casmin7~ said:
Foxes in love was liked by a lot of people so its surprising it was removed from the best place to view it and read it (As I would also prefer to read Faux Pas here) but I guess when standards change things end up shifting.

It was also liked by a lot of staff, too, so hot feelings sometimes flared up, especially this last time, so don't think we did this on a lark. But we couldn't come up with a sufficiently good reason to keep it, much as we wanted to (and we did try). As I've said several times before and likely will nauseate people with in the future, sometimes you have to murder your darlings, no matter how much it hurts.

rainbow_dash said:
Foxes in love was always right there on the border of the standard. That's what made it so hard to deal with. It's not drawn poorly, but it's also very simplistic. It made applying the standard consistently hard.

What is the policy on minimalist art?

Would love to know who kept pushing to have it all removed. No one ever seemed bothered by it. It's very clear a lot of furs love those cute little foxes, so why was there ever any internal debate about it in the first place?

brave said:
Would love to know who kept pushing to have it all removed. No one ever seemed bothered by it. It's very clear a lot of furs love those cute little foxes, so why was there ever any internal debate about it in the first place?

Just because a lot of people, staff included, loved those foxes doesn't exempt those Fox Peeps from the site's quality standards. Even taking minimalism into account, much of the art was below the quality standards. The reason so much of it was accepted was because a former staffmember kept accepting it despite consistent disapprovals on quality standards by other staffmembers, and because of that precedent, other staffmembers kept it up despite the quality issues frequently coming up in discussions. Several comics actually had been deleted for quality reasons until a fan cleaned them up. In the later comics, the foxes actually improved quite a bit, but the things they interacted with were often lumpy, unrecognizable, and indistinct, even for minimalism. The dialogue was frequently the only thing carrying the comics and dialogue by itself isn't sufficient enough to make something acceptable on the site. Let's face it, if it hadn't been "Foxes in Love", the comics would have been deleted long ago and few would have cared.

Basically, the disapproving staff wanted us to be more consistent with our standards even when it pains us to be so. Further, the exception that was "Foxes in Love" caused problems when other poorly drawn minimalist pictures got deleted and uploaders would point at "Foxes in Love" as getting in when other, slightly better (but still not quite good enough) pictures weren't.

And no, I'm not going to tell you who those disapprovers were. They don't need to be harassed for doing their jobs and caring about this site even when it means making hard, painful decisions that other people might disagree with.

A prime example of when a rule should be enforced, or adjusted and changed for the better...

And I never expected you to tell us the names of the disapprovers. Nor would it even matter. I was more curious as to *why* they would push for this