# AUP Update - Aug 27 (Minor Update)



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

The AUP was updated with a minor edit. This is mostly a clarification as to the screenshots section which was not clear before. ​*
Updated*​ 
*Screenshots, 3D Renderers, Generators and Sprites*

*Screenshots* - Screenshots of web pages (e.g. Fur Affinity, Google), games (e.g. World of Warcraft, City of Heroes), desktops, programs or apps may not be submitted unless they contain original user created content. User created content, in this instance, does not include customizable characters or creations assembled using pre-created criteria (e.g. Spore) and/or programs where the user input is primarily adjusting values (e.g sliders, values, seeds).
 *3D Renderers* - Pre-packaged/downloadable models may not be used as the primary focal point of a submission unless they contain significant modifications which would distinguish itself from the original model.
 *Generators* - Fractal and landscape generated artwork may be submitted provided they do not violate the Flooding Policy.
 *Sprites* - Sprites may be uploaded so long as they contain new, original content (e.g. no game rips, re-colors).
(Updated for clarity)
*Original*​ 
* Screenshots, Generated Art, Renderers and Sprites*
 Screenshots of web pages, including Fur Affinity, as well as screenshots of desktops, programs, etc. may not be submitted. 
Images which are pre-generated or contain computer generated content (e.g. game screenshots, etc.) May not be submitted. This includes customizable characters (e.g. Warcraft, Spore) or creations assembled using pre-created criteria and/or programs where the user input is primarily adjusting values (e.g sliders, values, seeds) and the computer then generates content. 


 *Renderers* - Pre-packaged/downloadable models are not permitted as the primary focal point of a submission unless they contain significant modifications which would distinguish itself from the original model.
 *Generators* - Fractal and landscape generated artwork may be submitted, within reason, provided they do not violate the Flooding Policy.
 *Sprites:* Sprites, such as those ripped from games and/or modified sprites may not be uploaded as a submission. Sprites must be all new, original content.


----------



## Mikau (Aug 27, 2009)

...there's a Flooding Policy?


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

Mikau said:


> ...there's a Flooding Policy?


Yes.


----------



## hgryphon (Aug 27, 2009)

Dang, no Worgen flood next year?


----------



## Kattywampus (Aug 27, 2009)

Prepare for a massive amount of deleted content.


----------



## Chakat Stripedfur (Aug 27, 2009)

Ah, that's a relief.  For a sec there, I thought you were doing a major overhaul, and I'd have to read several pages of legal text. =3


----------



## Infinity (Aug 27, 2009)

Hooray! Hmm quick question... What about those animated type avatars that are kind of re-colors would they fall under the sprite editing thing? (Well... some are sprites and some aren't, meh confusing...)


----------



## zc456 (Aug 27, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> *Original*​
> * Screenshots, Generated Art, Renderers and Sprites*
> Screenshots of web pages, including Fur Affinity, as well as screenshots of desktops, programs, etc. may not be submitted.
> Images which are pre-generated or contain computer generated content (e.g. game screenshots, etc.) May not be submitted. This includes customizable characters (e.g. Warcraft, Spore) or creations assembled using pre-created criteria and/or programs where the user input is primarily adjusting values (e.g sliders, values, seeds) and the computer then generates content.
> ...



*sniffs the fresh air* Mmm.. the sweet smell of originality.


----------



## Kimbyfox (Aug 27, 2009)

Kattywampus said:


> Prepare for a massive amount of deleted content.



i don't think people will even delete their stuff sadly... in fact they MAY just keep uploading D:


----------



## chrislynx (Aug 27, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> The AUP was updated with a minor edit. This is mostly a clarification as to the screenshots section which was not clear before. ​*
> Updated*​
> *Screenshots, 3D Renderers, Generators and Sprites*
> 
> *Screenshots* - Screenshots of web pages (e.g. Fur Affinity, Google), games (e.g. World of Warcraft, City of Heroes), desktops, programs or apps may not be submitted unless they contain user created content. This includes customizable characters or creations assembled using pre-created criteria (e.g. Spore) and/or programs where the user input is primarily adjusting values (e.g sliders, values, seeds).



Just to be clear: Does the word "This" refer to the word "Screenshots" or the phrase "user created content"?  

In other words, is it saying that "customizable characters or creations assembled using pre-created criteria (e.g. Spore) and/or programs where the user input is primarily adjusting values (e.g sliders, values, seeds)" qualify as "user created content" that would make a screenshot acceptable?

I'm not trying to be super-picky, but that pronoun confused me in this context.


----------



## dmfalk (Aug 27, 2009)

I wonder if anyone noticed that the UPDATED policy actually allows more freedom than the ORIGINAL version? 

d.m.f.


----------



## krisCrash (Aug 27, 2009)

Infinity said:


> Hooray! Hmm quick question... What about those animated type avatars that are kind of re-colors would they fall under the sprite editing thing? (Well... some are sprites and some aren't, meh confusing...)


If you submit them to the gallery they probably would, but as an avatar they're fine.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 27, 2009)

tbh i give it a week, two weeks tops before this changes because of all the violations that will be pouring in.

yeah, i'm cynical... reason? the AUP wasn't uniformly enforced before, why should we expect it to be enforced now?


----------



## Gavrill (Aug 27, 2009)

Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

Infinity said:


> Hooray! Hmm quick question... What about those animated type avatars that are kind of re-colors would they fall under the sprite editing thing? (Well... some are sprites and some aren't, meh confusing...)


Avatars we're not concerned about (if used *AS* an avatar). If you're posting it as a submission... that's another story.



chrislynx said:


> Just to be clear: Does the word "This" refer to the word "Screenshots" or the phrase "user created content"?


It refers to screenshots. User created content is fine, but for all intents and purposes, creating a character in Spore or Champions Online doesn't qualify as original/user created (considering they're made using a character generator). If we allowed them, even as scraps, they'd contribute to overall system resources, of which we only have so many.



Redregon said:


> tbh i give it a week, two weeks tops before this changes because of all the violations that will be pouring in.
> 
> yeah, i'm cynical... reason? the AUP wasn't uniformly enforced before, why should we expect it to be enforced now?


We are working towards refining the AUP and site policies furthers to work towards uniformity. There will be some more changes to the AUP in September.


----------



## Russano_Greenstripe (Aug 27, 2009)

So if I'm reading this correctly, you can't submit a screenshot of simply the terrain of Lordaeron or Icecrown, or other digital worlds. But if your character (which was originally created with player selected skins and decorations) is in the screenshot, then everything is fine, as long as you don't too it to much.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 27, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> We are working towards refining the AUP and site policies furthers to work towards uniformity. There will be some more changes to the AUP in September.



understood... guess i'll just keep my eyes on a bunch of users i know that ignore the AUP and ToS consistently.

though, what is the currently-in-place method for flagging submissions that are against the AUP? is it still "note the mods and hope they don't choose to ignore their job?"

reason i ask is that there have been users i've brought to the attention of the mod staff and they've done what they could to conveniently ignore the submissions in question. (by the by, is there a staff restructuring plan in mind?)


