Genjar
Former Staff
2 years ago
2011 annoyed antennae arthropod biped black_markings blue_eyes clear_membrane clothed clothing crossed_arms cute duo feral front_view green_body human insect insect_wings lifting lol_comments male mammal markings moth nisimawari pellucid_hawk_moth portrait quadruped shirt shorts simple_background solo_focus spread_wings standing three-quarter_portrait three-quarter_view traditional_media_(artwork) watercolor_(artwork) white_background wings

Rating: Safe
Score: 240
User: Genjar
Date: May 29, 2013

NotMeNotYou said:
Indirect Addition to the CoC:

▼ Avoid Posting List

Avoid Posting List

Avoid posting these things.

  • New commercial content (Doujin, paysites, etc.). If it's less than two years old, don't post it. This includes HD versions only visible on Patreon.
  • Real porn / real images or videos depicting illegal activities (such as bestiality, child pornography, etc.)
  • Images where a person who is not the original copyright owner has placed a watermark on the image.
  • Excessive webcomic rips (more than 5 or more consecutive webcomic pages)
  • Images where compression artifacts are easily visible.
  • Content that is not furry or furry-related. We may still approve it if it's high quality or "special" in some way, but it's still more likely to be deleted than approved.

Is this change still in effect? As far as I can see, it never actually got added to the avoid posting list.


Genjar said:
Is this change still in effect? As far as I can see, it never actually got added to the avoid posting list.

Maybe so, I don't see it in the latest avoid posting list.


Genjar said:
Is this change still in effect? As far as I can see, it never actually got added to the avoid posting list.

Whoops, it's in it now.


Patchi said:
Yeah if Dragonrump or Stink come back then it's bye bye Patch. I don't wanna start fixing Dragonrump's god damn tags again.

thank you so much with all respect.


New CoC update!

This it's not change of the rules, but adding record worthy offenses from the DNP list directly into the rules. The goal of this change is to allow people to directly see what will lead to records when posting without having to read both the CoC and the DNP list.

Posting Abuse
This category includes:

  • Posting works made by one of the artists or publishers on the Avoid Posting List
  • Posting new commercial content that is not yet 2 years old.
  • Posting real pornography / real images or videos depicting illegal activities (such as bestiality, child pornography, etc.)
  • Knowingly uploading previously deleted content
  • Removing any watermark(s) or signature(s) from submissions
  • Knowingly adding or editing a post source to an incorrect link
  • Knowingly or repeatedly uploading a lower-resolution image, if there is a higher-resolution of that image available
  • Knowingly or repeatedly uploading screenshots, images under 200x200 pixels, images with artifacts or large watermarks, and/or non-artistic images (motivational posters, Second Life, memes, image macros, etc.)
  • Editing/creating post descriptions (if you are not the artist, uploader, character owner, or commissioner) to create information
  • Using post descriptions to express personal feelings, create drama, or otherwise take away from describing the attached post
  • Please try to use proper spelling and grammar in post descriptions

NotMeNotYou said:
New CoC update!

I read that and suddenly wondered why we're keeping track of Corruption of Champions before I reread the thread title.


Furrin_Gok said:
I read that and suddenly wondered why we're keeping track of Corruption of Champions before I reread the thread title.

It could also standing for Clash of Clans.


GameManiac said:
It could also standing for Clash of Clans.

Or Crucible of Carnage.


E-hentai eventually created some (kind of halfass if not able to access 'Sad Panda', though) tools that try to help you avoid reposting existing or expunged galleries. Not a major poster at e621/paheal/boorus/etc. so not run into issues, though.

Yeah, sorry for going back in-topic. :P

Lyokira
Privileged
1 year ago
ambiguous_gender anthro avian conditional_dnp crossed_arms legendary_pokémon looking_at_viewer lugia nintendo oze pokémon reaction_image red_eyes solo son_i_am_disappoint unimpressed video_games

Rating: Safe
Score: 58
User: Lyokira
Date: November 23, 2010

That last point seems a little out of place in the list...

Jugofthat
Privileged
1 year ago
2016 <3 ambiguous_gender anthro blonde_hair blush brown_hair cat clothed clothing covering cute english_text feline hair hands_behind_back humor looking_at_viewer mammal multicolored_hair open_mouth pants powfooo powfooo_(character) reaction_image shirt shocked simple_background solo sweat tears text two_tone_hair white_background wide_eyed

Rating: Safe
Score: 140
User: Jugofthat
Date: June 04, 2016

  • Editing/creating post descriptions (if you are not the artist, uploader, character owner, or commissioner) to create information

...Wait. What exactly is this about? Are you saying I'm not allowed to add an artist's or commissioner's info (from a source) to a post if I'm not its uploader?

