the person out and out states it is underage then fine, but apart from that what is the difference between a mature but underdeveloped person and a child?  I can't remember the character off hand but I remember a pink mouse who was a flat chested woman, she was shown to be a grown up female who simply didn't develop breasts or very curvey hips but was otherwise an adult in behavior and story.  I fear that this debate on semantics and aesthetics is going to cause more than a few drama storms.  This really is the problem with trying to police thought crime and apply real-world rules on blatant fiction, it always comes down to a childish game of 'my reality is more true than your reality'.  If there really is anything we can call this folly it would be a "holy war".
> 
> Even with all that said it's very hard for me to defend some of the more graphic and disturbing bits of cub porn you can find on FA, I only remind myself that it's all just fiction ultimately and the denial of fantasy is the quickest way to bring dark impulses into reality, just look at any gay-hating preacher or politician and their corresponding hypocrisy for proof of that.  Ultimately this is FA's decision and we can't argue, it's not our sight, but this is going to be a very bumpy road before it's all over.


 
I think you are talking about Wednesday from Sublimates comics. And she would be perfectly fine. Yes she doesn't have hips or large boobs. But she LOOKS mature. very slight folks don't automatically mean children. Again this is case by case. We know it's going to cause Drama storms (as it has already caused them.) But we have no choice in the matter and this is what has to be done.


----------



## Grandpriest (Dec 7, 2010)

The question I have is something that others have already asked.  Sure, 'Neer has already said Digimon and other things "are not cub" because they are feral or something, but again, what matters here?  It's not what 'Neer thinks or wants to believe.  It is what the next possible provider thinks.

What will the next provider think when they see a Pikachu getting it on with an Agumon?  I thought this all started to try to get other providers to see us as a non-cub/child porn site.  If something of this large of a scale is happening, you can't half-ass it, because that possible provider won't see that little digimon as "feral".  It'll think of it as a young cub.

Being realistic here, and nothing more.


----------



## Xenke (Dec 7, 2010)

Grandpriest said:


> It's not what 'Neer thinks or wants to believe.


 
This is the crux of your argument.

It's false.

It's all about what 'Neer thinks.

If red flags are raised again, he'll change how he thinks again.


----------



## Summercat (Dec 8, 2010)

Ahem.

This thread is for Questions for admins about the new rules only. Do not debate here, please try not to answer for the admins.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

Please continue to ask questions, but debate and conversation will be deleted. Please allow me or one of the other admins to answer the questions.

If your question doesn't get answered right away don't fret it will. Please hang tight.


----------



## ZoomSwish (Dec 8, 2010)

Do you know if Dragoneer did look at this topic at all after work like he said he would, or was he still too busy? I think all that really remains after the mods have done their best to answer is to hear the final word from the big man himself. I hope he'll find time to read everything that was put forward rather than just giving a stock answer. Hopefully the delay in his reply means that he'll give a full answer, even if it's not necessarily what we want to hear.


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 8, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Please continue to ask questions


 
Question:

Since someone decided to point out that poke/digimon are totally cubs over and over instead of just asking if the sonic chars they draw are cubs, I'l just ask on their behalf:

Pic1
Pic2
Pic3

Can you tell where the cubs are or are they all aged up enough?
Cause I have a hard time seeing cubs here. Do you see them?

And before you say "canonical style", the proportions are shifting so much here that a lot of things are probably off.
Such as the size of the hands, shape of spikes, non-perfectly oval/circular shaped body etc.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

pic 1: I would have to get some other opinions cause that's borderline.
Pic 2: knuckles looks old enough but... super sonic? dosen't
Pic 3: To young looking


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 8, 2010)

I see but why dos knuckles look old enough?
What would the artist need to take from that shape and apply it to all their other characters so they look old enough too?
At first look, knuckles looks indistinguishable from all other characters. But maybe I'm missing something obvious here.

Thanks.

(Also I'd have guessed the most obvious "non-cub" one would be the first one. The more you know I guess.)


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 8, 2010)

*deleted*


----------



## CerbrusNL (Dec 8, 2010)

9_6 said:


> <Stuff>


 This ban is not about human kids, tho, it's about -all- underage stuff.
Sonic is undeniable not-human, yet underage, and this banned, how does your nipple-theory cover that?
(Excuse me for picking Sonic, but everyone knows what he looks like, he's a good example, here.