----------



## Vitae (Aug 27, 2009)

So
What if I took a screenshot of my Spore creation, and then drew some pretty flowers around it, that would count because it has user generated content that does not include prepackaged parts.

In fact, I'll go do this now.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

Vitae said:


> So
> What if I took a screenshot of my Spore creation, and then drew some pretty flowers around it, that would count because it has user generated content that does not include prepackaged parts.
> 
> In fact, I'll go do this now.


Awkward sentence noted. I updated the clause to be more concise as to what it covers. =)


----------



## Firebreath (Aug 27, 2009)

> 3D Renderers - Pre-packaged/downloadable models may not be used as the primary focal point of a submission unless they contain significant modifications which would distinguish itself from the original model.



Please indicate to what extent "significant modification" means. Are we talking about just a texture change (Like so many do with Poser3D and Littledragon's Krystal model) or would it require actual modelling changes to the mesh in an of itself?
Also, would the addition of items (guns, swords, clothing, etc...) fall under "significant modification" or not, in the instance where a user would have modelled those items (which could be argued to be part of the "main focus" of the image, sharing said forcus with the character)?


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 27, 2009)

Kattywampus said:


> Prepare for a massive amount of deleted content.



I can't wait for that.



Firebreath said:


> Please indicate to what extent "significant modification" means. Are we talking about just a texture change (Like so many do with Poser3D and Littledragon's Krystal model) or would it require actual modelling changes to the mesh in an of itself?



I myself am tired of seeing that lame model being posted up in porno situations time after time after time...she is not the poster's material and frankly, yes..she's been used to death. Even the cheap recolors are not enough.



Vitae said:


> So
> What if I took a screenshot of my Spore creation, and then drew some pretty flowers around it, that would count because it has user generated content that does not include prepackaged parts.



Note the word "*Significant*". I don't think a cheap 2 minute MSPaint scribble would count.


----------



## chrislynx (Aug 27, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> It refers to screenshots. User created content is fine, but for all intents and purposes, creating a character in Spore or Champions Online doesn't qualify as original/user created (considering they're made using a character generator). If we allowed them, even as scraps, they'd contribute to overall system resources, of which we only have so many.



Sounds good, thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Firebreath (Aug 27, 2009)

Glaice said:


> I myself am tired of seeing that lame model being posted up in porno situations time after time after time...she is not the poster's material and frankly, yes..she's been used to death. Even the cheap recolors are not enough.



Well, being a 3D modeller/animator and somewhat of an amateur photographer at the same time, I honestly feel a lot of my work being cheapened by this issue. Where it takes me a few dozen hours to complete a model from start to finish (modelling, UV Mapping, texturing, rigging, effects, animation and then renders), I see those people churn out piece after piece of "art" without ever giving credits where it's due. To me, it's always been nothing short of what tracing is in the drawing world, and sickens me. :X
Pretty much why I'm asking a more specific definition of "significant modification" means here... and hope that the AUP will be more strictly enforced, too. :X


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 27, 2009)

So, when will SL crap be banned?


----------



## Tzolkin (Aug 27, 2009)

-_- .... Maybe you ought to redo the AUP telling us what we -can- post. That'd be more helpful, and a lot shorter.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 27, 2009)

Tzolkin said:


> -_- .... Maybe you ought to redo the AUP telling us what we -can- post. That'd be more helpful, and a lot shorter.


Here. Go buy some tissues.


----------



## RCRuskin (Aug 27, 2009)

It is interesting to note the effect this will have on contests to see who hits a specific milestone.. (1,000 page views, for instance.)

Where can such a screen shot be posted?


----------



## kjorteo (Aug 27, 2009)

http://imageshack.us


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 27, 2009)

kjorteo said:


> http://imageshack.us



Or http://www.photobucket.com/, in the unlikely event that no smut is involved.


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 27, 2009)

People need to STOP posting stupid screenshot snippets or full screens of who got a certain milestone in pageviews (1000, 2500, 5000, 10000, 25000, etc).


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

RCRuskin said:


> It is interesting to note the effect this will have on contests to see who hits a specific milestone.. (1,000 page views, for instance.)
> 
> Where can such a screen shot be posted?


Those have never been permitted, and are removed when discovered.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 27, 2009)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> So, when will SL crap be banned?


it probably wont be due to furs on there learning to fully modify their avatar from the base or making a completly new one themselves.

The rule is mostly applied to stupid idiots who have prim cawks, showing off their avs having VR sex or simply hanging out.


----------



## BiggKatt (Aug 27, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> it probably wont be due to furs on there learning to fully modify their avatar from the base or making a completly new one themselves.
> 
> The rule is mostly applied to stupid idiots who have prim cawks, showing off their avs having VR sex or simply hanging out.




Now that I can agree with. Granted, I've never posted anything from SL here myself, but, should I desire to, at some point, for some reason, it should be noted that it is because I've modded the flaming green bejeziz out of my avatar and all of its parts, and might wish to show what can be accomplished, perhaps to give others some ideas as well, and I like to create run-on sentences.

I can agree also that, dear god, I don't want to log in and see "stock avatar A. boning stock avatar B."  Much less do I want to see 15 shots of it.  If I wanted that, I could just log into SL and wander around for 4 minutes.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 27, 2009)

Glaice said:


> People need to STOP posting stupid screenshot snippets or full screens of who got a certain milestone in pageviews (1000, 2500, 5000, 10000, 25000, etc).



Yeah, but that won't be happening until people STOP doing that kiriban shit in the first place.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 27, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> it probably wont be due to furs on there learning to fully modify their avatar from the base or making a completly new one themselves.
> 
> The rule is mostly applied to stupid idiots who have prim cawks, showing off their avs having VR sex or simply hanging out.



i think in regards to this one there should be one rule re: modifications of existing avatars.

if you can see any of the base model used and it's not yours, then ban the shit out of it. i'm tired of seeing moderators waffling on how much is enough for modifying another user's AV and then deciding not to enforce the AUP because they're afraid to be the big-bad mod who made the weetwle fuwwy take down his pictures.

afaik, this site has always been first and foremost about furry art... this is not the furry equivalent of MySpace, never has been.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 27, 2009)

Redregon said:


> i think in regards to this one there should be one rule re: modifications of existing avatars.
> 
> if you can see any of the base model used and it's not yours, then ban the shit out of it. i'm tired of seeing moderators waffling on how much is enough for modifying another user's AV and then deciding not to enforce the AUP because they're afraid to be the big-bad mod who made the weetwle fuwwy take down his pictures.


