FA Banning Cub Porn Again?

[AshleyAshes]

Ah thanks.  FAF's search function is pretty terrible and I couldn't search for exact phrases or have it search while requireing a post must have every word I search for, instead a post had to have ANY word I searched for.

[Jim Demintia]

Well we all know PayPal won't deal with anything remotely pornographic, which is (I assume) part of the customer base of AlertPay. So now they seem to be getting a little bit, er, prude, where are the animal people going to turn when it comes to hastily spent pornodollars sent to sketchy characters they only know by a pseudonym on the Internet?

It'd be awesome to see furries' ability to send money to each other go away, but that's just a pipe dream.

[MazelTovCocktail]

where are the animal people going to turn when it comes to hastily spent pornodollars sent to sketchy characters they only know by a pseudonym on the Internet?

This is a question I hope will be answered soon.

I think it's hilarious how people are going to the "... and I didn't speak up... Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up" line.  Yeah, this is fucking Nazi Germany, you idiots.

[Heimdal]

To be more accurate, it sounded like this AUP change was in the works anyways with regards to how the situations in various countries were changing. It just happened that AlertPay, or whatever it's called, moved first.
Seems like it was inevitable.

The AUP change was being worked on, but removing cub art was NOT part our original goal. It was merely to revise and restructure our policies into a slightly more readable format. Not... this.

I guess the cub porn ban wasn't going to happen regardless, it was just going to be a general adjustment. That's too bad. I almost thought they were learning.

[LordNagetiere]

Does anybody remember last year when FA had to find a new colocation facility? Remember when Dragoneer announced he had found a Canadian company that was willing to host them, but then went with their current one because it was better in the same town as him?

Anyone think it would have been funnier if they decided to send the servers to Canada? This whole thing probably would have ended with FA's servers being seized by the Government.

I could have sworn this was half the reason VCL was originally hosted in Sweden, because the nation that's the home of The Pirate Bay isn't exactly one where companies buckle under hypothetical lawsuits over material.

Also, I've done it on a lot of 'celebration' journals on FA already, but honestly while the Nazi comparisons are just regular internet retardation, and while I'm not a fan of cub porn in the least...

Honestly, how many times did Frank Gembeck draw cub shit, and what's he in prison for now?

[pikachang]

Thanks to the ban we get some choice pedofur quotes:
http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/87380-The-New-Policy-on-Cub?p=2267047&viewfull=1#post2267047

When you've got people like Betawolf who commission newborn porn of babies being raped... how do you step in and differentiate that between cub art? Or a five year old, or any combination of juvenile characters getting fucked by adults, screaming "DADDY!" out loud in comic format?

I'm sorry, but there's some limits that you need to put your foot down upon when you cross a certain threshold, and when that threshold damages the rest of the site... it's gone too far.

See, The issue is I see that as art and you don't. He's not jerking off thinking about having sex with the next baby in a stroller. He's smiling because he's getting you flustered. So called five year olds are not real and no real child is being hurt. What YOU worry is that it promotes it. That people will think it's okay to do in real life. Even when we take it as far from it by putting in Cubs, you have an issue. You can't believe that everyone who looks at cub art doesn't look at real children drooling.

Yes, it hurting the site is bad. I agree with this in whole. This is the only part I accept as valid. But DA banned gay art because of this. Y gallery banned furry art because of this. Does that make them right? Because it helped make their site more attractive? Because they thought it was morally wrong?

I stand by the fact you could argue people's right to draw what they want, but if it went to court, there would definitely be limitations. I would never get up and defend cub art. Not once, not ever. Anything else? I would. I would defend anything else in court, and not blind an eye. But I will not stand up and defend cub art.

You don't have to defend it in court. People already did in the USA. Now... I hate my country in many ways, but Bless them for beating out the UK and Aussieland by not banning art. I understand you don't want to stand up for Cub art, but PLEASE say it like that instead of hiding behind AlertPay. I understand you don't understand cub art and that's actually cool. Please say that first so we don't all feel like... like the cake is a lie!

I hope you will spend more time thinking about it... researching it. Trying to understand how banning any art is a bad idea. I will not think less of you for banning cub, but I hope you will do me the favor of stepping back for a moment to see what you're doing. What do you hope to really accomplish with this ban? How will it make the community better, the world better? Do you feel like you're support children getting raped by allowing? Do you think removing it will stop this from happening in real life? Do you understand therapy through art? Should we ban everything that is evil in real life from art? Should we start banning songs that talk about shooting cops? What about adults raping adults? Where does this line really end? What makes you think you know what is right and what is wrong?

I would just feel.... so much better knowing you though of it more then "I hate CP! let's ban cubs!"

