*DISCUSSION* The fluffy ratio and what is and isn't a fluffy.

Community Posts
1

2023-05-18-12-27-52

We’ve been noticing some contention among the community lately regarding what constitutes ‘fluffy content’, and concern over the mod team’s attitudes towards the matter in the past. This has been also of discussion among the mod team recently—as Ryou discussed in his post-migration announcement, it’s been made clear there is a need for more consistency in moderation, and more clarity in the site rules, and this is one amongst several such issues we’re giving careful consideration to in our plans moving forwards.
Seeing as how it’s the one in the spotlight at the moment though, we thought it best to give you guys an opportunity to voice your opinions on it now. We’ll be taking this discussion heavily into consideration as we adjust our approach from here on out.
Please bear in mind we’re trying to agree on a standard here that works for the fluffy community as a whole no matter which boxes they’re a part of or which parts of the fandom they enjoy, one that leaves people as much room for freedom and creativity as possible, while still ensuring the content posted here is, first and foremost, focused on fluffy ponies.

So, that said:

What do you think is, and is not fluffy content?
If it were up to you, where would you draw the line between what is and isn’t an appropriate contribution?

Please be advised: the following discussion is first and foremost about art. You are free to use examples of what you think is and isn’t a fluffy, but I would suggest leaving the artists themselves out of your arguments. Thank you in advance.

15 Likes
2

A fluffy is, with very few exceptions, a short little retarded horse-thing with thick fluff of many potential hues. It speaks in a stupid stilted child-like lisp and has a simple understanding of the world. They are small and, again, horse-like and fluffy.

The point of exceptions was that they’d be exceptions. Seafluffies never should’ve been considered a serious subspecies. Yet these are, largely, the only two valid species.

Anybody that makes anthro needs to fucking leave the fandom. If they refuse we should combine efforts to expedite their departure with non-stop bullying. Because that shit’s fucking gross and so is anyone that defends it. No ifs, ands, or buts. Anthros are not fluffies. They remove the one thing separating fluffies from children. That being the extreme biological differences. You make them one more step towards child-like, and a step too far.

15 Likes
3

partenone-01-edited

4 Likes
4

If the core concept is fluffy then it belongs here, or another way to put it is if it couldn’t exist outside of our influence then it belongs with us. Fluffalos, Sea Fluffs, Bat-Fluffs, and Rabbit-fluffs are all things that could not exist outside of our space and as such they should be represented here. The same goes with non-fluffy creatures such as Jellens and Puffies as they are ingrained in the fluffy culture.

However I do believe that some more careful consideration needs to be given to non-fluffy posts as it is easier to deviate from the strict rules required to keep everything above board. Possibly any content that contains non-fluffs should be relegated to the non-fluff group, and posts featuring these moved there. I was not a part of the non-fluff group until just recently and had seen a large amount of non-fluff content anyways.

This doesn’t mean people can start posting their fursonas or waifus in this section, it’s not for extraneous content. It would be a place for the content still related to fluffies that doesnt necessarily only have fluffs in it. Hopefully having a section dedicated to these posts will allow those with a weaker stomach for content that isn’t exactly what they expect some comfort while still allowing a section of our small community to stick with us.

Edited to correct a mis-conception of mine about how the non-fluff group works.

6 Likes
8

Less like fluffies could be a sub class like contervial and lgbt. It would allow for people to continue creating these types of fluffies but allow people who dont like to to not have to see it

2 Likes
9

I owe you an apology, I wasnt aware I wasn’t seeing Anthro posts and thought I had seen what Anthro was here. I agree, almost everything posted in Anthro is simply Furry or Furrybait and all of it is horny. I don’t think that has a place here as that can exist on e621 or whatever it is without the need to be on fluffy sites.

As well, while I’m not against human violence in posts there is something disconcerting about the Anthro abuse that normal human violence doesn’t have.

1 Like
10

A lot of the issues with declaring something “fluffy enough” is that people tend to work on a binary. Something either is fluffy or isn’t.

I suggested this before, but what we need might be a trait list of sorts. Fluffies have a lot of fluffy-esque traits, and that’s what we tend to judge subspecies and OCs and such by even if we don’t realize it. There is an acceptable amount of fluffy that people are subconsciously aware of.