Yeah, especially when they don't waffle at all about what does or does not constitute insulting other users. Unless choosing to expand the definition thereof to cover offering malicious tech advice counts as waffling.



> afaik, this site has always been first and foremost about furry art... this is not the furry equivalent of MySpace, never has been.


Alas, some would  argue otherwise.


----------



## Kawaburd (Aug 27, 2009)

You know, it's kinda sad that can't just be summed up as "Post only ORIGINAL works."


----------



## thorndraco (Aug 27, 2009)

I still feel that under the current AUP 90% of SL content falls under the same conditions as Spore content and therefore shouldn't be allowed unless it's made primarily (60% or more) of sculpty prims. I understand Spore being restricted as an anti-flooding measure (in the same way I would if it were SL or Poser) but there's essentially no way one could word it in a way that doesn't include SL in the same set of rules and restrictions including for anti-flooding reasons. Then the fact that pre-packaged/downloadable content is allowed after "distinguishing" modification further blurs the clarity of this part of the AUP.

There's really no clear lines on why things are and aren't allowed and it seems self contradictory. I've worked with SL, Spore, and have done regular 3D modeling, including modifying existing models... other than actual 3D modeling from scratch there isn't a whole lot of difference (other than modifying a pre-generated/downloadable 3D model so it is distinguishable from the original, which is even less original than either Spore or SL).

I'm not really upset with this at this point since most of these condition do not apply to me anymore (I have no plans to post works from any of these other than perhaps the very rare Spore creations I've heavily repainted or SL content that is primarily sculpties - though I currently play neither). I just don't see how any of this makes sense. The quantifier for "originality" seems to lack consistency from policy to policy.


----------



## VincentFox (Aug 27, 2009)

Alright, I'm not exactly sure if this is covered by the AUP/TOS (Yeah, I still have yet to read through it. I'm sorry!)

But I'm curious if there is anything done about those people that fire off 50 pictures of their horse, ferret or whatever their most beloved pet is at different random angles and have nothing else to contribute. I'd be more okay with it if there were actual elements of photography involved but that is 'seldom' the case with a lot of people that post in such a way.

Anyway, I'm totally okay with the whole SL thing. I make my own avatars and post stuff about them. All 100% original content on my end here! <3.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

thorndraco said:


> I still feel that under the current AUP 90% of SL content falls under the same conditions as Spore content and therefore shouldn't be allowed unless it's made primarily (60% or more) of sculpty prims.


So do I, actually.



VincentFox said:


> But I'm curious if there is anything done about those people that fire off 50 pictures of their horse, ferret or whatever their most beloved pet is at different random angles and have nothing else to contribute. I'd be more okay with it if there were actual elements of photography involved but that is 'seldom' the case with a lot of people that post in such a way.


I am actually working on rules to try to curb this. However, I will only enforce a rule like this wherein I can protect photography. More art, less "MySpace".


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 27, 2009)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> Yeah, but that won't be happening until people STOP doing that kiriban shit in the first place.


Actually most who do the Kiriban would state in the rules "DO NOT UPLOAD THE DAMN SCREENSHOT TO FA" but always...always..some idiot does, or the person themselves


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 27, 2009)

Redregon said:


> i think in regards to this one there should be one rule re: modifications of existing avatars.
> 
> if you can see any of the base model used and it's not yours, then ban the shit out of it. i'm tired of seeing moderators waffling on how much is enough for modifying another user's AV and then deciding not to enforce the AUP because they're afraid to be the big-bad mod who made the weetwle fuwwy take down his pictures.
> 
> afaik, this site has always been first and foremost about furry art... this is not the furry equivalent of MySpace, never has been.


The one problem I would see with that is users who learn how to fucking Modify like shit turning the base part to something drastically new. My friend does that with his Avatars.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 27, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> Actually most who do the Kiriban would state in the rules "DO NOT UPLOAD THE DAMN SCREENSHOT TO FA" but always...always..some idiot does, or the person themselves


I've had people blame me for them losing Kiribans because I removed their screenshot, and they KNEW they were against the rules, but "only needed it posted for a few hours". On one hand I do feel bad for them, but...


----------



## wolfbird (Aug 27, 2009)

kjorteo said:


> http://imageshack.us




I lol'ed. Srsly.


Also, WTB "report" button. It could be really cool because it would be so incredibly satisfying to click away shitty SL/Poser uploads. It would be kinda fail though, because the internet is full of people who think "report a policy violation" means exactly the same thing as "I don't like this artist"/"I don't like this image"/"OMG BUTTAN CLICKY CLICKY LOLOLOL YIFF". 

For what it's also worth, in a similar vein... I seriously vote for like, the polar opposite of the "watch" function where a user can decide on their own accord to block themselves from seeing another's page. Ever been really horny and done a search for like, "anal sex" and instead of getting "normal" hot gay action (or whatever), you end up getting Poser-generated herm fatfur cub anal vore from that guy whose whole gallery is nothing but this sort of shit? Yeah. It would be really nice to never have to see anything that person uploaded ever again. Without having to rely on this person being competant/nice enough to ban you properly if you ask them too. 



-----------------------------------------------

FYI, I don't hang out in the forums to check any replies this may or may not get. Want to engage in discussion with me? FA note me.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 27, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> I've had people blame me for them losing Kiribans because I removed their screenshot, and they KNEW they were against the rules, but "only needed it posted for a few hours". On one hand I do feel bad for them, but...


aye it sucks for em but rules are rules, if the person states "post them elsewhere" and you decide to post it on FA, that person wont even pick you anyway cause you broke not only their rule but the AUP


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 28, 2009)

I'm a bit tired of seeing SL screenshots passing, notibly the ones who have not put a lot of effort into to their avatars, not to mention using a slightly modded av of someone elses.

Floods of Poser material should be deleted and the user noted, the same with any sort of flooding of a single character at 10 different angles, the way some "porn" shots are done.

What about that stupid Krystal model being used extensively?


----------



## Tatsuyoujo (Aug 28, 2009)

I'm a kiriban artist ,and i never really intend for those to be posted on FA ,but i still have some stuff that needs to be taken down ,apparently.

I'll get to it when the site's back up.


----------



## Nanakisan (Aug 28, 2009)

Now i don't want to bring up the ye olde evils of fractals. But is there still the possibility of a admin that will watch for original fractal art and pregenerated.


