So I had nothing much to do and decided to read some random lulz comments on picture like post #665449 stumbling upon this comment that I find kind of arrogant, with that rule reminding me of some countries far away where if you say anything negative about the king/president, you get shot.

I am not talking about troll/insults/assholish comments about these fetishes like "Your fetish is making me sick what the fuck is wrong with you go kill yourself", those don't need a "special" fetish rule and the classic "Don't insult other users" should be more than fine for that case.

However that Ignore and Blacklist rule is simply one sided. People having weird fetishes have the right to express them, but any negative reactions are not wanted and cannot be expressed, with a "Stop whining and ignore the picture" mentality. This actually sounds like censorship and completely against freedom of speech in the first place, something I'm sure people with those weird fetishes will always bring in. People have the right to express their opinions, positive or negative that may be.

Even for pictures without any kind of weird fetishes, what would happen if I comment on post #693981 "A little weird to see that Pokemon being anthrofied, I would have preferred it to be feral" then what ? Getting a "Stop whining and blacklist anthrofied" comment, and then get banned three days ? What if I say something about a picture being black and white and say how I wish the artist would take his time to color his pictures ? Getting scolded to blacklist black_and_white and get another ban for that ? That rule is causing this one big problem : Anything negative can fall under this rule and get you a ban, just because you gave a negative opinion on the matter.

I feel like this rule is just there because people with fetishes are insecure and don't want to hear anything about how their weird fetishes are weird.

I don't even use a blacklist at all, because I'm not a whiny man who needs to be protected by the sight of these thumbnails, and as weird some fetishes can get, I'm not going to block them. They have their place around the fandom and I respect them enough to acknowledge them, but don't tell me to pretend they don't exist because I may find your fetish weird and be vocal about it

Heh. My fetish is happy_sex which I have no problem discussing it with others.

Weird fetishs maybe, because they're a minority, and people always blame minorities.

Neitsuke said:

It's a matter of tone and extremity.
Saying "Pokemon don't look as good anthrofied" once or twice on a picture or so isn't an offense. Saying it five-to-eight times across multiple pictures? Now you're being a nuisance.

Politely stating that the content of the image is kind of gross? Might provoke a response, naturally but you're probably not going to get a ticket about it.
Getting hateful and aggressive on an image's comments, insulting or threatening people? Now you're crossed the line.

It really is fairly simple.

Actinium-89 said:
Getting hateful and aggressive on an image's comments, insulting or threatening people? Now you're crossed the line.

As I said, there are already rules about not insulting other users and such. There's then no need to coat a "Don't do that on stuff you can blacklist" over it, that's my main problem here

Neitsuke said:
As I said, there are already rules about not insulting other users and such. There's then no need to coat a "Don't do that on stuff you can blacklist" over it, that's my main problem here

It's a hold-over from an old "rule" that was basically described as "Shut up and Blacklist."

I presumed we kept it because it's a very brief and concise way to explain the notions of those various interlinked commenting guidelines.

Refusal to Use Blacklist
Suggested Suspension Length: 3 to 7 days
This category includes:

• Creating posts, threads, or comments that complain about artwork that can be blacklisted
• Wrongfully claiming lack of knowledge about the blacklist system to avoid punishment from the previous rule

This is intended to reduce or eliminate the complaints that users make about seeing a certain type of content on the site. If a user chooses, or refuses, to utilize the blacklist, but continues to complain about content they find offensive or unsatisfactory, then this rule may be enforced. Additionally, if a user finds a post that is incorrectly tagged and willingly chooses to complain about seeing it instead of placing the correct tag, this rule may also be enforced then.

That is the entire rule section concerning the blacklist, especially important is the last sentence, since that tells you about the intent of the rule.

In short, we have this part because we don't need to hear people whine on every single fetish picture how someone dislikes X. It gets annoying real fast even without insults so we have this to shut them up.

However, there is something you likely didn't saw:

Disciplinary Actions

When a member is found to have violated the Code of Conduct in one or more ways, disciplinary actions will be given from a site administrator in the form of a neutral or negative record. It will contain the specific rule that was broken, and the offending post (or hyperlink to offending post). This is a breakdown of how the disciplinary actions will work:

• Notification (neutral record): This will serve as an advisement that you have violated the Code of Conduct.
• If you broke the Code of Conduct in multiple ways that warrant a Notification, everything will be summarized in a single record

• Warning (negative record): This will serve an official warning that you violated the Code of Conduct.
• If you broke the Code of Conduct in multiple ways that warrant a Warning, everything will be summarized in a single record

• Suspension (Ban): This is a temporary ban from the site and forums.
• If you committed an offense that warranted Suspension, and another one that warranted a Warning, you will only receive one negative record summarizing all offenses. Treat the Warnings as if they were part of the Suspension instead of as Warnings.

