+45
Completed

Default Blacklist for 'squicky' content

Jessica Belle 4 years ago updated by Digby (Community Manager) 3 years ago 44 1 duplicate

As users have poured into FurryNetwork, we're seeing much more specific criticisms than in the past, and this is fantastic.


One such criticism has been that FurryNetwork permits the use of NSFW cub works. It's easy to distance oneself from the fetish, e.g. "That's not my thing!" but it's harder to create and enforce a policy banning one particular type of content. FurAffinity, for instance, only banned cub once a sponsor backed out.


The problem with this approach is that the Furry community is supposed to be an inclusive one, and even saying that is a difficult thing when we're dealing with something like cub. It's incredibly uncomfortable to discuss it because of how closely it can be tied to genuine kiddy porn, despite the argument that many people have that the two are very different. The argument can be duplicated onto every squicky tag, even more "vanilla" ones like Hypnosis/Mind-Control, when you put that against the notions of Rape and Consent.


You probably see where I'm going with this: This criticism doesn't end at Cub, and the only way to form a solid policy on the matter is to decide whether or not FurryNetwork will take a stance for, or against, each squicky fetish, on a case-by-case basis. It's a difficult position to be in, and I don't envy the developers for it.


Instead, I wanted to propose a middle-ground solution that, even if it doesn't remain forever, is both a useful feature AND allows users to sidestep the content that they don't want to see, at all. I propose that Furry Network should have a default blacklist for new users to hide all content deemed "squicky". The tag-based blacklist system has already been implemented, and it would be easy to give new users a list of tags that are hidden by default. We can assume for safety that each new user is "vanilla" and allow them to ELECT to see this questionable content. It spares the majority of users from seeing that content.

Answer

+2
Answer
Started

I'm kind of surprised we didn't have a thread for this already - we've planned to have this for a long time, and actually have the infrastructure for it completed, we just need to push it live.


This will be being implemented on the site shortly!


Varka

Duplicates 1

+2

Now this is using your head. Much like how just about every other site starts you in General mode and you have to enable Mature and Adult modes.
My only problem are the crusaders that will not block certain tags just to downvote/report/harass those specific images. This, of course, should be a bannable offence if a cub porn artwork is reported and does have the cub/adult/18+ tags.

+2

Update: FurryNetwork has told me on Twitter that this very feature is already planned and nearing implementation.

+2

I would say hopefully this will satisfy the angry mob crying for them to ban it entirely, but i know it won't. I just hope FN doesn't capitulate and ban it anyway just to appease these people... Censorship is a fucking terrible thing, and i can't believe an artist of all people is asking for it, just because it isn't her thing. You'd think someone who draws fetish art would understand all too well how dangerous this is.

+3

I support the idea of default blacklisting, if people want to see certain content they have to remove it from their blacklist,

+1

I would lie to add something to my previous post in stating that cub porn should have a separate tag from clean cub, that way furs that like the clean stuff but aren't too found of the porn are happy

I think what could be done, seeing that there are three different ratings for art that can be posted (General, Mature, and Explicit), you can have separate tags blacklisted for each rating.

+3

I agree with all of this. Some folks will be angry that they're not outright banning stuff from being allowed, but this is the best way to make this an inclusive site while not forcing content that people might not want to see down their throats.

+2

While "cub" might have some legal basis for being banned, we don't want to set the precedent of expecting FurryNetwork to have to take a stance on every fetish. That's where all of the shouts of "censorship" are coming in.


A blacklist sidesteps censorship for a lot of fetishes by allowing the majority rule to determine what the site automatically considers "opt-in" versus "opt-out", since any given tag can only be one of those two things. It turns the whole debate into a simple yes/no question which is appropriately answered by the majority userbase.

-10

I disagree

YOU ARE CENSORING THE INTERNET AGAIN
STOP IT XD

I completely agree! I even made a topic concerning it pretty recently, but I deleted it as you had the same idea as me.


Here's a link to my post: http://pastebin.com/PgXYdEYq

No idea who downvoted you, but I upvoted back.

-17

It's just easier to ban all cub. We'd still have the issue of artists not wanting to use the site because it would **STILL** allow pedocub "art". If you want to view cub, go to pedobunny. I don't want that evil shit gaining a foothold here.



Honestly, Weasyl has the policy of NO CUB ART PERIOD and it hasn't hurt Weasyl in the slightest.

+4

Easier doesn't always mean right.

+8

hard to hurt a site no one goes to.

+2

It's easier to just stop using the site maybe if you don't like the tagging and blacklisting system, my friend :)

-1

I think that this is a really huge topic and I see a lot of awesome discussion here it makes sense to talk about this although I do not support cub porn or cub art this is a very tough topic to talk about.

+2

I wouldn't mind.


However, please warn users of it. Especially new users.


Like a heads-up during registration. And I don't mean hidden somewhere in the TOS who people tend to kinda just scroll through absentmindedly.


By that I mean with size 30 bold letters in their face "Certain explicit content has been automatically been added to your global blacklist, if you wish to see it, please edit your tags here [link to account content settings]"

+3

Yeah, you'd obviously want people to KNOW about it so they don't just absent-mindedly browse the entire site without realizing they're not seeing a ton of stuff.

+1

While I generally am against censorship, I know many people have an "I don't wanna know!" mentality about certain subjects. Letting them censor what will unsettle them is just a good idea.