----------



## Kitoth (Aug 28, 2009)

First off I can understand taking screen shots of web pages and uploading them being an issue I mean so you want to show that you were the 1000 person to visit for a contest or whatever but as the way i see around this is sending a note to the person running the contest with a link from various image hosting sites or if they made a journal reply to that with the link. its not hard.

As far as game screen shots go that is where I'd like a little leeway as far as the kind of screen shot. i mean if you took lets say a screen shot of a stage from a fighting game where it has only 1 of two characters shown, and then draw in the new character is that acceptable? Also with game shots, what if you took one that shows something very rare done or something very odd and want to show it off, should that be allowed?

Now as far as the whole SL avatar issue goes. I believe Dragoneer said 3 pics at most hence why ppl do collage pics but Tinitri does make avs from scratch which is under the terms user created content So I do not think that should change. I mean i plan to upload 2 collages once i get things together of my avatar is a few poses and outfits, not just to show off but i've found some artist use SL avs as the only reference for some who never had a pic drawn at all.

Finally the renders thing, to me it looks the same as far as how things were stated from when it was first put in, so I'm not worried about good friend and those artists i watch being forced to delete stuff or move away from FA.

One thing i would like to see is less of random RL photo's I mean some yes do post ones that are important and all that but seriously do you need 5+ pics of your car or a pet from differen angles and distances?


----------



## Nanakisan (Aug 28, 2009)

Kitoth said:


> First off I can understand taking screen shots of web pages and uploading them being an issue I mean so you want to show that you were the 1000 person to visit for a contest or whatever but as the way i see around this is sending a note to the person running the contest with a link from various image hosting sites or if they made a journal reply to that with the link. its not hard.
> 
> As far as game screen shots go that is where I'd like a little leeway as far as the kind of screen shot. i mean if you took lets say a screen shot of a stage from a fighting game where it has only 1 of two characters shown, and then draw in the new character is that acceptable? Also with game shots, what if you took one that shows something very rare done or something very odd and want to show it off, should that be allowed?
> 
> ...




I'm not an admin but i'll clear some things up for you.

if you read the screenshots rule it does say a exception will be made if there is original art. so yes if the person took the screen shot and added their own art to it then its allowed.

SL pictures are limited to 3 photos "per" avatar and item not per users gallery. also if this user you mentioned has violated the AUP in anyway you should report each instance as a submission violation and let the admins check it out. Modifications are allowed to be shown so long as significant changes are there like reskinning the avatar are making new textures. adding accessories. if the avatar shown does not show reskinning or retexturing then its grounds for reporting. I hope this help. but Neer might be a better person to listen to.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 28, 2009)

wolfbird said:


> Ever been really horny and done a search for like, "anal sex" and instead of getting "normal" hot gay action (or whatever), you end up getting Poser-generated herm fatfur cub anal vore from that guy whose whole gallery is nothing but this sort of shit?



i think i know who you're talking about here as well :lol: 

... but you forgot badly animated.


----------



## Kitoth (Aug 28, 2009)

Nanakisan said:


> I'm not an admin but i'll clear some things up for you.
> 
> if you read the screenshots rule it does say a exception will be made if there is original art. so yes if the person took the screen shot and added their own art to it then its allowed.
> 
> SL pictures are limited to 3 photos "per" avatar and item not per users gallery. also if this user you mentioned has violated the AUP in anyway you should report each instance as a submission violation and let the admins check it out. Modifications are allowed to be shown so long as significant changes are there like reskinning the avatar are making new textures. adding accessories. if the avatar shown does not show reskinning or retexturing then its grounds for reporting. I hope this help. but Neer might be a better person to listen to.



I think you mis-understood what I mean I was countering a point on how someone said SL screen shots should be removed or something along those lines and Tinitri creates full avatars from the ground up, and you are allowed to have 3 submissions but i plan to do a collage myself since I only have one avatar i use.  Thats all I know of no one who has uploaded more than 3 that would violate the AUP. 

However its RL photo's that I'd love to see a little more guidelines added. I mean i forget who it was but when you take pics of your car or pet more than 3 times  it gets a little bothersome I mean i can see a temporary submission of your car if like it was damaged and wanted to show it off. but if you got a brand new car and the sides look the same do you really need 5+ pics?


----------



## Hendikins (Aug 28, 2009)

Kitoth said:


> However its RL photo's that I'd love to see a little more guidelines added. I mean i forget who it was but when you take pics of your car or pet more than 3 times  it gets a little bothersome I mean i can see a temporary submission of your car if like it was damaged and wanted to show it off. but if you got a brand new car and the sides look the same do you really need 5+ pics?



As a photographer myself I can do nothing but wholeheartedly agree.

Furry subject matter notwithstanding, photos should only be in the gallery if they're intended as artwork. Anything else should be quantity limited and in scraps.

If the photo is the point of the exercise, gallery.
If the subject matter is the point of the exercise, scraps.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 28, 2009)

Tatsuyoujo said:


> I'm a kiriban artist ,and i never really intend for those to be posted on FA ,but i still have some stuff that needs to be taken down ,apparently.
> 
> I'll get to it when the site's back up.


Just keep in mind we have no problem with Kiriban art (or even artists who do them). The issue is people who take a screenshot of userpages to show somebody's 10000th view or watcher, and then post them to FA. I've seen upwards of 30 people post the exact same screenshot of somebody's userpage trying to get that number (and that's really just a waste of resources).

Kiriban screenshots need to be posted to Imageshack/Photobucket. Kiriban art can be posted to FA.



Hendikins said:


> Furry subject matter notwithstanding, photos should only be in the gallery if they're intended as artwork. Anything else should be quantity limited and in scraps.


And that is one of the things on the agenda. However, crafting rules that protect photography while culling the "junk" photos is not easy. 

It's not meant to hurt the site as a whole or even ban photography (which some have claimed) but to put a realistic limit on what can be uploaded. The guy with a Nikon D80 taking fantastic pictures shouldn't be held to the same standards as the guy in TGI Fridays taking pictures of his food with a cellphone and posting the "Here's what I ate for dinner!" submissions.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 28, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> Actually most who do the Kiriban would state in the rules "DO NOT UPLOAD THE DAMN SCREENSHOT TO FA" but always...always..some idiot does, or the person themselves



Yeah, uh, maybe not. I've seen a LOT of big-name artists fail to state any such thing.

I'd post links to their pages, but the powers that be don't want me calling people out :/



wolfbird said:


> Ever been really horny and done a search for like, "anal sex" and instead of getting "normal" hot gay action (or whatever), you end up getting Poser-generated herm fatfur cub anal vore from that guy whose whole gallery is nothing but this sort of shit?



You know, that happens to me _all_ the time :V


----------



## Hendikins (Aug 28, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> And that is one of the things on the agenda. However, crafting rules that protect photography while culling the "junk" photos is not easy.