• Permanent Ban (Perma Ban): This is a permanent ban from e621.net and all other affiliates. This is reserved for repeated offenses and serious violations of the Code of Conduct
• If you wish to appeal your ban, you may contact the Community Manager

Notifications / Neutral Records will be removed after 6 months time if the broken rule has not been violated twice in this timeframe.

What does it mean? Before anybody gets banned for anything they must break the same rule 3 times, 4 times to make it permanent. (with the exception of being underage, linking malicious content, ban evasion, and being an automated spambot)
And if we need to tell you 3 times to shut up about how you dislike something while we give you the option to avoid it in the first place, then it is absolutely your own problem for not being able to shut up.

The fetishes this rule concerns most are only shared by a few people, we do not need a majority ganging up on a minority, we want everybody to feel welcome, and this requires that everybody is given a modicum of respect regardless of whether you can fap to something or not.

Last but not least:

Neitsuke said:
This actually sounds like censorship and completely against freedom of speech in the first place, something I'm sure people with those weird fetishes will always bring in.

We aren't run by the government so you have no freedom of speech in the first place. We have the right to remove anybody for any reason any time of the day.
We still haven't banned everybody yet (something Dave firmly denies whenever I bring it back up) so I would just trust in our ability to not be giant cunts and ban everybody because we feel like it, but instead that we only ban people who are toxic to our community.

aurel said:
Everyone's farts are toxic ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You are toxic aurel.
I had to wash my mind after your forum post twice.

when will people stop using freedom of speech as excuse for shitty behavior? freedom of speech means that government cannot tell you to shut up, someone else telling you to shut up and stop behaving like an ass is not violating freedom of speech in any way.

I knew about those disciplinary actions, it still doesn't address my issue about how we can't be negative (Without sounding disrespectful) without the now constant fear to stack these warnings up.
I'm talking about non-trollish negative comments that can happen to everyone to voice about at times, and that's what concerns me : This whole attitude where everything but positive comments is accepted otherwise we shoot you.

We aren't run by the government so you have no freedom of speech in the first place.

Woah, woah there. While I agree and understand that this is indeed your "domain" and you indeed have the rights to do whatever you want with the comments, freedom of speech still applies, that's like, I don't know, saying that you can kill me because the website is not run by the US government.

As a little note, I only mentioned that for ethical/morality purposes, and not as "You don't have the right to silence me you meanie Admins ! Freedom of speech's here to protect me !" since while they have the full freedom to post their fetishes, we have "no choice" but to stay silent and pretend they don't exist (I know, I'm being overdramatic about the getting silenced part, but hopefully you get the point)

Neitsuke said:
that's like, I don't know, saying that you can kill me because the website is not run by the US government.

Not even in the same realm of 'can't say whatever you want'. Not being allowed to say anything and having the right to kill is apples and oranges. It's a complete fallacy.

And it's their website, they have every right to boot you if they don't like what you say.

Neitsuke said:
I knew about those disciplinary actions, it still doesn't address my issue about how we can't be negative (Without sounding disrespectful) without the now constant fear to stack these warnings up.
I'm talking about non-trollish negative comments that can happen to everyone to voice about at times, and that's what concerns me : This whole attitude where everything but positive comments is accepted otherwise we shoot you.

That is why the wording is "If a user chooses, or refuses, to utilize the blacklist, but continues to complain about content they find offensive or unsatisfactory, then this rule may be enforced."
If it's a comment once in a blue moon we don't care. We reserve us the right to care, but we generally don't until it becomes problematic.

If you make a comment once in a blue moon it's not problematic. If you dedicate half an hour to post the same "I hate this fetish" on multiple images it becomes problematic.

Neitsuke said:
Woah, woah there. While I agree and understand that this is indeed your "domain" and you indeed have the rights to do whatever you want with the comments, freedom of speech still applies, that's like, I don't know, saying that you can kill me because the website is not run by the US government.

I am aware that you meant that we should allow everybody to speak their mind whether or not if it's positive or negative (and we enforce that up to the point that we have banned people for repeatedly demanding that we silence other users) but we still have no reason to do so except pure benevolence.

But past that, nothing forces us to accept any sort of hate speech from anybody, we try to balance the needs of thousands of people and we want that everybody has a good time on here. If that requires that we get rid of people who can't shut up about other peoples fetishes then so be it.
And again, repeatedly is important, if you say something once in a while then nobody cares, but some people literally go on a crusade and need to voice their disgust on as many images as possible. Which is annoying and counterproductive so we slap them around until they stop.