----------



## Stinkdog (Dec 8, 2010)

This slope is getting more and more slippery as more and more fans try to justify their particular drawings.

Pinkuh, could you note me on the forums with an email address I could send that story to for final confirmation or rejection?  You could also note me on FA itself.  My forum name and FA name are the same.

-SD


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 8, 2010)

CerbrusNL said:


> This ban is not about human kids, tho, it's about -all- underage stuff.


 
Funny, I could swear "feral" things were an exception.
I mean, it says so right there in the first post, isn't it?
Is that a lie?

Also there _are_ bipedal animals.
My creature is an example of something that would be borderline but is not because it's actually an "animal" and now I just formulated that gut feeling that made you say "animal" into a simple rule of thumb (that also just so happens to cover sonic characters... I mean come on, those are mascots)

Of course if it has no nipples but is bipedal, tiny, has blatant "child" symbols such as wearing diapers, shakes a rattle and sucks cocks, those would be taken care of by staff discretion but hey, that rule would make things a lot less arbitrary.
I haven't seen anyone come up with anything better >=/
This is objectively measurable as opposed to wonky "this looks kindasorta like a child"- definitions that everyone perceives differently.


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 8, 2010)

CerbrusNL said:


> Your creature wouldn't be borderline, it would just be cub. Just like any other anthro creature.



Did I do something to you?
I mean, that is a valid solution to the impending witch-hunt insanity and giant shitstorm that'll ensue once the ban gets enforced.
If people ask "why did my art get deleted", bam, there's your crystal clear answer and it's not just "Because an admin says so".
You can objectively see why.

If alertpay points at gatomon, remind them that it's a cat. If they ask why, nipples (also gatomon is actually "chibi" because of the incredibly stubby limbs but no one thinks that far, apparently. Stylization, what's that? =P).
If gatomon is displayed with 2 nipples, bam, cub, delete. Easy.
I callenge you to come up with a better solution that logically explains why all digimon are exceptions. So far I have seen nothing.

As for my creature, Pinkuh said it's "feral" earlier.
Are you even looking at what I mean?
Much miscommunication stems from people not actually looking but just assuming you know.
No offense.

Edit: There. Just saved you some time.
I could also show you a render with the new specularity maps that give it a structure that makes it look more robotic than anything and if that won't confuse you enough yet, I plan on depicting it on all fours and shrunk the head by 10% which pretty much changes everything about how you perceive it.


----------



## ZoomSwish (Dec 8, 2010)

I'm actually curious as to why 'cub' actually doesn't cover... actual  (literal) cubs. Like cub Simba, etc. I mean, yes, he's clearly non  bi-pedal and an animal... but he is still undeniably anthropomorphic  (i.e. given human traits). He's clearly a child. He's meant to represent  a child. He is physically and mentally immature.

A lot of people arguing pro-ban say that calling Sonic characters and  furries 'animals' doesn't change the fact that child animals are still  children. Therefore, Simba is still a child, no?

So, why is this okay? And how does one draw the line when some  Digimon/PokÃ©mon etc are as animal-like as Simba, and some as  'human-like' as Sonic characters? That's kinda the crux of my question  because I'm not sure whether it's all in the physical or partly in the  mental and/or canon. Given the wide range of creatures out there, there  definitely IS a grey area if being non-human enough makes cub okay even  when it's clearly still a child.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't a lot of the drama from the official announcement thread surrounding the potential loopholes that would be found and the admin stance was "sorry, that won't work." 

... and yet, here's one very glaring loophole. 

something classed as "beast" by the admins (even if said character that's "beast" is bipedal) is fine?

i had thought that the ruling was to prevent cub porn (beast or not) so that funding could be arranged for the site? what do you think it's going to look like to have riolu being porked by someone that doesn't know it's a pokemon? or a gatomon being raped for someone unfamiliar with digimon?

i mean, we ARE talking about the people that handle the funds for the site. yes, i'm sure they'd know pikachu and charmander, but if they see some of the more obscure pokemon and digimon out there and they look like cubs, from their viewpoint, wouldn't that be seen as the site going back on it's "okay, no more cub porn" decision?

not everyone in the world knows all the pokemon or digimon and this IS a matter of public perception afterall.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

9_6 said:


> Naked under the shower, thinking about childrens bodies and what defines them as such,
> I had a stroke of genius.
> Sorry if this isn't a question and doesn't quite fit in here but hear me out.
> 
> ...