Having been involved with creation and tweaking of rules on a large (300,000+ accounts) discussion forum, I really can appreciate this. No matter what you do, people will either whinge, poke holes in it, skirt around it, or simply ignore it completely.



Dragoneer said:


> It's not meant to hurt the site as a whole or even ban photography (which some have claimed) but to put a realistic limit on what can be uploaded. The guy with a Nikon D80 taking fantastic pictures shouldn't be held to the same standards as the guy in TGI Fridays taking pictures of his food with a cellphone and posting the "Here's what I ate for dinner!" submissions.



Indeed, and that would be a perfect example of "Photography for artwork" vs "Photography for subject matter" distinction. Some of my less spectacular submissions with my Canon 40D probably blur that line a little though.

I think one of the major issues is that CCDs are now a commodity item. Every man and his dog now has a device with one, and they snap everything under the sun. Defining what is considered to be chaff can only be a good thing - and to be honest, would benefit those who do photography as art.


----------



## Rouge2 (Aug 28, 2009)

What about screenshots used for stories?


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 28, 2009)

Rouge2 said:


> What about screenshots used for stories?


If they're used as previews/thumbnails?



Dragoneer said:


> The guy with a Nikon D80 taking fantastic pictures shouldn't be held to the same standards as the guy in TGI Fridays taking pictures of his food with a cellphone and posting the "Here's what I ate for dinner!" submissions.


...on a similar note, what about cooking? Recipes, end-result pictures, etc.

Also, will con photos ever be banned, either in whole or under a similar sort of quality-control thing?


----------



## flamander (Aug 28, 2009)

soz for my sillyness but... whats a kiriban?

and yip I agree with the laws.. I hate stuff that is not art... humm but yip.. ppl need a space to post that stuff.. yip like MySpace.. to post all the SL content.. why a link to their websites and updates via Journals is not enough???


----------



## Moddex (Aug 28, 2009)

Was there by chance any revision of meme based submissions or any other subsection on the AUP?


----------



## Rouge2 (Aug 28, 2009)

If you use screenshots for the Thumbnail of a story, like my Gator Team Racing ones.


----------



## Fennec_Wolfox (Aug 28, 2009)

This is probably a stupid thing to ask, but what about screenshots of the TF2 maps I make and generally spend many months on? The map itself could be considered user-generated content, considering I spend much of my free time designing and perfecting the various aspects of the landscape and/or buildings.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 28, 2009)

Rouge2 said:


> If you use screenshots for the Thumbnail of a story, like my Gator Team Racing ones.


Probably fine. I mean, why wouldn't using screencaps for that be okay? Since there's a story, they probably aren't the focal point...



			
				Flamander said:
			
		

> soz for my sillyness but... whats a kiriban?


A contest used for further ego-stroking by artists who want to make people fight over who got the x000th pageview instead of thanking everybody.

Judging from the name, it's from Japan--just like everything else ruining the idea of an art community--but the idea is also pretty clearly Japanese in its concept. They invented pissing contests, for god's sake.



Fennec_Wolfox said:


> This is probably a stupid thing to ask, but what about screenshots of the TF2 maps I make and generally spend many months on? The map itself could be considered user-generated content, considering I spend much of my free time designing and perfecting the various aspects of the landscape and/or buildings.



Yes, that's an incredibly stupid thing to ask about, since it doesn't contain any dog boners :V


----------



## Redregon (Aug 28, 2009)

see, this is where having some more pricks on staff would help...

furry: can i have this? it's kinda not allowed.
Mod: no.
furry: well what about if i.
Mod: no
furry: but, it's just a small.
Mod: no.
furry: you're being a meanie
Mod: glad you noticed. 

though, not pricks towards the users such that they're playing favourites or bending the rules for the popular ones, i'm talking about enforcing the rules across the board and being stern in their enforcement (and not bending to the incessant whining that's going to happen... oh you know it will, in droves.)

being a moderator means that if you're doing your job right, you aren't making friends because of your position... which means that most mods currently here aren't doing their jobs right.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 28, 2009)

Fennec_Wolfox said:


> This is probably a stupid thing to ask, but what about screenshots of the TF2 maps I make and generally spend many months on? The map itself could be considered user-generated content, considering I spend much of my free time designing and perfecting the various aspects of the landscape and/or buildings.



aah, good question... afaik by reading the AUP, it'd be borderline. though, to be 100% honest, wouldn't posting pics of that map to... oh, i dunno... a TF2 website make more sense than a furry site? i mean, yeah, a lot know of the game but how many actually play it?


----------



## Fennec_Wolfox (Aug 28, 2009)

Redregon said:


> aah, good question... afaik by reading the AUP, it'd be borderline. though, to be 100% honest, wouldn't posting pics of that map to... oh, i dunno... a TF2 website make more sense than a furry site? i mean, yeah, a lot know of the game but how many actually play it?



Well, yeah, but many of my friends who watch me DO play TF2 and, though I do post on TF2 map-sites and stuff, I like to do it here to see what people think. :3

I like a broad opinion. And yes, I'd think it'd be borderline, really, but if we get all these SL shots of characters people have put hard work into, I think maps and such that are born of that same hard work should be allowed, honestly. Screenshots are one thing, especially of just a game event that happened, but a screenshot of something that someone spent time and effort on, SUCH AS A SL AVATAR, should be LIMITED...but not banned. Like, 2 or 3 shots of the same avatar would be nice, not the flood of 100,000 pics of the same character in different situations. Same goes for maps that are user created and painstakingly tested over and over again. And as stated, I understand this is a furry site, but overall, it's also an art site. And mapmaking, in the form I've discussed, is a form of art that I made from scratch. :3


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 28, 2009)

Con photos should be limited based on the subject matter..if it's the same person/group/object(s) more than 3 times, nuke the remaining.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 28, 2009)

Fennec_Wolfox said:


> Well, yeah, but many of my friends who watch me DO play TF2 and, though I do post on TF2 map-sites and stuff, I like to do it here to see what people think. :3
> 
> I like a broad opinion. And yes, I'd think it'd be borderline, really, but if we get all these SL shots of characters people have put hard work into, I think maps and such that are born of that same hard work should be allowed, honestly. Screenshots are one thing, especially of just a game event that happened, but a screenshot of something that someone spent time and effort on, SUCH AS A SL AVATAR, should be LIMITED...but not banned. Like, 2 or 3 shots of the same avatar would be nice, not the flood of 100,000 pics of the same character in different situations. Same goes for maps that are user created and painstakingly tested over and over again. And as stated, I understand this is a furry site, but overall, it's also an art site. And mapmaking, in the form I've discussed, is a form of art that I made from scratch. :3



well, i'm of the mind that stuff like SL shouldn't be here (unless you're selling the avatars you're making but that would be the only exception were i to make the rules.) along those lines, given that maps for FPS games are basically data files and you can easily link them in a journal post and you'd have to host them elsewhere (like, those TF2 sites?) i don't see how it should be listed as a submission here. besides, no one screenshot (or even three) would give any game map any justice (unless it's the big-bad-box mod.) to be honest, you'd have to actually load up the game and play it to truly appreciate it... hence, why if i had my say in the matter, things like that wouldn't be permitted as a separate submission. there's little point in posting screengrabs of it unless you went ahead and completely redid all the textures and brushes (which would require users to DL and install additional materials.)