Unless "to create information" (that seems pretty vaguely worded) means I'd have to be deliberately pulling things from my ass and making it seem as though it's quoting one of the people involved. Now outlawing that I could understand.

treos
Member
1 year ago
2016 bandanna cel_shading dry_bones glowing glowing_eyes gradient_background hi_res itoruna koopa mario_bros nintendo scalie simple_background solo toony undead video_games

Rating: Safe
Score: 24
User: Itoruna
Date: August 16, 2016

Lyokira said:
That last point seems a little out of place in the list...

i think that one might not be a rule so much as a request and/or guideline mainly.


Jugofthat said:
...Wait. What exactly is this about? Are you saying I'm not allowed to add an artist's or commissioner's info (from a source) to a post if I'm not its uploader?

Unless "to create information" (that seems pretty vaguely worded) means I'd have to be deliberately pulling things from my ass and making it seem as though it's quoting one of the people involved. Now outlawing that I could understand.

It's best to not fuck with descriptions, because you can do anything a description can in a comment or source field. If you want to give credit to a music maker or the secondary animators, do it in a comment. If they forgot a second source, say the owner's end of the commish'd piece, change the source to include it.

For uploaders, they can use the description to say/relay information that doesn't belong in a comment. For instance, stories, character details, "uploader quips", or artist details. That stuff should not be modified and making a long comment, or series of comments, would be not smart.

So, ultimately, it's curtesy between the first and third parties: uploaders use descriptions to put information that may (not) be needed, third party can choose to comment on it, or add more, or choose not to.

In your example, the smartest method is to use "[.section=*], remove the . , and replace the * with "artist information". Once you are done with the info, end it with [./section] ,again remove the . . It saves people the time of reading through your comment by sectioning it, and if people are interested you've just provided the information they may have needed. A person can't edit your comment, but some random Douchebag McAsshole can choose to re-edit out your description information, so commenting it saves a potential description war.

As pseudo off-topic, I've never seen that rule enforced while looking through negative records, and I'm willing to assume it's because they don't have to, tagging and sourcing is the most common method of adding needed information.

Jugofthat
Privileged
1 year ago
2016 <3 ambiguous_gender anthro blonde_hair blush brown_hair cat clothed clothing covering cute english_text feline hair hands_behind_back humor looking_at_viewer mammal multicolored_hair open_mouth pants powfooo powfooo_(character) reaction_image shirt shocked simple_background solo sweat tears text two_tone_hair white_background wide_eyed

Rating: Safe
Score: 140
User: Jugofthat
Date: June 04, 2016

I was actually talking about adding descriptions from a source to posts that currently have none, definitely not editing something made or put there by someone else, or adding stuff onto it (unless it's entirely sensible, like adding the already quoted person's name, which is clarifying).

Not much harm in that, and it's much more tidy to have that kind of info in the description box instead of a post (again, only if nothing else is currently in there). Because that's literally what it is, a description.

People screwing with them afterwards is very rare too, I can thankfully say from lots of experience. By the way, posts can be downvoted beneath the treshold, so that would ultimately be the same except irreversible.


Jugofthat said:
...Wait. What exactly is this about? Are you saying I'm not allowed to add an artist's or commissioner's info (from a source) to a post if I'm not its uploader?

Unless "to create information" (that seems pretty vaguely worded) means I'd have to be deliberately pulling things from my ass and making it seem as though it's quoting one of the people involved. Now outlawing that I could understand.

The second part is correct, if you wish to edit the description to match the description on the original upload you're more than welcome to do so. The thing we forbid is writing made up crap to hope and influence the tags or other such nonsense.
If you do edit descriptions be mindful if the uploader is either the artist or the commissioner, you should let them deal with their descriptions in those cases.

Jugofthat
Privileged
1 year ago
2016 <3 ambiguous_gender anthro blonde_hair blush brown_hair cat clothed clothing covering cute english_text feline hair hands_behind_back humor looking_at_viewer mammal multicolored_hair open_mouth pants powfooo powfooo_(character) reaction_image shirt shocked simple_background solo sweat tears text two_tone_hair white_background wide_eyed

Rating: Safe
Score: 140
User: Jugofthat
Date: June 04, 2016

NotMeNotYou said:
The second part is correct, if you wish to edit the description to match the description on the original upload you're more than welcome to do so. The thing we forbid is writing made up crap to hope and influence the tags or other such nonsense.
If you do edit descriptions be mindful if the uploader is either the artist or the commissioner, you should let them deal with their descriptions in those cases.

Thank you! In that case I can safely say I've not been doing anything wrong, and that includes paying attention to the uploader to see if it's perhaps someone with more of a say in things than me. :)

That's a relief.


GameManiac said:
It could also standing for Clash of Clans.

No it's Clash of Cykas


NotMeNotYou said:
The second part is correct, if you wish to edit the description to match the description on the original upload you're more than welcome to do so. The thing we forbid is writing made up crap to hope and influence the tags or other such nonsense.
If you do edit descriptions be mindful if the uploader is either the artist or the commissioner, you should let them deal with their descriptions in those cases.

