I do not mind rules but I would demand a fair enforcement of the rules
1 Like
Can you really blame me for thinking that if we weren’t on a fluffy site his art could be easily mistaken with a furry horses?
6 Likes
Yes I can and did
1 Like
Alright, now we’re finding a place where you and I can agree.
I want to point out that the moderators and administrators here are from far-flung places around the world. They’re all working for free, doing their jobs out of the goodness in their hearts.
I want to think that I’ve chosen good and honest people, but I cannot expect all of us to think exactly the same.
I don’t put people on a tight leash. They’re free to act in the ways they feel are best.
I don’t hand people some 350 sheet rulebook when I ask them to help me make this site better.
I ask them to let me know when they see problems, and to give me their opinions on a whole lot of matters that most people wouldn’t give two shits about.
Because there are a solid way to tell the difference, or because he was doing it longer than anyone else?
1 Like
Rules suck but whit out them decisions seam arbitrary
1 Like
You tell me why goudzilla and not anyone else
1 Like
Okay, I can understand that.
Generally speaking when I make a decision regarding the allowance or disallowance of a piece of art on this website, it’s after a few hours of discussion. At that point I usually don’t feel up to writing out a dissertation on why such a decision was reached.
But if that’s what it takes to make people a bit less abrasive to each other, I’ll try to make more of the staff decisions publicly announced.
What else?
Don’t get me wrong, the question of “is it a fluffy, or is it a horse” can be applied to quite a few artists who did anthros. From @bunnybunnyhops to @anon3053411. It’s just so happened that the question rose on a guodsillas art, that’s all
4 Likes
That is the root of the problem why what makes you question if any of them are drawing fluffies,when is something not a fluffy anymore
Again, we have to get back to defining all the things that a fluffy can be, and all the things they cannot be, to have level of enforcement that you seem to want.
1 Like
This place my not need hard rules but it needs at least a range like one of those sliding sexuality scales so we know what is to far to push as a fluffy , can I really just call anything a fluffy if I can back it up whit possible head cannon
No. I will go ahead and say No to that thought.
I’ve already had to discourage a number of people that were merely trying to tell furry stories with a fluffy in the background.
There is definitely a limit to what can be called “fluffy”
4 Likes
That is what we need known the limit
Are you saying that I need to disallow your work due to the lack of fluffies?
So long as you’re not going to start some crusade in regards to this, I’m completely fine in deleting your works that don’t include fluffies.
1 Like
tfw mcgee wants me to make a statement just when I was about to type
Speaking as somebody who had been looking through the booru quite extensively, and believes in maintaining some level of freedom regarding the depiction of fluffies as well as preserving the diversity of headcanons within the fluffy pony diaspora, I feel that there is some difficulty in defining what is a fluffy pony. I know some people like to push for gatekeeping, but the level of it has extended to the design of fluffies in the past with people complaining about the length of legs and such. One person has commented that the genre hasn’t really developed because gatekeeping gets in the way of innovation.
Not too long ago, I have attempted a working definition of a fluffy pony as follows:
A fluffy pony is an equine that is fluffy, has hooves, speaks fluffspeak, and is a bioengineered product of the company Hasbio or similar. Different stories and canons will take liberties with their depiction of fluffies but ideally should not contravene three or more of these descriptions
Going by what Virgil stipulated earlier in the discussion, the definition above allows for some of these stories as:
- @Carniviousduck’s fluffies have fluff, hooves, speak fluffspeak and afaik are the product of Hasbio
- @mutagen’s Greg from Postfluff has fluff and hooves, though its not known if the fluffies in that world are bio-engineered by Hasbio or an equivalent. Also, and in the world of Postfluff, Greg is actually an exception as the majority of the fluffies in Postfluff speak fluffspeak, and the whole point of Greg is that he’s a “mutant” by virtue of speaking normal English
- I’d consider @Pumpiikin 's Pepper as actually quite fluffy, and of course, she speaks fluffspeak and has hooves
Going a bit further:
- @Pinkyfluffy has depicted remarkably intelligent fluffies that speak perfect italian, but his fluffies have always been relatively fluffy and have hooves, which I consider important. Also, he has made one post in the past depicting how fluffies are a Hasbio creation, though his approach is different from others
- I do think that seafluffies and similar “hoof-less” fluffies (including jellenheimers) skirt the definition, but as long as they keep at least two of the definitions that could still be counted as fluffies or derivatives (jellenheimers have been acknowledged as an unintended Hasbio creation at times, and seafluffies are fluffies in every way except for having flippers instead of hooves)
One thing I should mention and point out is that, when determining the content, I also keep in mind if the characters of a specific story or body of work by an artist/writer is an intended outlier. So in @Guodzilla and @ArisenLeaf 's case, they have both depicted their non-anthro fluffies as speaking fluffspeak and following into the earlier definitions. Whether they should draw more “normal” fluffies is a different matter, and something I’d tackle at the bottom, but suffice to say is that, unless Guodzilla starts populating his world with no fluffspeaking fluffies, then I would think it’s a different story.
As some would note, I don’t discriminate fluffies by design as well as level of intelligence. This is because people have depicted differing levels of fluffy intelligence in the past, to the extent that people have tried to push for fluffy stupidity as the primary norm. As somebody whose interested in stories about intelligent fluffies (whether as outliers or as a norm), I do think that a fluffy can be intelligent even with the provision of fluffspeak, though their reasoning and rationality could be hampered by the deficiency of language. Its a complex issue and in my opinion not one that’s easily resolved.
The same extends to fluffy origins. The most common has been Hasbio, but the earliest fluffy stories have depicted fluffies as a creation of Four Leaf labs or Aperture, or similar. At least one person I known in the past had a rather specific headcanon of fluffies being naturally occuring animals that suddenly came into existence, but otherwise maintain the values of being fluffy, speaking fluffspeak and having hooves.
Finally:
This is something I also believe in. There were too many cases in the booru of people put on a tight leash because they weren’t following a popular hivecanon regarding fluffies, with certain people harassing content creators because of their depiction of fluffies. As somebody whose interested in the history of the fluffy fandom for its diversity of content (primarily in hugbox and weirdbox), I believe that any definition of fluffies should allow for innovation with the concept. While I can see the value of gatekeeping, from what I’ve seen too much of it had chased too many content creators in the past.
13 Likes
That, I will agree with you. My stories actually have a fluffy (Halfwit), but I’ve been trying to make him an actual character with his own features/storyline(s), instead of just relegating him to the background/using him as window dressing.
5 Likes
What I keep saying is the community needs to know what are the limits at lest a rough understanding of what is allowed so that we can understand why something can be posted but other things can not
3 Likes
I would like to see more of Halfwit, to be honest. I haven’t seen much of him to my memory.
1 Like