Things like looking pony-like, having thick fur, short limbs, hooves, and a child-like demeanor, using flufftalk, being innocent and naive, stupid as hell and quadrupedal, loving spaghetti, appearing in all colors, shitting a lot, loving babies, being fragile as all hell, being afraid of water, herd dynamics, being mainly herbivores, and so on.

Not all artists use all of these traits. I don’t use the shitting-a-lot or ultra-fragility traits, some artists don’t do the innocent and naive (aka draw exclusively hellgremlins) or have them be less stupid, some people don’t have the short limbs so the fluffies are more actual-horse shaped. But they all still register as fluffies.

Subspecies and OCs need to keep enough of these traits to have a passing grade in fluffy. For example:

  • Kitsunefluffs are just fluffies with fox tails (that they love a lot) who don’t love spaghetti.
  • Sea fluffies are just fluffies with fins instead of legs (that live underwater).
  • Fluffaloes are just size XL fluffies with buffalo horns.
  • Micro fluffies are just size XS fluffies.
  • Cannibal fluffies are, in a vacuum, just fluffies that eat meat (and have swirly eyes). More on them below.

That said, the personality of the fluffies is very important. That child-like ideology and love for all. If that’s changed, well… I think there’s a reason why people considered hellgremlins to be a separate thing and caused a bunch of wars about it, and that’s because of this. They still read like fluffies, but like a subspecies. “Fluffies but they’re naturally assholes who torture each other for fun.”

Cannibal fluffies specifically run afoul of this a lot. “Fluffy that is carnivorous” is in itself fine, but a lot of cannibal fluffies are also sadistic and smarter and stronger than a fluffy. That changes too many traits, and the result stops reading as a fluffy, causing people to cry foul. It’s a super-smart asshole carnivorous fluffy.

OCs run into this, too. Here’s a herd that behaves more like a Warrior Cats clan than a herd, here’s a human OC that I transplanted into a fluffy body and changed nothing else about, here’s a fluffy that killed her owner with a knife and now hunts for abusers to kill off vigilante style. It removes the childishness and stupidity and herd dynamics and fragility, so too much changes and people cry foul.

For example, sea fluffies are okay and so are cannibal fluffies (in theory). Combine them to make a shark fluffy, which is a sea fluffy but it’s faster and more durable (to catch its prey) and it has fangs and eats other sea fluffies … and I bet some of you just cringed a bit.

Note also, jellens aren’t fluffies. Puffy griffins aren’t fluffies. My Wish Granter creature isn’t a fluffy. So having non-fluffy creatures is fine, HOWEVER, they need to be treated with a lot of extra care and should not be a main character, by virtue of not being fluffies.

Jellens came from hilariously badly drawn foals. Puffy griffins came from the griffins in the MLP show (but evil? for some reason?), and Wish Granter is like a fluffy horror version of Discord from the MLP show. So they’re based on pre-existing ties, and any new creature that doesn’t have such a tie will get some big side glances.

And note, a story that focuses on any of these as a main character will fall flat right away. Because they’re not fluffies. They’re just … other creatures that happen to share a universe.

So yeah that’s my suggestion. A checklist or chart that says “if it’s not at least X% fluffy, people are gonna call foul”. Like one of those Mary Sue tests, maybe! That’d make it fun.

10 Likes
11

Honestly, I don’t see why we should worry about limiting all of it.

The focus should always be on fluffies, but whether Anthro or not, the focus of the content being about fluffies is the main point. Taking away any specific category limits the possibility of future content, and further narrows the fandom. Eventually, the fandom begins to decrease due to the gatekeeping.

I’m not saying all content is good, but I think it’s more about what the content says than whether it checks specific boxes. I’ve seen good comics and stories of all kinds, and removal of specific content, to me, is just losing content. Plus the vitriol of others attacking specific creators or demanding them be threatened off the platform tells me it’s less about the actual content, and more about them wanting to attack people for not making “their content”. “I’m in the cool club, and the cool club says your content is stupid.”

9 Likes
12

A short discussion from general chat.

Screenshot_20230518_054522_Chrome
Screenshot_20230518_054522_Chrome1080×1344 181 KB

5 Likes
13

fluffy and pony, is fluffy pony

14

The threshold for subspecies should be twofold. 1: The new subspecies is still Fluffy-like in behaviour, and 2: The new subspecies appearance doesn’t allow it to do unfluffy actions.