----------



## Crissa (Aug 28, 2009)

Thank you for giving us comparison text!  If only all companies did that.



Nanakisan said:


> SL pictures are limited to 3 photos "per" avatar and item not per users gallery.


Of course, putting it this way means if someone else takes a picture of your sculpture or art means you can have less pictures of it yourself!

If recoloring sprites isn't allowed, then texture changes on 3d models wouldn't be allowed, yes?  It's very difficult to change a model of, say a horse, that is still a horse and not look similar to the original - while changing a human would be simpler.  Simply because humans remember smaller balance details on a human figure more than on other figures.

So no one ever notices that I've resculpted all the portions of my 3-d horse anthro model such that it shares only structural similarities and the artist's hand on the eyes; but they always notice that I've switched out the textures and colors.

-Crissa


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 28, 2009)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> Yeah, uh, maybe not. I've seen a LOT of big-name artists fail to state any such thing.


To them they know of the AUP and expect the person to also know the AUP. Just seems the middle and low name artist state such rules then


----------



## Firebreath (Aug 29, 2009)

Fennec_Wolfox said:


> This is probably a stupid thing to ask, but what about screenshots of the TF2 maps I make and generally spend many months on? The map itself could be considered user-generated content, considering I spend much of my free time designing and perfecting the various aspects of the landscape and/or buildings.



The question I would have for you then would be the following:
Are your static meshes in your maps (I never used Hammer, only UnrealEd, so... don't hate me for using the wrong terms for that software. :X) in your map coming from the existing package, or are you creating your own objects and then importing them to use in your maps?

If you only use objects that are already existing in the game, then one could be able to debate the point about "existing assets" being the main focus of the image (Ã  la Poser3D). However, if most of the objects in the map are created by yourself, then I don't think it would be a problem, as most of the content is generated by you and not Valve (or someone else who released another map).


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 29, 2009)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> ...on a similar note, what about cooking? Recipes, end-result pictures, etc.



Cooking recipe provided you have the recipe below it is acceptable with one photo I believe. He's referring to someone just doing an outing. At least with the cooking recipe with the end result as one picture or a collage of recipe works too, is more acceptable. That is actually user created content AND provided it's a FYBY recipe. We prefer the former, because we don't want people ganking someone's recipe off cooks.com or something trying to claim the latter. And yes, there is recipe theft.


----------



## Silverwolfoneofmany (Aug 29, 2009)

Redregon said:
			
		

> afaik, this site has always been first and foremost about furry art... this is not the furry equivalent of MySpace, never has been.





			
				Rigor Sardonicus said:
			
		

> Alas, some would  argue otherwise.



Who would argue that? MySpace is a social networking site. FurAffinity is an art site. They could not be any more different.


----------



## Silverwolfoneofmany (Aug 29, 2009)

Glaice said:


> What about that stupid Krystal model being used extensively?



The model itself isn't what's stupid. It's the fact that so many people are copying it and adding minor modifications to it. It seems unfair to call the original artist's work 'stupid'.


----------



## OCAdam (Aug 29, 2009)

In regards to the screenshots type thing... I have a level for Unreal Tournament 2004 in which I have specifically only used stock static meshes and the rest. However, the entire level's layout and base idea was designed and put together by myself.

So while the level doesn't contain any custom content (done so that it's a level playable by anyone with only the Epic updates), should a screenshot of something like this be allowed?


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 29, 2009)

Silverwolfoneofmany said:


> Who would argue that? MySpace is a social networking site. FurAffinity is an art site. They could not be any more different.



Yeah, uh, I had some fucking links there, but calling people out is against forum rules for whatever reason.

If you wanna know who I'm talking about, ask me in a PM.



Arshes Nei said:


> Cooking recipe provided you have the recipe below it is acceptable with one photo I believe.



That's all I needed to hear. Thanks!


----------



## Fennec_Wolfox (Aug 29, 2009)

Firebreath said:


> The question I would have for you then would be the following:
> Are your static meshes in your maps (I never used Hammer, only UnrealEd, so... don't hate me for using the wrong terms for that software. :X) in your map coming from the existing package, or are you creating your own objects and then importing them to use in your maps?
> 
> If you only use objects that are already existing in the game, then one could be able to debate the point about "existing assets" being the main focus of the image (Ã  la Poser3D). However, if most of the objects in the map are created by yourself, then I don't think it would be a problem, as most of the content is generated by you and not Valve (or someone else who released another map).



If you mean the objects IN the map (like, the scattered-around random objects like boxes and shit) yes they ARE the existing game props, but the main focus, I believe is the architecture and design OF the map. While it's true that the props add a sense of style to the map, it's also true that without the architecture, those props are just...there. :\


----------



## OCAdam (Aug 29, 2009)

(just realized someone else was thinking of the same thing already)

Following with what FW is saying, I'm pretty sure that a screenshot is for focusing on the level layout. Just for some example, this is a screenshot of my level in question (uses only Epic created content, but was set out by myself):

http://www.bwcommunity.com/download/file.php?id=478

(warning, 1920x1200 image)


----------



## Magnus (Aug 30, 2009)

what about pictures of yourself? i keep seeing more and more of them and it's disgusting, half naked old guy showing off, thousand different angles and shit. Girls showing off their hair and whatnot. 

please say it's not allowed, i don't even mind sending everyone i see a link to this topic, i'd even browse whole FA to look for stuff that isn't allowed.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 30, 2009)

OCAdam said:


> (just realized someone else was thinking of the same thing already)
> 
> Following with what FW is saying, I'm pretty sure that a screenshot is for focusing on the level layout. Just for some example, this is a screenshot of my level in question (uses only Epic created content, but was set out by myself):
> 
> ...



reiterating what i've said before, if i were to be the one making the final say i'd say no. reason? there are other sites that are better suited to posting levels like that, the screenshots do not contain any original work and also it would be a huge drain on the bandwidth to host those here. 

besides, is that all there is to your level? if so, that doesn't seem like a very enticing layout since you're only showing one view and to truly appreciate a level mod, you kinda have to play it rather than just look at it. 