Alright then. At least I know for sure that it's not going to happen as soon I voice a (negative) opinion about some weird fetish.
With all these mentions of "Has to be done repetitively" then this whole rule has more to do with actual harassment than anything about negative comments towards a fetish, which is what I wanted to bring about : This rule is more about being some icing on some already established rules the code of conduct has.

The rule should maybe rephrased a little better then, because from how I read it, it really feels like people simply have no rights to be negative about fetishes under the pretext they can pretend it doesn't exist

Neitsuke said:
Alright then. At least I know for sure that it's not going to happen as soon I voice a (negative) opinion about some weird fetish.
With all these mentions of "Has to be done repetitively" then this whole rule has more to do with actual harassment than anything about negative comments towards a fetish, which is what I wanted to bring about : This rule is more about being some icing on some already established rules the code of conduct has.

The rule should maybe rephrased a little better then, because from how I read it, it really feels like people simply have no rights to be negative about fetishes under the pretext they can pretend it doesn't exist

What I want to know is, if someone voices a negative, but civilly-written comment, what good does it do for the artist who posted the fetish or medium that someone doesn't like? Is it really conducive for said negative comment to be posted? Does it benefit the artist in any way? If it's constructive criticism, I can see, but if it's negative comment just for the sake of being negative, who does it help?

I'm genuinely curious.

There's an old adage

"If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all" or at the very least, if you insist on critiquing/criticizing a work, be civil about it, like you said and I agree. But being negative just because someone can doesn't mean they should. It doesn't help the art or artist in anyway since it doesn't address the problem or problems with which they can improve on.

It's okay to have differences of opinion, I think that they're only saying this so the same negative comment isn't spammed dozens of times on any given artists' works. Saying the same thing once or twice is fine, saying the same thing ad nauseum, not okay.

Personally, I like this rule. It's function is more as a social lubricant of sorts. It keeps the site friendlier overall, by granting a protection, of sorts, to those with less accepted interests, so that they don't have to as frequently hear about people disliking their art.

I checked your profile, and apparently you like Audino? Imagine if every time you clicked on an Audino image, there were a ton of comments about how Audino is a horribly ugly Pokemon and you had to be deeply disturbed to like her. On every single picture.

Because that's what this rule is designed to prevent, I think. It's not to stop you from expressing your opinion, but rather, from expressing it ad nauseam. I've never seen it applied to anyone who just made one or two comments about their dislike of something.

To take your example. If you posted "it's weird to see Pokemon anthroified" on one picture, you are not going to get banned. If you post it on twenty pictures, then you're being obnoxious and this rule would most definitely apply.

Clawdragons said:
Imagine if every time you clicked on an Audino image, there were a ton of comments about how Audino is a horribly ugly Pokemon and you had to be deeply disturbed to like her. On every single picture.

As I said many times, people have their rights to an opinion, so of course I will be sad to know that people wouldn't like Audino for some reason and I will move on. However the second half is not something I would call great to say. Not because it's a negative opinion but because that's basically being insulting me here. It has nothing to do with negativity or fetishes. I have no problem with the first part, unless if that guy would post that everywhere, which would be harassment here, and that's another issue I mentioned lots of times before.

To take your example. If you posted "it's weird to see Pokemon anthroified" on one picture, you are not going to get banned. If you post it on twenty pictures, then you're being obnoxious and this rule would most definitely apply.

So yeah, again, this should be under harassment and not labelled as "Don't say anything negative about stuff you can blacklist"

To add even more to this whole situation, I'm fairly sure in my five years of being a member here, I never once typed a negative comment about some weird fetishes. I did voice many times some negative comments about some uploaders tagging themselves as an artist while they only commissioned the artist but other than that, I never once trolled or even said anything bad about fetishes. My only reason why I'm complaining is because I find this rule to be unethical the way it is written and "presented" by users who don't want to hear about how weird their fetish is to the average person

"How I Learned to Stop Whining and Love the Blacklist"

Neitsuke said:
As I said many times, people have their rights to an opinion, so of course I will be sad to know that people wouldn't like Audino for some reason and I will move on. However the second half is not something I would call great to say. Not because it's a negative opinion but because that's basically being insulting me here. It has nothing to do with negativity or fetishes. I have no problem with the first part, unless if that guy would post that everywhere, which would be harassment here, and that's another issue I mentioned lots of times before.