For example, from what I’ve seen on Angora (or rabbit) Fluffies is that they’re still Fluffies just with longer ears and a thicker coat. They’re a less used subspecies but they still work as a Fluffy type.

Whereas if I was to introduce Bird-Fluffies, who have feathers instead of Fluff and actually can fly, then I’ve just introduced talking birds who eat spaghetti and gone so far outside of the original Fluffy design as to just insert my own creation and called it fluffy

4 Likes
15

Hey, I think a fluffshark sounds like fun!

16

i think we should avoid pushing them too close to real animals. i think weirdbox, can do whatever. but when playing with hug and abuse and sad, shit starts to get weird. we should try to keep it clear that its all Fiction And no real animals or people are getting hurt

Then we have jellies which are still fluffie enough to cause a normal ‘oh fluffy’ reaction. and rabit fluffs work well too.

though to say all fluffies have to be dumbasses and fat limmits a lot of crwativity, like a fluffy bread to work on a farm is likely gonna be stockyer, maybe a longer snoot for grabbing vegies.

Or show fluffies that acre crazy inbred for colors and ‘rare geans!’ have a flat snoot, hard time breathing and have the worst shits ever. probably the dumbest of them too.

I say just try to keep it clear that its fiction. though that is hard for some.

3 Likes
17

should not be a main character, by virtue of not being fluffies.

What about in stories with multiple main characters? (Ex: A story about the unlikely friendship between a fluffy and a puffy.)

I think having one would be acceptable as long as you have an equally focused-on fluffy main character in the story as well.

18

Yeah anthros are the one thing I don’t like. I had to block that subcategory because I joined Non-Fluffy for worldbuilding aspects and other SFW stuff, not gross furries.

1 Like
19

Those are fine! In a story like that, the main focus is still on fluffies and interactions with fluffies. A story where someone adopts a fluffy and a puffy griffin and the two hang out, with the viewpoint changing every chapter? That works. A story where someone adopts a puffy griffin and the only fluffy involved is some angry smarty dropped in as live food that’s only around for 10% of the story? Doesn’t work.

1 Like
20

Fluffies to me are small round horses, my art style can’t really protray that cause my headcanons say their more mobile, so thats why i tag them with “non-fluffy” now if i actually finish a wip. But their like, horse pig rabbits that are like, way too easily killed like wet paper towels. I try to never destroy someone elses creativity but theres gotta be some restraints.

21

I think we gotta leave everything as is right now, it just gonna cause annoying chaos as last time
I’m assuming this is cuz of what I can saw as “dragoon 2.0”

When it comes to fluffies, what is considered too far from a fluffy, cuz fluffies as a whole are biologically engineered chimeras which were created by (by hive-cannon standards) Hasbro but release/escaped before being finished (sometimes, depending on head cannon)
The one reason fluffies are “pig horses” is cuz the origins of the community is just an off shoot of the MLP 4chan forums, and MLP as a whole as both horses and horse people

But going back to before, fluffies as ‘bio-toys’ so, in the sense of science that would be available, you could technically make anything as a ‘fluffy’, but we’ve stuck with the retarded dwarf rave ponies, and what makes them different from any other animal eh?
Literally nothing beyond “science experiment gone wrong”(depending on cannon) so are a lot of domesticatedly bred animals, ‘they talk’ some can most birds
The only thing that keep em from being animals (based on the headcannon) and us beating their face in, is that they’re fictional, which by all honest with the scientific pace we got going irl, we literally might have some “biologically engineered Chimeras” in around 50 years

In conclusion, let’s leave it all alone, and stick with our freaky horses and freaky horse people

Also puffys, fuck em, I remembered they existed, they show off a good point of “that’s not a fluffy, why is it here” and reiterates the point of, “if we can make bio-toy horse things, what else can we make into bio-toys”

22

The worst example are the so-called “hunting friends”. I’ve never seen one that isn’t an edgy donut steel OC.

23

You can’t allow anthros and not allow SFW non-fluffy biotoys.

I personally despise anthros and am grossed out by them, but I like the idea of there being other types of biotoys that fluffies can have a wide range of interactions with.