Not throwing shade at peeps who like that sorta thing
(As long as they keep that in the world of doodles obviously)
But with the 'Popular posts' on the front page of the site
1 outta 3 times being something to this effect
http://image.prntscr.com/image/708f26ec3caa41988da5e907ae99b81a.png

You really gotta wounder ya know?

A lot of cub artists go there because other sites generally don't allow cub content.

IB is the got-to for cub artists and fans.

I mean...do other furry art sites like FA allow cub or not? It's probably just the fact that so many other sites don't allow it so all the cub lovers end up in one place. Sorta like how Pivix has a ton of shota.

FA no longer allows cub after the whole AlertPay fiasco.

FurryNetwork also no longer allows cub IIRC.

Not sure about SoFurry?

InkBunny is definitely the big place I see for those who do cub art.

Not many places allow cub porn these days, and in all honesty I don't blame them. There's been a "pedophile panic" going on for quite a few years now, similar to the Satanic Panic of the 1980's, where even the slightest thing that might potentially look like it could possibly have anything to do with pedophilia is automatically branded as child abuse and other such stuff. Since cub porn involves underage-looking fictional anthropomorphic characters, it gets targeted by the idiots who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction, as well as those who go on and on about the "gateway drug" effect despite the fact that the said effect has long since been debunked. When people are terrified and panicked and "thinking of the children," no amount of facts and statistics is going to make the stampeding herd stop to see that they're heading toward a cliff.

wolftacos said:
Not sure about SoFurry?

Yes, SoFurry allows cub.

InannaEloah said:
Yes, SoFurry allows cub.

Maybe it's because I don't visit often, or the userbase is smaller than other sites, but I don't recall ever seeing cub there. Huh! Today I learned.

wolftacos said:
Huh! Today I learned.

And learning is half the battle!

SoFurry allows it, but SoFurry doesn't make as much noise as other sites. There does seem to be a not insignificant following for feral stories on it- 1/3 of the stories featured on the front page involve feral sex. The site owner even admins a feral group on the site.

wolftacos said:
Huh! Today I learned.

You learn something new every day.

regsmutt said:
SoFurry allows it, but SoFurry doesn't make as much noise as other sites. There does seem to be a not insignificant following for feral stories on it- 1/3 of the stories featured on the front page involve feral sex. The site owner even admins a feral group on the site.

Huh. I might need to take another look at the site then.

Not really, there is just more of it, since it's not allowed in different places.

Around the time of the AlertPay thing on FA was not long after the launch of IB. Since IB was the shiny new toy of the time, cub porn peddlers left FA for the most part and went to IB. Before then, IB was like any other furry site.

It's actually kinda sad that people combine inkbunny with cub, because that's actually the most technically advanced furry site of everything and I legit like using that site.

But inkbunny is just like any other furry site, but simply happens to allow cub on top of all other content and nobody wants to leave FA which is technically one of the worst furry sites there are.

Well FA itself started the same way I believe, with "dA" and "furry porn" in place of "FA" and "cubs".

hslugs said:
Well FA itself started the same way I believe, with "dA" and "furry porn" in place of "FA" and "cubs".

Didn't FA grow basically out of all the hardcore furry porn artists who got kicked out of SheezyArt?

By volume, cub art is less than 10% of all art on Inkbunny. There are plenty of artists using the site who despise cub art and shit-talk it every chance they get.

It's also a popular place for Japanese artists. Undoubtedly this is at least partially due to the cub association, but many of those artists do not draw cub so I'm not sure.

Short answer, no, long answer, cub art is a lot more prolific and popular there because that's one of the few sites now that openly welcomes it.

It shows up on the most popular page most often because a large percentage of people come to that site specifically to see that kind of content, despite it only being a small fraction of the overall content on the site. That's not to say people don't view other types of artwork on IB, but a lot of the art that isn't cub related can be found most anywhere else, so most people aren't really going to come there to seek that out specifically, especially when a lot of artists who do non cub work mainly host their art on other sites, and just use IB as a means to draw people to their main account off-site.

The relegation of InkBunny to "cub pornography hub", while certainly unfortunate for the owners and operators of InkBunny, is probably for the better. It acts as a "containment site" for cub pornography aficionados (or as most people would call them, pedophiles).

Kavellrist said:
The relegation of InkBunny to "cub pornography hub", while certainly unfortunate for the owners and operators of InkBunny, is probably for the better. It acts as a "containment site" for cub pornography aficionados (or as most people would call them, pedophiles).