 

Proportion is key. All of these look underage. (And I don't appreciate being called a twerp )

If any of these were applied to a humanoid character I would be like "Huh thats a kid" But only for 2 and maybe 3 (depending on the lower portion of the body... a torso does not a monster make, and if the body were proportioned such that they had anthro arms and legs we would have to take a second look unless it specifically fell under the beast category by being a Pokemon or Digimon... ramble ramble) would removal be warranted (Unless 1 was in an erotic situation.)


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

ZoomSwish said:


> I'm actually curious as to why 'cub' actually doesn't cover... actual  (literal) cubs. Like cub Simba, etc. I mean, yes, he's clearly non  bi-pedal and an animal... but he is still undeniably anthropomorphic  (i.e. given human traits). He's clearly a child. He's meant to represent  a child. He is physically and mentally immature.
> 
> A lot of people arguing pro-ban say that calling Sonic characters and  furries 'animals' doesn't change the fact that child animals are still  children. Therefore, Simba is still a child, no?
> 
> So, why is this okay? And how does one draw the line when some  Digimon/PokÃ©mon etc are as animal-like as Simba, and some as  'human-like' as Sonic characters? That's kinda the crux of my question  because I'm not sure whether it's all in the physical or partly in the  mental and/or canon. Given the wide range of creatures out there, there  definitely IS a grey area if being non-human enough makes cub okay even  when it's clearly still a child.



This is one that Dragoneer is going to have to answer since I don't know.  Sorry, I will try to get him to respond today


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

9_6 said:


> Did I do something to you?
> I mean, that is a valid solution to the impending witch-hunt insanity and giant shitstorm that'll ensue once the ban gets enforced.
> If people ask "why did my art get deleted", bam, there's your crystal clear answer and it's not just "Because an admin says so".
> You can objectively see why.



Unfortunatly allot of this IS going to fall under the "Becuase an admin says so" Box. It's something the users will have to deal with becuase Neer makes the rules, and if he says something has to go it has to go. There really isn't any point to arguing it. It's his site, he makes the rules. We Enforce them. It's rather cut and dry. As much as people argue about what is and isn't allowed, it will always come down to "We said so".



> If alertpay points at gatomon, remind them that it's a cat. If they ask why, nipples (also gatomon is actually "chibi" because of the incredibly stubby limbs but no one thinks that far, apparently. Stylization, what's that? =P).
> If gatomon is displayed with 2 nipples, bam, cub, delete. Easy.
> I callenge you to come up with a better solution that logically explains why all digimon are exceptions. So far I have seen nothing.



If a company asks us to remove it to keep funding going then we will. It's as simple as that. If Gatomon or anyone else falls under the scrutiny of our pay services, then we will remove them. Right now they are not the issue so they remain.



> As for my creature, Pinkuh said it's "feral" earlier.
> Are you even looking at what I mean?
> Much miscommunication stems from people not actually looking but just assuming you know.
> No offense.



The Creature was feral, as there are feral creatures that stand on 2 legs... see birds, kangaroos, Dinosaurs... ect ect. Adding a fictional element doesn't automatically anthro-ize something.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't a lot of the drama from the official announcement thread surrounding the potential loopholes that would be found and the admin stance was "sorry, that won't work."
> 
> ... and yet, here's one very glaring loophole.
> 
> ...



Indeed it's a matter of perseption. But untill a service calls us out on it we are trying to let as much remain as possible. Dragoneer classified things as beast and feral becuase that is what he sees to be beast and feral. No more no less. It's his site so he can make the rules as he pleases. We just enforce them. 

Again like I said in one of my previous posts, allot of this is going to wind up falling into the "Becuase we said so" Box without allot of explination. That's just the way it is going to be, and as annoying as that is for users, it's something they are going to have to get used to.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 8, 2010)

Having technical difficulties... I accidentally locked the thread @_@


----------



## Deo (Dec 8, 2010)

People. Come on. Pinkuh has made it clear. And the most important thing is that FA is not your site. It doesn't have to cater to your wishes at all. The people running it don't have to listen to you. Dragoneer owns the site and it's his. You are allowed on it. That's it. If you want to change the rules make your own site where you can have whatever rules you want. Otherwise this is pointless as your opinion is meaningless.


