Postscript: My thoughts as I leave the Fluffy-Community in new hands

Community Posts
25

The fluffy OCs are sweet and all, but I’d love to see more comics with more effort in them, back in the days people made huge creations that would run for pages and pages and nowadays there’s maybe one or two creators who still keep it up… That’s not a lot. And it’s quite sad to see.

Hell, even if it was poorly drawn in MS Paint, I’d still love to see what’s running in someone’s mind. So long as it’s a good and creative story, that’s all that matters really. That’s something I tried to encourage with the contest I ran~

14 Likes
26

To be fair, some of us are still here (myself included) but currently unable to think of something regarding art or story work due to various reasons (hell, I’m busy with my job and I only get one day off a week).

9 Likes
27

There shouldn’t be anybody telling you that you HAVE to create fluffies.
Ever.
I’ve recently taken steps to decrease the amount of responsibility I have here, and that’s the only reason why I now feel comfortable writing new fluffy content with @Dragonixa
If anyone was to ever demand that we create fluffy things, both of us would tell that person to pound sand.

5 Likes
28

The problem is that it requires time and effort. Part of the reason why I support commissions and even patreons being on this site is because it’d give an incentive for people to stay in fluffies. I remember @Shadysmarty 's attempt at a Patreon from back in the day, and wonder if Scootafluff could have continued and even be finished if the patreon had succeeded. A number of people who I talked to who left fluffies mentioned that there was little incentive to stay in fluffies, especially when the time supposedly could be spent in other avenues.

3 Likes
29

True enough, but at the same time who said that you have to mass produce low effort content instead to keep yourself relevant?

Then again, I can’t tell anyone what to do, also considering that drawing can be very therapeutic to some people, so I’m torn on that opinion. I guess to each their own~

2 Likes
30

The problem with “low-effort” is that it’s subjective. And sometimes it may be discouraging. KMEB’s Cottonfluffies originally started out as “doodles” over photos of cottonballs. Some people thought it was “low-effort” and “spam”. And yet, cottonfluffies ended up having their own lore and stories. Heck, I wouldn’t have written Milk if @kmeb had not continued cottonfluffies. Sometimes its just a matter of putting out something until you actually come up with an idea. It may seem low-effort at first but, if one keeps doing it, maybe something else could come out of it. :shrug: Ideas aren’t borne in a vaccum.

Heck, even trying to define what may be low-effort could be divisive. Milk was a story that took me about a day to write, whereas some other stories I’ve written have taken weeks or even months to conceptualize, plot out and write. But does that make one story’s quality less than the other? Yes, I do believe quality assurance is needed, but its not that simple to define, whether its by writing or drawing.

4 Likes
31

Do you think we’re unable to tell the difference between unique works (in spite of their low effort) and truly Low Effort content such as a colored circle or a slightly deformed colored circle with a smile and a couple of eyes?

2 Likes
32

While I agree on that, I also know that some people could take it too far. I mention the cottonfluffy example because it was one that was used back on the booru

1 Like
33

The way we tend to allow such low effort “art” is a lot of why drama sites tend to latch onto us and make us the butt of their jokes.

2 Likes
34

fluffy
fluffy1094×615 1.84 KB

I’M A FLUFFY!
I said FLUFFY so you can’t do anything about it!

4 Likes
35

BEHOLD, A FLUFFY!

5 Likes
36

I am one of those who harshly criticized a newcomer’s OC-turned-into-fluffy.

I did so because it conflicted not only with the “widespread” definition of fluffy (using this term loosely, as there’s no real set-in-stone true fluffy, although most renditions usually share the same common tropes, like being rather dull-minded, physically weak, loving spaghetti more than anything, yadda yadda) but also because said character radiated major “bad trope juju”.

With that being said, the opinion of a random internet jackass called A-S (dude couldn’t even be arsed to write a real name) shouldn’t be the end of all things. Heed my word and cut down on the overall “edgy-ness” by reducing the character’s skillset to something a “general” fluffy might have (even something a bit more, a pit-fighter fluffy may indeed be able to pick on other fluffies or small critters, or at least have human intervention be responsible for their teeth being filed into being sharper, rather than them going Rambo mode and doing it themselves against a rock, somehow). Or disregard it entirely and go right on. It’s not a big deal.