[Pi]

Remember how I said they were going to randomly ban random people for random reasons over this?

[Heimdal]

I dislike the 'nihilist deconstruction of morality' arguments. It makes their weird crap justifiable in their own minds, even if they're still wrong in reality.

That last guy quoted, I still think he sounded like some obsessive pornmonger praying to Dragoneer to save his ruined life porn.

[pikachang]

Golden post!
http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/87380-The-New-Policy-on-Cub?p=2267214&viewfull=1#post2267214

Sod quoting anyone. I think anyone and everyone whose looked at this thread, and everyone whose read the initial post will either think the same (screw those alertpay bastards) or are to simple minded to conceptualise the bigger picture.

Alertpay are scummy cowards who will rather crush the largest (and some would argue only) bastion of community for the most ostracised legal fetish minority (yes, pedophiles and rapists are more ostracised, but that's illegal so doesn't count) rather than face the mildly embarrassing court case where they would have to stand up and say "yes we fund furaffinity, it brings in profit for us" (the court case that will NEVER win. even if a small minded jurisdiction is willing to set a world record precedent by convicting alertpay for a different nationality company containing morally dubious material. it would be quashed on appeal, at the very worst it would be quashed at the UN because, a minor is a 'person' under 18, and as we all know a drawing of an anthropomorphic squirrel will NEVER have the rights of a 'person')


I do wonder however, if it's at all possible for FA to get funding from elsewhere? It might be a touch embarrassing but perhaps the admins should contact others, I imagine WoW and other games, and various other sites will have no problem advertising to a site with tens of thousands of users. And I for one, have no problem having to see a multitude of adverts when I log on. It's been a blessing not to. but we would all rather see ads than not see what we want

[Conan]

Golden post!
http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/87380-The-New-Policy-on-Cub?p=2267214&viewfull=1#post2267214

Sod quoting anyone. I think anyone and everyone whose looked at this thread, and everyone whose read the initial post will either think the same (screw those alertpay bastards) or are to simple minded to conceptualise the bigger picture.

Alertpay are scummy cowards who will rather crush the largest (and some would argue only) bastion of community for the most ostracised legal fetish minority (yes, pedophiles and rapists are more ostracised, but that's illegal so doesn't count) rather than face the mildly embarrassing court case where they would have to stand up and say "yes we fund furaffinity, it brings in profit for us" (the court case that will NEVER win. even if a small minded jurisdiction is willing to set a world record precedent by convicting alertpay for a different nationality company containing morally dubious material. it would be quashed on appeal, at the very worst it would be quashed at the UN because, a minor is a 'person' under 18, and as we all know a drawing of an anthropomorphic squirrel will NEVER have the rights of a 'person')


I do wonder however, if it's at all possible for FA to get funding from elsewhere? It might be a touch embarrassing but perhaps the admins should contact others, I imagine WoW and other games, and various other sites will have no problem advertising to a site with tens of thousands of users. And I for one, have no problem having to see a multitude of adverts when I log on. It's been a blessing not to. but we would all rather see ads than not see what we want

THAT DAMN DIRTY ALERTPAY! FURSECUTING TROLLS ALL ALONG!

In other news, anyone else notice Inkbunny is down? I get "connection reset" here and "unable to connect" using my friend's VPS. Nevermind turns out their worse than FA when it comes to trying to update the site code.

[GreenReaper]

OS upgrade. Back now.

[Jim Demintia]

I have no confirmation or source or anything, but a random Tweet (protected, sorry) says that Insane Kangaroo reported Inkbunny and SoFurry to AlertPay. Maybe that came from fd_2, I don't know.

But one wonders, if that's true, what the timeline is with respect to FA. Since we all know Insane Kangaroo and the WYS crowd is essentially the secret police of the FA administration, I really really doubt they reported FA to AlertPay. So it raises the possibility FA was an unintentional casualty of IK's actions.

[MazelTovCocktail]

They can say what they want about "hiding behind AlertPay".  They're hiding behind the vagueness in our legality that defines cub porn as art and protects it under the guise of freedom of expression.  They don't even bother to consider that businesses have rights too, and one of those rights is to refuse service to anyone for any reason.  If AlertPay has moral objections,  do these people have the right to tell them to disregard their own sense of right and wrong just because Krystal can't enjoy her cub porn? 

Why aren't these same people bringing up FA's recent revision that disallows photographs of non-anthro-related possessions?  Photography's an expression of art, am I right?  They want everybody to speak up when they come for the cub porn lovers, but when they come for the people with photographs of stuff they own in their gallery, they won't speak up because they're not interested in anything without prepubescent private parts depicted somewhere within.

[a pigeon]

I have no confirmation or source or anything, but a random Tweet (protected, sorry) says that Insane Kangaroo reported Inkbunny and SoFurry to AlertPay. Maybe that came from fd_2, I don't know.