----------



## 9_6 (Dec 8, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Proportion is key. All of these look underage. (And I don't appreciate being called a twerp )
> 
> If any of these were applied to a humanoid character I would be like "Huh thats a kid" But only for 2 and maybe 3 (depending on the lower portion of the body... a torso does not a monster make, and if the body were proportioned such that they had anthro arms and legs we would have to take a second look unless it specifically fell under the beast category by being a Pokemon or Digimon... ramble ramble) would removal be warranted (Unless 1 was in an erotic situation.)


 
I see your point.
Perhaps I got a bit too excited over finding something you can actually put your finger on but this really isn't helpful at all.
My apologies.

It's off-topic then.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 8, 2010)

Thanks 9_6 for asking Pinkuh about my arts =P

It is weird how when drawing Sonic the same way through all three picture examples, they all have varying degrees of exceptance. And how Knuckles appears adult enough. At least to me, I give my Knuckles and Sonics very canon body shapes.

Can you tell me what differentiates the Knuckles and Super Sonic?


----------



## Grandpriest (Dec 8, 2010)

Wait a minute.  I keep reading different things from admins.  Sometimes I read "Only if the character is canonically 18 or older" while other times I read "as long as you draw them to be 18 or older" or "As long as they don't look young".
Screw clarification and the massive amount of (some questionable) deleted posts, this is getting annoying.
I get that whatever 'Neer says goes (until he's told to take something off, which will no doubt happen), but even he's saying different things here and there.


----------



## Chu- (Dec 9, 2010)

As far as I know no official age has been announced for Klonoa. Is he considered underage?


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Dec 9, 2010)

I thought his wide-eyed shota design pretty much makes it clear.

Say, what about King Kazuma?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 9, 2010)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> I thought his wide-eyed shota design pretty much makes it clear.
> 
> Say, what about King Kazuma?


 
The Rabbit guy from Summerwars?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 9, 2010)

Apprently some of you guys arn't getting the memo

I am locking this thread for a couple hours with a warning.

From here on out summer and I will be handing out infractions for those who refuse to follow the rules. 

Questions and answers only. YOU ask the questions, the mod's/Admins will anwser. 

All other unnecessary banter will be removed and infractions handed out.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 9, 2010)

open again


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Dec 9, 2010)

Wait, so if we actually have the info, or an answer is just blaringly obvious, we still need to wait after an admin to give out answers?


----------



## Esichs (Dec 9, 2010)

Was my previous question not on topic? Or was I simply lumped in with the others out of convenience?

Here it is again, simplified. I know 'neer has said "digimon have no relative age" But that seems to fly in the face of Digimon Season 4. The human protagonists in this season become the digimon  themselves, instead of traveling with companion digimon. Since all these  humans are under the age of 18, does their age carry to their digiforms  regardless of their shape and size?


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 9, 2010)

Esichs said:


> Was my previous question not on topic? Or was I simply lumped in with the others out of convenience?
> 
> Here it is again, simplified. I know 'neer has said "digimon have no relative age" But that seems to fly in the face of Digimon Season 4. The human protagonists in this season become the digimon  themselves, instead of traveling with companion digimon. Since all these  humans are under the age of 18, does their age carry to their digiforms  regardless of their shape and size?


 
Digimon are considered beast so it doesn't matter what is or isn't said in the show about them.


----------



## Esichs (Dec 9, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Digimon are considered beast so it doesn't matter what is or isn't said in the show about them.



That seems like a double standard with the current issue though.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Dec 9, 2010)

They're not anthro, and if they are, they're adult-shaped.

Anyway, again, what about King Kazuma of, yes, Summer Wars?


----------



## Objection (Dec 9, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> Digimon are considered beast so it doesn't matter what is or isn't said in the show about them.


 zoomswish brought up a similar point in that although a character like simba is obviously a cub, his personality is that of a human child and he is meant to represent a human child. you were uncertain of how to answer this question.

the case of the minors turning into digimon isn't that much different. although they are now "beasts", they think, act, and talk like minors and therefore are meant to represent children like simba. does the "all digimon are beasts" still stand here, although you needed clarification on a similar point?


----------



## Ozzy_Olivers_Cat (Dec 10, 2010)

I have a very straight to point question, to just confirm this. 
I probably was told this answer before, but all this conversation is confusing, so let me just get a clarification.