The part that really bothers me, however is not edgy OCs that might make for interesting characters with just a wee bit of polishing around the edges (pun intended), it’s when artists introduce their own species of “fluffies”, who end up taking the spotlight instead of well, the actual fluffies.

I don’t want to call out specific people, especially since it’s people whose stories I’ve been reading and have enjoyed a good chunk of.

However, I can think of no better example right now.

Oversized, “fluffy-fied” viruses. The stories involving them rotate around these bundles of love and deadly goo, relegating fluffies to side characters at best, background scenery only there to be infected, go SCREEE and allow the sentient viruses to replicate.

At least in my head, fluffies should be the focus of a fluffy story on fluffycommunity.

Simply because said viruses talk like fluffies and are just as innocently dumb, it doesn’t make them fluffies.

Just my 2 cents.

11 Likes
37

“Your OC is trash.”

~ Me, from a previous thread.

Kidding aside, I still feel like I’m a total newb here by all rights, but I do appreciate and recognize the insane amount of effort that goes on, in front of behind the scenes, to keep fluffies, well, fluffy. Not to mention keeping a community from eating its own face. And then there’s the madness of site maintenance. The admins and mods have my utmost respect and condolences. This place can’t be an easy herd of cats to wrangle.

As far as the drift goes… I feel like there needs to be some level of gatekeeping to keep fluffies true to themselves. I mean, I’ve seen weird-ass subspecies aplenty while trawling the archives and some of it is cute one-offs but some… eh. It’s hard to pass judgment, though, in some cases. Creativity is a really hard thing to police.

9 Likes
38

Is A-S short for something? I always figured it was some kind of acronym, maybe. Whenever I encounter one I don’t know, I make up words for it. Right now, you’re ‘always-sexy’ or ‘aesthetically-sedated’ in my headcannon. Maybe ‘amazingly-successful’. Who knows?

Anyway, I agree that there may not be a set-in-stone definition of a true fluffy. There’s a cobbled-together series of tropes tied together with goat entrails that make up a fluffy. Shit evolves, though. Stories change with every telling and and even Hitler himself won’t be able to keep the fluffy race pure despite purges of ferals or munstahs. Creative people are going to create stuff. There’s not stopping that. I feel like there does need to be a line, though. I don’t want to call out the virus thing but, yeah, I agree that that’s not a fluffy in the base definition/perception sense. It’s a fucking rad trajectory and creatively cool concept and I can’t and won’t bring myself to shit on someone just because they made something I might not agree with or dig, so yeah. Stick it in a weirdbox category or something, I guess. I don’t know.

Anyway, I disagree strongly with your assertion that fluffies should be the focus of fluffy stories. Mostly because of the lack of elaboration (I know they can be background players or take the centre stage but, fuck it). My own, and many other, stories focus mainly on the people that interact with fluffies. Characters like Earl and Erin, or the ever-popular Doc M. The fluffies are sometimes the focus but, much more frequently, the people who have to deal with their shit are the focus.

I think it’s a tough call to pass judgment on the stuff people have worked hard to create. We’re all here, I figure, because we dig fluffies. How we express how we dig fluffies comes in many forms. I feel like the best we can do is remain civil and categorize. Weird pseudo-fluffy shit? Put it in a category. It’s valid work, but not in line with mainstream perception.

If we were to be uncivil, we might be asked: who the fuck are you to tell me what a fluffy is?

Edit: Keep the furries out, though. No one wants those weirdos.

4 Likes
39

One day off? Ouch. Hang in there, my friend. When inspiration strikes, heed the call. Never worry about where it leads.

3 Likes
40

Creepy as hell fluffy lip bite “Bestest commuwnity enfies…”

3 Likes
41

We have such sights to show you !

https://fluffy-community.com/t/mmm-ok-pumpiikin/2770

4 Likes
42

Dude, you’re the best.

3 Likes
43

You see, this is a different example because something cool actually came out of it~

What I meant by low effort is exactly what @Virgil used as an example, there’s just… No essence to it, ya know?

(I’m sorry love if I’m hurting your feelings ;_; T_T true sadness and compassion™)

2 Likes
44

Truth be told, it’s because on the keyboard, A and S are right next to each other. The “-” is just to separate them.

I doubt I’d be able to unironically describe myself as Always Sexy or Amazingly Successful.

Aestetichally Sedated works if you imply my awful tastes should remain asleep.

2 Likes