+4

No it's not. Where does the "censor this because it personally bothers me!" end?


First it's cub art.

Next it's rape.

Then gore.

Then vore?


It's a slippery slope and it is NOT a path this fandom needs to tread. Letting people hide things that bother them is fine. Even having certain things that are known to be commonly disliked hidden automatically, and optionally viewed is fine too. Not allowing people to post that art at all is unacceptable though, and sets a poor precident for the future.

Khzhak is talking about the use of a personal blacklist, allowing a user to censor from themselves content they don't want to see.

+1

I thought this was already a feature by virtue of selecting General, Mature, or Explicit. If you wish to see the most agreeable art, you select General.


In any case, if this gets implemented (default blacklisting), I would like for this default blocking of particular fetishes deemed 'unworthy' to be notified to the user, or plain obvious in the settings panel. I hate it when websites take those kinds of decisions for me and I don't know about them.

-9

Moot point. FN has decided to ban all furry pedophilia! YES!!

+1

This is not a moot point, because this post is not about the cub stuff

+1

This is a valid idea. In fact, since FN has already said that the blacklist will be a feature soon, I recommend you make your own Suggestion ticket for this feature! I'd appreciate something like this too.

-5

I have heard they have the F.B.I. looking at these websites now to catch child predators I was told this by my next door neighbor Lisa she has been letting me know all about odd news and strange things happening on the web so she says" she is a Photographer and is in the Hollywood filming industry. I however am very glad that they came to a decision about this and am very impressed with this site. And all of the beautiful Art and kind artists that are on here.

+2
Answer
Started

I'm kind of surprised we didn't have a thread for this already - we've planned to have this for a long time, and actually have the infrastructure for it completed, we just need to push it live.


This will be being implemented on the site shortly!


Varka

-1

what happened why do I have a minus in my response what did I do wrong :( I was just saying how nice people were and now I have minuses. I can't get anyone to follow me I can't respond right why do I even try??? :(

Because people are unhappy about the censorship with art - all other comments saying they're happy with the ban are also downvoted, not just yours.


Yeah I don't care any more I lost the use of my legs in an auto accident about 2 years ago and I was just stupid to even voice anything. I am not a person any more. But I do still have my beautiful Bunny at least I am loved by her. And I am awesome with that.

Completed

The blacklist has been rolled out and appears to be working as intended! If there are other tags that the majority of the community want added, please submit a ticket for that tag. Thanks!

-2

Good! That means cub stuff can come back!

This is complicated. Now that we are dealing with payments with commissions, we are at a point where we can't have cub art return. Business relationships are difficult, and changing the content to include cub art could damage or destroy those relationships.


I know this has been a sore topic for many people, and I wish we could have something that would make all parties satisfied. Unfortunately, there's not an option that would work for everyone.


I'm all for artistic freedom, and I want people who create art within the bounds of the law to have a place to share and express that. It hurts a little bit to have to say no, but for the future of the site, that's what we need to do.

-2

Then you can't call this task "completed" since the original author talked about cub art explicitly. This is rejected.


It's also not that complicated as commissions and payments and such. None of that has anything to do with it. It's simply NIMBY attitudes, fear, intolerance, and site reputation because you guys are for-profit rather than for-fandom.

-2

Inkbunny doesn't look like they have problems with payments

-2

Inkbunny doesn't have the scope of payment systems that Dragonfruit is planning for FurryNetwork. Their interface was coded ten years ago, and while it's very clean, it doesn't cover the vast array of services this site will, so it will lead to an economic disadvantage for cub artists in the long-term.

You know, I understand people's frustration. I wish the original decision several months ago could have been made more amicably, but we're doing our best to make sure we look into every option and weight the different outcomes at this point.

The decision made was sound, given the factors that FurryNetwork has to consider in order to achieve what they hope to. It's just frustrating to see some people won't let it go.


I mean, you don't see me making my kinks' legality the problem of others. Why should I expect someone to take it upon themselves to assume liability for me?

Banning erotic cub art was never a sound decision because it was not based on facts. The deluge of votes against cub art were proven to be fraudulent, and even though Varka acknowledged this on the very day it happened he proceeded to make a hasty administrative decision. Therefore, a minority of loud bigots created a false representation of widespread outrage, and Varka folded nonetheless. This has been documented on Wikifur for several months now.


Secondly: Legal liability has never been the issue. To suggest so propagates a falsehood. Not a single legal claim has been made against an anthropomorphic art piece since 1988. And the case was against a comic book shop owner for selling "obscene" material. There has never been a case brought against a furry website owner for hosting obscene material. And if that's the concern, well... better get rid of everything.

At this point, we're going to move on from the discussion and consider the issue finished - we rolled out a blacklist as requested in the initial post. For now, if you do have any other questions about policies, feel free to send an email to policy@furrynetwork.com; a member of staff will look into that and send you a reply.

-2

By the way, if you guys really wanted to be crafty, you would go the way that Disney and other major brands do when they're worried about hurting their reputations. You make another brand and hold it with the same parent company. In other words, if you got idiots on this site who are being snooty about being near the cubs, then make another site with the exact same interface and let them have their fun there. Pretty simple. Instead of trying to buy out all these other sites, just make your own.

-2

what like cubfurnetwork?

Thanks very much. Kindly disregard the less-than-helpful replies you've been getting, it was nice to hear more on this.