So yeah, again, this should be under harassment and not labelled as "Don't say anything negative about stuff you can blacklist"

To add even more to this whole situation, I'm fairly sure in my five years of being a member here, I never once typed a negative comment about some weird fetishes. I did voice many times some negative comments about some uploaders tagging themselves as an artist while they only commissioned the artist but other than that, I never once trolled or even said anything bad about fetishes. My only reason why I'm complaining is because I find this rule to be unethical the way it is written and "presented" by users who don't want to hear about how weird their fetish is to the average person

It's separate from harassment because they don't harass you. If they pick a fetish they could go through 50 different artists and still bash the same fetish over and over. It's not harassment of a person since it's different artists, so that rule simply doesn't apply.
If they say that they hate Audino on multiple images they aren't harassing you just because you read the images. They aren't even harassing the artist if they say it one other artist's audinos.
And slapping them for harassing a fictional creature sounds very, very strange.

Edit: However, we're not saying it's 100% perfectly worded, if you have an idea on how to improve the wording write it down and post it to us. We're not against making it clearer, but we do need to know exactly what and where the issue is.

Recently, I've started to wonder if that rule also applies in reverse.
Some users have a habit of complaining about vanilla images, and trying to push their favorite fetishes everywhere. Comments like: "This is so dull. Would be better if he <insert a commonly blacklisted kink here, such as scat, snuff or vore>."

It can be pretty annoying at times.

NotMeNotYou said:
It's separate from harassment because they don't harass you. If they pick a fetish they could go through 50 different artists and still bash the same fetish over and over. It's not harassment of a person since it's different artists, so that rule simply doesn't apply.

Usually when someone comments/trolls/insults on a picture with some fetishes he hates, he aims his comment to people into this fetish and/or the uploader rather than the artist per se. I can see that as some form of harassment/trolling even if it's not to someone specific, by the fact that he would harass the "fetish fandom" in general.

If they say that they hate Audino on multiple images they aren't harassing you just because you read the images. They aren't even harassing the artist if they say it one other artist's audinos.

The way he presented this case implies that the "You" is me, or people who actually likes Audino, which again would be somewhat harassing to a group of people rather than a specific person.

For that rule, I simply suggest to change the title to something that doesn't look like you can't have an opinion, to something like Repetitively harass/complain over the same subject, being more clear about how it has to do with constantly being negative over the same stuff rather than this whole premise of "Don't like it ? Don't say anything"

alirezatm said:
You are toxic aurel.
I had to wash my mind after your forum post twice.

Don't attack people.

Fenrick said:
"How I Learned to Stop Whining and Love the Blacklist"

"How I Learned to not Care and Leave my Blacklist White."

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON E621 GROSSES ME OUT!

The internet has done wonders in desensitizing me to the point where I can stare the cheese grater image square in its bloody anus and not even squirm. And I suppose real life had done the same.

In my veterinary job, I recently dissected a Border Collie, twelve years old and euthanized for being both blind and deaf. It smelled disgusting, but I have a fairly poor sense of smell to begin with.

GameManiac said:
"How I Learned to not Care and Leave my Blacklist White."

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON E621 GROSSES ME OUT!

The internet has done wonders in desensitizing me to the point where I can stare the cheese grater image square in its bloody anus and not even squirm. And I suppose real life had done the same.

In my veterinary job, I recently dissected a Border Collie, twelve years old and euthanized for being both blind and deaf. It smelled disgusting, but I have a fairly poor sense of smell to begin with.

It's not that I'll melt if I see any of that shit, I'd just prefer not to when I'm looking for porn or cute stuff. I've seen plenty of disgusting things in person, so pictures aren't going to kill me.

GameManiac said:
"How I Learned to not Care and Leave my Blacklist White."

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON E621 GROSSES ME OUT!

The internet has done wonders in desensitizing me to the point where I can stare the cheese grater image square in its bloody anus and not even squirm. And I suppose real life had done the same.

In my veterinary job, I recently dissected a Border Collie, twelve years old and euthanized for being both blind and deaf. It smelled disgusting, but I have a fairly poor sense of smell to begin with.

Gamemaniac, you seem to have this idea that having nothing on your blacklist is something to be proud of. It's not. On the same note, it's not something to be ashamed of either.

People use the blacklist for various reasons. I use it to help me filter out results so that it is easier to find things that are relevant to my interests more easily, as well as blocking things which I specifically don't like to look at.

If you like everything, good for you. I don't. Most people don't. And not liking everything isn't a bad thing, just as liking everything isn't a bad thing. Either way it's not something to brag about.

Fenrick said:
It's not that I'll melt if I see any of that shit, I'd just prefer not to when I'm looking for porn or cute stuff. I've seen plenty of disgusting things in person, so pictures aren't going to kill me.

True.