but hey, if i were to be more involved in the rules, there'd be a lot that'd change (#1 being the mods... treat it like any business; if you don't want to do your job, just find someone else that will... and of course, abuse of moderator _priviliges_ would result in said mod being fired. (please note that i emphasized the word _Priviliges_))


----------



## Redregon (Aug 30, 2009)

you know what? i think this could be an idea to help reduce people spamming the site with AUP violations as submissions...

allow img tags in journal posts? i mean, think about it... if there's something you want to post and it's not allowed based on the AUP, what about if you made a journal that had images in it? they'd have to be hosted on another site such as Imageshack or Photobucket, but it would be a way that users on this site could disseminate stuff visually without having them to post links that may or may not be clicked?

this could be a way to work around the AUP limitations, help users share images of themselves or their avatars or game mods etc... and not break the ToS by violating the AUP!

though, i can see it being only in journals as in shouts and comments that could lead to image macros clogging up people's pages. 

see, i'm not just a cynic, i'm actually bringing something to the table


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 30, 2009)

Silverwolfoneofmany said:


> The model itself isn't what's stupid. It's the fact that so many people are copying it and adding minor modifications to it. It seems unfair to call the original artist's work 'stupid'.


No we call it stupid cause the Original Artist started this whole shit with the flooding of Recolored Krystals


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 30, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> No we call it stupid cause the Original Artist started this whole shit with the flooding of Recolored Krystals



..and Sonic/Tails/Amy/Shadow knockoff characters used by others.


----------



## Tikki (Aug 30, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> The rule is mostly applied to stupid idiots who have prim cawks, showing off their avs having VR sex or simply hanging out.



Something of which there is a lot, I'd like to see it stop. My avatar, it's modified but it's also still a Jogauni, as such I'd never upload it. My airship, it's 100% built by me, I may upload it some time.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 30, 2009)

Tikki said:


> Something of which there is a lot, I'd like to see it stop. My avatar, it's modified but it's also still a Jogauni, as such I'd never upload it. My airship, it's 100% built by me, I may upload it some time.



heh.. my avatar is original enough to upload.. but the quality isn't there... (and it's a frickin GREAT looking avatar compared to a lot of others... but meh)


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 30, 2009)

Another thing, is uploading these sorts of photos permitted? Elkit has more than 10 of them in his scraps and gallery..

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2724529/


----------



## XerxesQados (Aug 30, 2009)

Seriously, 'Neer, we still can't have G or PG-rated avatars? Every time you update the AUP, it still says they have to be PG-13. I'm convinced you're just trying to screw with me.


----------



## Mikau (Aug 30, 2009)

So much for "freedom of self-expression", huh?


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 30, 2009)

Mikau said:


> So much for "freedom of self-expression", huh?


theres a difference between Self Expression and I'm using the same crap like everyone else


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 30, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Seriously, 'Neer, we still can't have G or PG-rated avatars? Every time you update the AUP, it still says they have to be PG-13. I'm convinced you're just trying to screw with me.


um I think you need to learn the ratings

G->PG->PG-13

meaning it cant be anything at R or NC-17 

PG-13 is higher than PG and G
thus you can have anything at and below PG-13 not above it

So lets recap starting from most rated to least

NC-17
R
PG-13 <-Highest we can go with our Avatar Icon
PG
G


----------



## Aurali (Aug 30, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> um I think you need to learn the ratings
> 
> G->PG->PG-13
> 
> ...



I believe that was a joke love.


----------



## brightfire (Aug 30, 2009)

Wait, what changes?

I don't remember the AUP NOT having this stuff in it.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 30, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> theres a difference between Self Expression and I'm using the same crap like everyone else



What do you expect from this guy? He uses a crappy SL avatar of a blue fox as his icon.

Nobody who actually knows dick about art plays Second Life--_god._ :V


----------



## kai74 (Aug 31, 2009)

I notice this doesn't mention Second Life, but almost all characters and screenshots posted from that MMO, are copies of other content previously created, just with a different clothing set, etc, similar to WoW's customization while playing..


Will SL screenshots be subject to the new AUP?


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 31, 2009)

kai74 said:


> I notice this doesn't mention Second Life, but almost all characters and screenshots posted from that MMO, are copies of other content previously created, just with a different clothing set, etc, similar to WoW's customization while playing..
> 
> 
> Will SL screenshots be subject to the new AUP?


The old AUP and the New AUP, BOTH had things about Second Life
Ya allowed only 3 screenshots of ya character, Must be original content in other words nothing have changed but further enforcing the original content part


----------



## Redregon (Aug 31, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> The old AUP and the New AUP, BOTH had things about Second Life
> Ya allowed only 3 screenshots of ya character, Must be original content in other words nothing have changed but further enforcing the original content part



true, SL screenshots have always been covered under the "for you by you" rule... but that's not saying much about it being enforced. i've had mods basically say "since you can't name who made the AV in the first place, we're just going to let this slide." yeah, i may not know the name, but i know that they're everywhere and i know that it's not an original avatar.

personally, i kinda hope that SL screengrabs (save for the case of the people making them) are removed from the allowable list. and i truly hope that the moderators won't be such lazy bi#ches about enforcing the rules either. lazy and idiot mods are my biggest concern... i mean, when you can be banned for talking about naughty stuff you did as a teen or for begging on the site yet if you've got a shitty SL screengrab of you F##king your mate you're safe, there's something seriously wrong here.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 31, 2009)

Redregon said:


> . . . bitches . . . fucking . . .


Fixed.

And yeah, lazy mods ruin everything. Though overzealous mods are much worse. (ilu Xaerun<3)


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 31, 2009)

Redregon said:


> true, SL screenshots have always been covered under the "for you by you" rule... but that's not saying much about it being enforced. i've had mods basically say "since you can't name who made the AV in the first place, we're just going to let this slide." yeah, i may not know the name, but i know that they're everywhere and i know that it's not an original avatar.
> 
> personally, i kinda hope that SL screengrabs (save for the case of the people making them) are removed from the allowable list. and i truly hope that the moderators won't be such lazy bi#ches about enforcing the rules either. lazy and idiot mods are my biggest concern... i mean, when you can be banned for talking about naughty stuff you did as a teen or for begging on the site yet if you've got a shitty SL screengrab of you F##king your mate you're safe, there's something seriously wrong here.


no theres nothing seriously wrong here. While the chance of having a custom made avatar by that company is very fucking low, a person using parts from several companies isnt. I dont mind someone showing off the reskinning work of a buyable avatar, or what they have added and modify about it. I'm more just pissed about furs posting screen grabs of them having prim cawks out, simply hanging out or screwing their fuck buddy at different angles. Those who do modification work actually POST screen grabs a lot less than those other folks who is showing off stock avatars with prim cawks out at different angles.