Which ones of these would be considered deletable, if porn was drawn of this character. Note, I specified age. Could you also specify, why?

My character Ozzy - http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4874396 (Age 22)
Gatomon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatomon (Age Never Specified)
My character Stab - http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4012940/ (Age Never Specified. This character looks like a kitten, but is suppose to be over 18. His height is a birth defect.)
This? - http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4911492 (Allegedly Over eighteen)

Just asking, because reading this whole thread has seemed to confuse me.


----------



## SEGAMew (Dec 10, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> Thanks 9_6 for asking Pinkuh about my arts =P
> 
> It is weird how when drawing Sonic the same way through all three picture examples, they all have varying degrees of acceptance. And how Knuckles appears adult enough. At least to me, I give my Knuckles and Sonics very canon body shapes.
> 
> Can you tell me what differentiates the Knuckles and Super Sonic?


 
One of the few remaining questions that wasn't outright deleted.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 10, 2010)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> They're not anthro, and if they are, they're adult-shaped.
> 
> Anyway, again, what about King Kazuma of, yes, Summer Wars?


 
Looks adult enough to me.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 10, 2010)

Ozzy_Olivers_Cat said:


> I have a very straight to point question, to just confirm this.
> I probably was told this answer before, but all this conversation is confusing, so let me just get a clarification.
> 
> Which ones of these would be considered deletable, if porn was drawn of this character. Note, I specified age. Could you also specify, why?
> ...


 
I have already anwsered your questions about your characters they look to young plain and simple. Sorry.


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 10, 2010)

SEGAMew said:


> One of the few remaining questions that wasn't outright deleted.


 
Knuckles looked older, taller and such with a wider shoulder base. Sonic did not. He still looked young.


----------



## Ozzy_Olivers_Cat (Dec 10, 2010)

Pinkuh said:


> I have already anwsered your questions about your characters they look to young plain and simple. Sorry.


 
But, why? I'm asking for a clear answer. Out of all these pics, what is acceptable or not...


----------



## Maikeru (Dec 10, 2010)

Ozzy_Olivers_Cat said:


> But, why? I'm asking for a clear answer. Out of all these pics, what is acceptable or not...


 
I'm not an admin or anything, but I'm guessing that his overall body type looks too juvenile in a way that doesn't look like SD/"chibi".  As in the bodies are proportionate in a way that gives them too much of a childish appearance. The shoulders are too narrow in a way that makes them both look like they're quite young , the limbs are short and underdeveloped, et al.

I mean, I can see how one would mistake them for a kid. :/


----------



## Ozzy_Olivers_Cat (Dec 10, 2010)

Maikeru said:


> I'm not an admin or anything, but I'm guessing that his overall body type looks too juvenile in a way that doesn't look like SD/"chibi". As in the bodies are proportionate in a way that gives them too much of a childish appearance. The shoulders are too narrow in a way that makes them both look like they're quite young , the limbs are short and underdeveloped, et al.
> 
> I mean, I can see how one would mistake them for a kid. :/


 
Bah, never mind it's a stupid question. I didn't ask it right, nevermind. I posted those links for a reason, but It's safe to say, all my characters are children then. I give up, this is annoying, okay. The only way for me to conform is to change styles. So screw it, I'm done. Stick a fork in me, finished.


----------



## Sipher (Dec 10, 2010)

isn't it unfair to force someone to change their art style. Even if everything in it is portrayed as being older than 18+. But only due to their style its illegal? Wouldn't that impede on an artists development and possibly force them out of enjoying their hobby all together?


----------



## MasterSkadu (Dec 10, 2010)

Sipher said:


> isn't it unfair to force someone to change their art style. Even if everything in it is portrayed as being older than 18+. But only due to their style its illegal? Wouldn't that impede on an artists development and possibly force them out of enjoying their hobby all together?


 
....THANK YOU! Thats what I've been saying since this whole thing with sonic has started!

In short people and mods
What is drawn vs how its drawn.
Cub art being ban hits everybody (What is drawn)
drawing porn in sonic style being ban only hits those drawing in that style, which isn't fair to the artist who draw in that style. (How its drawn)


----------



## Pinkuh (Dec 10, 2010)

Closing the thread till neer can look at it. Seriously guys how hard is it to keep discussion off it?


----------

