I've noticed for a bit now that there tends to be a bit of inconsistency with the use of the "Irrelevant to site" reason to take down a image that admins use.
Sometimes two images that have very similar content will be posted one will get removed under that reason while the other will be approved, and this has made me wonder about what irrelevant to site actually means, is it a valid thing that has a reason or is it just a way to say a upload didn't agree with a admins personal tastes?
(and no I'm not looking for drama it's a honest question)

afaik human only pics are typically regarded as irrelevant, yet humans are allowed in pics with at least one other character considered to be furry. i don't really know that much regarding other things though like robots and vehicles and stuff.

I do know something with just vehicles or robots in them normally get the axe quickly if its real life and that would make sense I think, but I was under the impression that even art with human only characters was acceptable as well if properly tagged. A recent post of a gif from Minus8 that got declined made me wonder about it.
Thanks for answering.

treos said:
afaik human only pics are typically regarded as irrelevant, yet humans are allowed in pics with at least one other character considered to be furry.

For a while, all human-only posts were automatically denied, but that seems to have changed since quite a lot of them have been approved recently. So I'm not sure what the current rules are.

What doesn't count as "human only":

• Human, but with ears/tail like a cat (cat_humanoid)
• Human on cat action
• Allieens (the less human-y ones) Edit: Tentacles, ovipositors, maggots, etc.
• Monster girl
• Human, but with a realistic horse penis (used to be handled kind of inconsistently in the past)
• Anything below when it is part of a larger comic (assuming the majority of the comic is relevant to the site).

What is considered "human only" (assuming there are no other characters in the background):

• Human in all respects, but they have non-human skin colors (Equestria Girls, Doug)
• Some humans, but there's a cat in the background not doing anything in particular.
• An alien in human form
• Human with fake animal ears (most are irrelevant, but I've seen some approved)
• Anything irrelevant that were approved in the past, but a larger/higher quality version was uploaded to replace it

Genjar said:
For a while, all human-only posts were automatically denied, but that seems to have changed since quite a lot of them have been approved recently. So I'm not sure what the current rules are.

Can you give me some examples of this?

And some (such as post #841193) are in pools which have some furry content. It makes sense to approve the whole thing, instead of select pages. But I was referring to posts like post #839509, which seem human-only to me.

Genjar said:
And some (such as post #841193) are in pools which have some furry content. It makes sense to approve the whole thing, instead of select pages. But I was referring to posts like post #839509, which seem human-only to me.

I think that just got accidentally approved. At a glance it looks kind of like cat ears.

Edit: It's deleted now.

Genjar said:
But I was referring to posts like post #839509, which seem human-only to me.

I swear those were cat ears when I approved it.

Genjar said:
For a while, all human-only posts were automatically denied, but quite a lot of them have been approved recently.

parasprite said:
Can you give me some examples of this?

post #822362 post #807473 post #800637

post #825979 post #820742 post #792378

post #843659 post #840662 post #830087

post #825956 post #801226 post #775974

leomole said:
<snip>

Although those aren't furry, the rule only applies to full humans. Humanoids are okay to post. Tentacles on human also tend to be approved, even though tentacles don't count as a character.

_{My personal opinion is that human undead such as ghosts and vampires should be counted as humans, though.}

True enough. post #820742 and post #792378 are entirely human though.

_{My personal opinion is that not_furry posts should be purged with the fury of a thousand suns.}

leomole said:
_{My personal opinion is that not_furry posts should be purged with the fury of a thousand suns.}

_{I suppose I'm grateful that you're not admin, then.}

But really, nothing against you, I just like seeing variety on here.

leomole said:
_{My personal opinion is that not_furry posts should be purged with the fury of a thousand suns.}

Have you blacklisted human rating:e -interspecies? That would hide images like those two.

Thanks for the info, granted it still feels wildly inconsistent with what is viewed as acceptable and what isn't.
Also leomole mind if I ask why you don't like not furry posts?
(don't have to answer that if you don't want just my inner psychologist asking)

Genjar said:
Although those aren't furry, the rule only applies to full humans. Humanoids are okay to post. Tentacles on human also tend to be approved, even though tentacles don't count as a character.

_{My personal opinion is that human undead such as ghosts and vampires should be counted as humans, though.}

Would a post of a fully humanized character be acceptable, as long as we recognize the the character that's fully humanized?
post #487610
Basically a post that's like the above, but just the far left character and nothing else.

ElctrcBoogalord said:
Would a post of a fully humanized character be acceptable, as long as we recognize the the character that's fully humanized?
post #487610
Basically a post that's like the above, but just the far left character and nothing else.

No, we delete those.

NotMeNotYou said:
No, we delete those.

Well usually. Humanized ponies sometimes slip through moderation:
post #812714 post #760047 post #680107

Furrin_Gok said:
Have you blacklisted human rating:e -interspecies?

I tried blacklisting not_furry but the biggest offenders never tag it (e.g. comment #2430012), making this tag useless for the front page. Thanks for the suggestion!

neogoterra said:
Also leomole mind if I ask why you don't like not furry posts?

MissChu said:
nothing against you, I just like seeing variety on here.

No offense taken. I like variety too. The question is where do we draw the line? We could open up to all Japanese art (e.g. Pixiv), making millions of wonderful pieces accessible here on e6. But that's not the mission of this site. e6 has been and should be for furry art, not humans and elves and robots. There are plenty of other sites for those things. That's my opinion anyway.

leomole said:
Well usually. Humanized ponies sometimes slip through moderation:
post #812714 post #760047 post #680107

Those are humanoids (and humanoidized). Humans don't have tails or bright yellow skin.

Yeah, the tails make them relevant just as animal ears horse penises would. The skin however isn't really a factor, we delete Equestrian Girls humans regularly.