The first thing that I do on most of my mornings is browse e621. Some of the images, I skim by. Others, I pay more attention to. And I prefer not to use blacklist to see what's new and what's dated. That's just me though.

Clawdragons said:
Gamemaniac, you seem to have this idea that having nothing on your blacklist is something to be proud of. It's not. On the same note, it's not something to be ashamed of either.

People use the blacklist for various reasons. I use it to help me filter out results so that it is easier to find things that are relevant to my interests more easily, as well as blocking things which I specifically don't like to look at.

If you like everything, good for you. I don't. Most people don't. And not liking everything isn't a bad thing, just as liking everything isn't a bad thing. Either way it's not something to brag about.

If I did use the blacklist, I'd blacklist Doge. It's a terrible meme of a stupid-looking dog with a sense of grammar so irritating that I've come to hate the use of the words "much", "such", and "wow" within the same sentence or within the same few, short, sentences.

But I don't blacklist Doge because there's still some humor to be found in that tag.

Such as this.

post #368717

GameManiac said:

Such as this.

post #368717

I remember running into this one a few months back. Of all the posts I've seen on here, this was the only one that managed to startle me. :x

parasprite said:
I remember running into this one a few months back. Of all the posts I've seen on here, this was the only one that managed to startle me. :x

I've had experiences with pics that did that, like seeing certain art in the wee hours of the night, no one around, a dark room, I nearly crapped myself on a few occasions. Very unsettling indeed -_-

parasprite said:
I remember running into this one a few months back. Of all the posts I've seen on here, this was the only one that managed to startle me. :x

It's because it blends so eerily well.

Two words, cheese grater.

post #681991
post #477055

Yooo I'm reviving that topic because one case about this one issue I have happened days ago, making me even more worried about this whole issue. The funny part is it's not even about some weird fetish at all, but it's still a result I was talking about when I brought up the subject on being scolded for being vocal about something.

I was browsing the user records for some lulz reasons for bans and warnings, then I noticed this lovely comment] on post #860698 . The guy received a warning for that, however not for the right reasons as I was worried about] . What really weirds me out here is he wasn't bitching about a fetish, he was, very rudely of course, whining about how the character was extremely not original at all with his two deeks and character fur color. What's the fetish to blacklist here, bad_uncreative_pokemon_oc ?Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he's innocent. He was being pretty douchey here and the warning is fine, but this reason about not using his blacklist just sounds, frankly enough, pretty stupid, and that makes me even more worried about saying anything without hurting someone's feelings now

Neitsuke said:
I was browsing the user records for some lulz reasons for bans and warnings, then I noticed this lovely comment] on post #860698 . The guy received a warning for that, however not for the right reasons as I was worried about] . What really weirds me out here is he wasn't bitching about a fetish, he was, very rudely of course, whining about how the character was extremely not original at all with his two deeks and character fur color. What's the fetish to blacklist here, bad_uncreative_pokemon_oc ?

fan_character

alirezatm said:
Heh. My fetish is happy_sex which I have no problem discussing it with others

Yeah, I quite like that too! That and romantic ones. Because I like my porn to have emotion in it I guess, as its more releastic?

Not every fan character is uncreative, which is the problem with how blacklisting ideas is pretty much impossible, but my main issue with this is the reason being refusal to use the blacklist when it would have been easier and make more senses to simply have been for being insulting and disrespectful towards a member, which falls under Harassment or Defamatory, would make more senses than being for not using the blacklist because you can't really blacklist uncreativity to begin with, while his comment is very hostile towards someone

How about you stop kinkshaming my fetish for garish, badly designed, red and black original characters.

Neitsuke said:
What really weirds me out here is he wasn't bitching about a fetish, he was, very rudely of course, whining about how the character was extremely not original at all with his two deeks and character fur color. What's the fetish to blacklist here, bad_uncreative_pokemon_oc ?

I think they only see a small slice of the Sliding Scale of Original Characters as truly original.

NotMeNotYou said:
fan_character

I would add Pokémon to that line for the person whom was warned. That way it's only blacklisting Pokémon OCs.

Lativee said:
I think they only see a small slice of the Sliding Scale of Original Characters as truly original.

I would add Pokémon to that line for the person whom was warned. That way it's only blacklisting Pokémon OCs.

fan_character ~red_body ~black_body maybe? Do fuzzies work in blacklists? If not, it'll have to be two lines for them.

fan_character pokemon alternate_color -shiny_pokemon
fan_character pokemon hybrid

adding those tro rows on blacklist should be p effective. it removes all pokemon fan characters that either have non-canon coloring or are hybrids which are p common traits on donut steel level ocs.