Might I suggest changing it to "making shit up" or "making up non-factual information" or just something a little clearer than "creating information?" While it's currently very PC and intelligently worded not everyone will fully understand what it means, as you've already seen. If it means making sure it's clearer then I'm all for being a bit cruder or less eloquent, and definitely less ambiguous, in wording.

BW100
Member
1 year ago

I'm concerned with this new Code of Conduct system, I understand having smart and respectful people is nice thou, It feels quite restrictive or highly PC. like harassment for example, the person might report that person for saying mean words, while others just seeing criticism. So demanding people to be nice is fine but can be highly limited to freedom of speech.

I can see you want nice and friendly people thou you can get highly authoritarian and out of control on censoring people, simply for offending someone's feelings. This may get a bit SJW if not careful.


I've only seen them hide truly atrocious comments, and otherwise they just leave a warning or a record, otherwise leaving the comment there. They're pretty respectful of freedoms.


BW100 said:
I'm concerned with this new Code of Conduct system

The rules have been like this for more than 2 years. You tell us if we're highly authoritarian by now.


I posted a couple videos that I made somewhat recently, using footage captured from within a game, edited to music. I didn't know that this qualified as "screenshots". Could you clarify that rule so I don't waste my time trying to upload things like those in the future? Maybe add "game captures"?

The videos I made are here:

https://www.youtube.com/user/NontendoSextyFour

Thanks.


YesOhYes said:
I posted a couple videos that I made somewhat recently, using footage captured from within a game, edited to music. I didn't know that this qualified as "screenshots". Could you clarify that rule so I don't waste my time trying to upload things like those in the future? Maybe add "game captures"?

The videos I made are here:

https://www.youtube.com/user/NontendoSextyFour

Thanks.

If it's screencapture of a video game, whether a still image or a video, it's still a screenshot.


my image was deleted for "low quality picture of drawn image" i do not own a scanner the image looks fine all joking aside
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/18175133/
is there any way i can have this ruling on the image changed?


brightstreak said:
my image was deleted for "low quality picture of drawn image" i do not own a scanner the image looks fine all joking aside
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/18175133/
is there any way i can have this ruling on the image changed?

https://e926.net/wiki/show/uploading_guidelines

Low quality submissions: Highly visible artifacts, scribbles, low-quality photographs of traditional media (invest into a scanner, people!), 1000h in MSPaint images, computer generated mosaics, etc. etc.

https://www.freecycle.org/
https://www.craigslist.org/about/sites
https://www.google.com/maps/search/public+library+near+me/

Note: Scanning a previously photographed image does not guarantee that it will be approved.


I've read the "Upload Guidelines" and Come across the Bad things to upload.
-Screen captures
And yet, a simple search found a whole page full of them. (320) How are these getting accepted?

As well,
"Knowingly or repeatedly uploading a lower-resolution image, if there is a higher-resolution of that image available" seems unfinished, If there is a higher reso of that image....What do we do? Since you can't repost something that was deleted, how do you post a higher reso of that image.


LordzBacon said:
I've read the "Upload Guidelines" and Come across the Bad things to upload.
-Screen captures
And yet, a simple search found a whole page full of them. (320) How are these getting accepted?

As well,
"Knowingly or repeatedly uploading a lower-resolution image, if there is a higher-resolution of that image available" seems unfinished, If there is a higher reso of that image....What do we do? Since you can't repost something that was deleted, how do you post a higher reso of that image.

From what I've seen, changes to the acceptable content policy on e621 generally do not affect uploads made before that policy change, so any screenshots et al that were uploaded ages ago are allowed to remain for the time being

If there is a higher-resolution image on e621, do not post a lower-resolution of the same image


LordzBacon said:
"Knowingly or repeatedly uploading a lower-resolution image, if there is a higher-resolution of that image available" seems unfinished, If there is a higher reso of that image....What do we do? Since you can't repost something that was deleted, how do you post a higher reso of that image.

If an image was deleted, chances are it's irrelevant to the site or poor quality. In the latter case, take a look at the source of it (If one wasn't linked then don't even worry about it) and see what the quality looks like. If the source's top resolution looks to be a good quality and it simply offered up a thumbnail, then try uploading the full version.


NotMeNotYou said:
New CoC update!

This it's not change of the rules, but adding record worthy offenses from the DNP list directly into the rules. The goal of this change is to allow people to directly see what will lead to records when posting without having to read both the CoC and the DNP list.

Genjar said:
Is this change still in effect? As far as I can see, it never actually got added to the avoid posting list.

Can we please add : NO dipictionsof children or someone that looks like a child (under 18) they can not be less thena quarter of tere size an the same species of animals.

There would be no point of not loading child porn if you are drawing child porn. Please I beg you its morally wrong