----------



## Redregon (Aug 31, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> no theres nothing seriously wrong here. While the chance of having a custom made avatar by that company is very fucking low, a person using parts from several companies isnt. I dont mind someone showing off the reskinning work of a buyable avatar, or what they have added and modify about it. I'm more just pissed about furs posting screen grabs of them having prim cawks out, simply hanging out or screwing their fuck buddy at different angles. Those who do modification work actually POST screen grabs a lot less than those other folks who is showing off stock avatars with prim cawks out at different angles.



granted, and i do see where you're coming from, but in the end there isn't any original work being done... (by original, i mean "making it from scratch.")

and there's also the issue where mods of avatars rarely (if ever) give proper credit where it's due... people will be all "this is the mod I made." when all they did was rearrange stuff that they bought in game. i don't know about other users, but if i found someone took one of my 3d models, hacked the head off and put it on a different body to call it their own, i'd be pretty pissed... i mean, that'd be MY hard work that's being bastardized. yeah, on some level i'd be impressed someone liked it enough to do that, but in the end they're basically being lazy co%k-gobblins.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 31, 2009)

Redregon said:


> granted, and i do see where you're coming from, but in the end there isn't any original work being done... (by original, i mean "making it from scratch.")
> 
> and there's also the issue where mods of avatars rarely (if ever) give proper credit where it's due... people will be all "this is the mod I made." when all they did was rearrange stuff that they bought in game. i don't know about other users, but if i found someone took one of my 3d models, hacked the head off and put it on a different body to call it their own, i'd be pretty pissed... i mean, that'd be MY hard work that's being bastardized. yeah, on some level i'd be impressed someone liked it enough to do that, but in the end they're basically being lazy co%k-gobblins.


Maybe if FA enforce or add to state who the stock avatar came from, like how furs when they pay for a commission would state who the artist who actually did the work.

In other words instead of saying "This is what I made" instead state "Using so and so company avatar I modified it into this"


----------



## XerxesQados (Aug 31, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> um I think you need to learn the ratings
> 
> G->PG->PG-13
> 
> ...



No, it clearly states "Avatars must be rated PG-13." Read it. Thus, avatars are technically not allowed to be rated G, PG, R, or NC-17.

And yes, Eli, it was kind of a joke, but that doesn't mean it's not true.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 31, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> No, it clearly states "Avatars must be rated PG-13." Read it. Thus, avatars are technically not allowed to be rated G, PG, R, or NC-17.


then several furs would be in trouble
It can be below PG-13 just not above it, I did read it, the fact is thats common sense right there


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Aug 31, 2009)

Crysix Corps said:


> XerxesQados said:
> 
> 
> > No, it clearly states "Avatars must be rated PG-13." Read it. Thus, avatars are technically not allowed to be rated G, PG, R, or NC-17.
> ...



How about both of you shut up? Crysix, he beat you. Xerxes, you're not funny or clever.

Back on topic, people.


----------



## XerxesQados (Sep 2, 2009)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> How about both of you shut up? Crysix, he beat you. Xerxes, you're not funny or clever.
> 
> Back on topic, people.



Okay, but if the next AUP revision doesn't say, "within PG-13," rest assured I will be even less funny or clever in accusing everyone of non-compliance. =D


----------



## Redregon (Sep 2, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Okay, but if the next AUP revision doesn't say, "within PG-13," rest assured I will be even less funny or clever in accusing everyone of non-compliance. =D



that's a very good way to get on someone's block list yanno.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Sep 2, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Okay, but if the next AUP revision doesn't say, "within PG-13," rest assured I will be even less funny or clever in accusing everyone of non-compliance. =D


I wish being unbearably unfunny was a bannable offense =_=;


----------



## Magnus (Sep 10, 2009)

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/djanthro/

foto's of stuff? is it allowed? is playing with lego's and building cheap creations art?


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Sep 10, 2009)

Magnus said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/user/djanthro/
> 
> foto's of stuff? is it allowed? is playing with lego's and building cheap creations art?


Probably not. Why not go open a Trouble Ticket or two and find out?


----------



## Magnus (Sep 10, 2009)

it would be easier if we had clear rules, so i can leave a link and hope the person removes it. 
if not, i can report it. 

CLEAR RULES 


WE NEED THEM!


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Sep 10, 2009)

Magnus said:


> it would be easier if we had clear rules, so i can leave a link and hope the person removes it.
> if not, i can report it.
> 
> CLEAR RULES
> ...


The rules are clear enough for most people. I think you just need more intelligence.

And actually, all that Bionicle stuff belongs in scraps.



			
				Read The Fuckin' AUP said:
			
		

> *Photography*
> Fur Affinity allows Users to post photography provided the following criteria are met:
> 
> *Basic Quality/Content* - Photographs of poor quality (grainy, blurred, out of focus or washed out) or images meant to showcase personal collections (e.g. commercial items, toys, games, movies, stuff animals, etc.) must be uploaded to Scraps. Photographs of art, or items which are in full compliance with the By You/For You, are acceptable provided they meet are of a minimum quality.


(Emphasis added.)
It isn't forbidden, though.


----------



## Magnus (Sep 10, 2009)

you can kiss your ass goodbye on the intelligence part, not gonna happen


and if the rules where clear then there wouldn't be so much crap on FA.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Sep 10, 2009)

Magnus said:


> you can kiss your ass goodbye on the intelligence part, not gonna happen


Then kill yourself. If you've stopped learning, you're as good as dead anyway.



> and if the rules where clear then there wouldn't be so much crap on FA.


I think we've just discovered a new fallacy.

Child, even if the rules were so clear as to be completely free of any ambiguity (which the part I just quoted _was_), there'd still be people like you and the junkmongers who are too dumb to actually read them.


----------



## Magnus (Sep 10, 2009)

wow you sure are in a foul mood xD did someone die or somthing? lol you shouldn't take things so seriously, it'll make you look old and such D:


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Sep 10, 2009)

Magnus said:


> wow you sure are in a foul mood xD did someone die or somthing?


A little part of me died upon realizing what a colossal moron I was trying to help, so yes.


----------



## Magnus (Sep 10, 2009)

xD  poor you, awwww


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Sep 10, 2009)

Somebody close this thread, please. It no longer serves a purpose beyond letting idiots who can't be arsed to RTFAUP in the first place increase their postcount.


----------



## Devious Bane (Sep 10, 2009)

Very Minor, looks like your just took the top paragraph and mixed it with the points.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Sep 10, 2009)

What was it I said earlier about the ability about arguing over everything and learning nothing?

Yeah that applies here too.


----------

