I feel that you are on to something @researcher7201, and its related to my own thoughts regarding fluffies as a whole. The motivation for hellgremlins was borne out of more abuse-specific approaches towards fluffies. Its part of the reason why I take up the title of hugboxer, and am so critical of abuse. The over-emphasis on abuse was what led to the creation of hellgremlins, as the idea of seeing fluffies as the worst thing imagineable justified their killing.
But even if we ignore the hellgremlins, even if we put aside that approach, I feel that other forms of abuse is too saturated on this idea of looking at fluffies as completely pathetic, or taking pleasure in hurting something thats innocent or cute. Its part of why I am so against “cute aggression” as a motivator. One thing that Santanon mentioned on the Fluffcast is that people get so stuck in their ways of looking at fluffies, that the genre and the fiction doesn’t really develop. In that sense, I am critical of the kind of opinion that @Vanner mentioned here: “as a species, they’re hopeless”. I disagree with that. I think that disliking fluffies purely for their inadequacies, or relegating to thinking of them only in the negative prevents the genre from developing further and, in addition, would make the endevaour seem pointless. Thats what I got out of KMEB’s last post.
And I get that hugbox may seem “boring”, because it paints too rosy a picture of fluffies having happy lives, something that they can get from any other “cute talking animal story”. But thats why I believe the genre has to aspire to be more than just edge for the sake of edge. The edge is needed, but it should be needed to make a point instead of an excercise of “I release my frustration on this animal because I hate the way it talks”. (And yes, I like the way fluffies talk) Its why I believe that hugbox needs to go further than just being “fluffies being cute”. The appeal of @Carpdime 's Avocado to me is how he excels and thrives, despite his origins in industrial sadbox. The appeal of FierceDeityLynx’s Plum is her tenacity to survive the prejudice at the hands of her herd, with the solance being her foals. The appeal of @mutagen’s Greg is how he is unique because of his intelligence, and the bond he has with the Russian (who has consumed the other members of his kind). I love @Muffin 's Tumbly because, and despite being born disabled, Tumbly does not let his disabilities define who he is as a character. And I could go on about the many unique fluffy characters I have come to love in this fandom.
But my point is, if people only look at fluffies in terms of “when are we going to kill this particular fluffy character”, then of course the genre is not going to develop.