But one wonders, if that's true, what the timeline is with respect to FA. Since we all know Insane Kangaroo and the WYS crowd is essentially the secret police of the FA administration, I really really doubt they reported FA to AlertPay. So it raises the possibility FA was an unintentional casualty of IK's actions.

Insane Kangaroo boasted on FD_2 that he had reported inkbunny/so furry to alertpay because he believed that someone from Inkbunny had reported FA to alertpay. He was banned from FD_2 as a result of that, and he declared in a mssg. to one of the maintainers of the group that he intended to see inkbunny go down in flames unless it stopped harbouring paedophiles. Of course FA knows about and has not banned Crassus aka Rookie, and insane Kangaroo has never done much about that AFAIK.

Apparently though, once they'd heard about FA being dropped by alertpay, inkbunny already dropped alertpay, so Insane Kangaroo's efforts are only the sound and fury of a hypocritical idiot.

In addition, FA's new AUP update, as well as banning cub porn, imposed certain restrictions on photographs and this has also resulted in people getting randomly banned for random reasons:

http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/87541-Abuse-of-power

[Jim Demintia]

In addition, FA's new AUP update, as well as banning cub porn, imposed certain restrictions on photographs and this has also resulted in people getting randomly banned for random reasons:

Yeah, well, I always had it in my head that FA submissions had to have some kind of anthro or furry-related content in them, so I don't know why this was never in there in the first place.

[AshleyAshes]

In addition, FA's new AUP update, as well as banning cub porn, imposed certain restrictions on photographs

What are you talking about?  They banned 'Using FA as your personal Photobucket' in the LAST AUP Update.  Car shows, photos of all the shit you own, a gallery of photos of your dog, all of these have been banned before this week.

[ProvincialTwit]

They can say what they want about "hiding behind AlertPay".  They're hiding behind the vagueness in our legality that defines cub porn as art and protects it under the guise of freedom of expression.  They don't even bother to consider that businesses have rights too, and one of those rights is to refuse service to anyone for any reason.  If AlertPay has moral objections,  do these people have the right to tell them to disregard their own sense of right and wrong just because Krystal can't enjoy her cub porn? 

This also leads into that favorite logical fallacy of furries - the complete abuse and misinterpretation of the first amendment.  Freedom of speech is indeed a wonderful thing, but it doesn't mean you can go stomping into private property and spouting whatever you feel like.  Furries just can't wrap their heads around the idea that a web site on the Internet is considered private property for purposes of legality.  Yes, there are thankfully certain protections for the owners of sites and servers pertaining to content added/posted by individual users, but those protections do not apply in the other direction.  Nobody has a right to post anything the admins don't like here, or on FA, or anywhere else.

Tune in tomorrow when we discuss how having your 'furmeet' kicked out of the local mall does not, in fact, impinge on your right to freedom of assembly.

[Conan]

Inkbunny's going to make people process their own sales, meaning they no longer have a constant source of income. Now that they're back to relying on donations, it will be interesting to see which one furries support more. It would warm my cockles to see Princess Piche throwing a fit because Inkbunny is bringing in more donations than FA (and you know he'd blame something like the pedo porn and not himself and his staff.)

[a pigeon]

In addition, FA's new AUP update, as well as banning cub porn, imposed certain restrictions on photographs

What are you talking about?  They banned 'Using FA as your personal Photobucket' in the LAST AUP Update.  Car shows, photos of all the shit you own, a gallery of photos of your dog, all of these have been banned before this week.

Well, the rules regarding photography were at least updated with this most recent AUP change, but anyhow the main thing I wanted to point out was the whole "interpretations and enforcement of the rules varying depending on which admin is doing it" thing in action. Not to mention, the admin in question did in fact have photos of a dog in his own gallery, and food.

Edit:

& the random bans I usppose, but anyway, it's not about cub porn so that's enough about this.

[LordNagetiere]

Why aren't these same people bringing up FA's recent revision that disallows photographs of non-anthro-related possessions?  Photography's an expression of art, am I right?  They want everybody to speak up when they come for the cub porn lovers, but when they come for the people with photographs of stuff they own in their gallery, they won't speak up because they're not interested in anything without prepubescent private parts depicted somewhere within.

I think everyone kind of knows the only reason for that is to keep FA from becoming a myspace. Even the stern language about not posting collections hasn't stopped people from putting up "here's all my video games", or throwing in a plush and calling it furry. Really now though, what's left in terms of photography if only things anthro related are allowed? No wildlife photos? Nothing artistic for it's own sake?

Nope, just a lot of drunk fursuiters. Oh, but they can't fuck.