Is it just me or are you just purposefully going around making everyone want to hit you in the face and make others fight with each other?

I do not think lolicons to be pedofiles either, so when it comes to cub it gets even further away from the reality. Saying those who enjoy cub content to be pedofiles will most likely not end well, because most of that said group are not pedofiles just because of the fantasy content they consume. Pretty sure there was also user asking how to not see human child containing posts while still seeing cub on IRC one day.

Of course it's possibility that cub consumers are all pedofiles, but in my eyes it's exactly same possibility that all furries are into bestiality.

Kavellrist said:
The relegation of InkBunny to "cub pornography hub", while certainly unfortunate for the owners and operators of InkBunny, is probably for the better. It acts as a "containment site" for cub pornography aficionados (or as most people would call them, pedophiles).

I always find this amusing coming from people on furry sites, considering how frequently I hear those very same furries loudly and angrily decrying the idea that they have any tendencies towards zoophilia.

It seems hypocritical to me. They want to criticize others for what they imagine their tastes in fantasy creatures indicates about their interests, but if anyone infers anything about them, based on the same basic rules, then oh no, that's totally out of line.

(Note: I'm not saying that furries are necessarily attracted to real animals. I'm just drawing an analogy. I think that inference is as unjustified as the inference that cub artists are into actual children.)

Furthermore! Even if they are pedophiles... Even if they are really attracted to children... As long as they aren't acting on those attractions, and they are keeping things to the realm of fantasy, I've got no problem with that. If someone can use cub pornography to keep themselves happy, more power to them. I see no reason to demonize them for that. No reason to convict them for their thought crime. Harmless outlets are much preferable to harmful actions.

Mario69 said:
Is it just me or are you just purposefully going around making everyone want to hit you in the face and make others fight with each other?

I do not think lolicons to be pedofiles either, so when it comes to cub it gets even further away from the reality. Saying those who enjoy cub content to be pedofiles will most likely not end well, because most of that said group are not pedofiles just because of the fantasy content they consume. Pretty sure there was also user asking how to not see human child containing posts while still seeing cub on IRC one day.

Of course it's possibility that cub consumers are all pedofiles, but in my eyes it's exactly same possibility that all furries are into bestiality.

It's just you. EDIT: To clarify: This doesn't need to be a slappyfight. You could just maturely discuss the matter, or ignore it altogether if my assertions offend you. I am not looking to pick a fight, but I refuse to simply let the furry community sweep this under the rug, or pull their usual "It's not the saaaaaaame for... reasons". You have a problem, furries. The question is, will you do the same thing about it that the gay community did when they realized they had an extraordinarily high incidence of pederasty amongst their ranks?

The fact of the matter is that if you get your rocks off to cub material, you are getting your rocks off to depictions of ostensibly underaged, non-sexually-mature quasi-humanoid creatures, aka children. Cub gets your rocks off in the first place BECAUSE you are sexually attracted to these things. Lolicons/shotacons have even less plausible deniability than cub porn lovers, to be honest, and should rightly be considered to have pedophilic tendencies. Cub, loli and shota consumers pretty much HAVE to be pedophiles, because if they weren't pedophiles, they wouldn't find depictions of children (bearing fur or otherwise) titillating.

Now, you can argue whether these latent pedophiles are doing anything actually wrong or not when they create and consume cub/loli/shota content. Unless the content in question is incredibly-heavily modeled after a specific or multiple specific real children's identities, to the point where a relative or acquaintance of that child could look at the picture in question and go "Holy shit, I know that kid", it's probably safe to call cub/loli/shota content "victimless", as it would not be victimizing an actual, real child. This, however, does not change the logical fact that a pedophile is the one who consumes that content, and the funny thing about pedophiles is that they don't always keep their pedophilia in the realm of the victimless.

In regards to furries and bestiality: There's a pretty shocking level of overlap between the zoophiles and the furries to begin with, and a pretty large amount of zoophilic/bestiality-focused artwork here on e6. I have personally encountered multiple furries who were both furry and zoophile and confessed that there were a great deal of zoophiles present in their circles.

The fact of the matter is that furries actually have a pretty serious problem with harmful paraphilias in general being allowed to run rampant throughout the furry community.

Kavellrist said:
It's just you.

The fact of the matter is that if you get your rocks off to cub material, you are getting your rocks off to depictions of ostensibly underaged, non-sexually-mature quasi-humanoid creatures, aka children. Cub gets your rocks off in the first place BECAUSE you are sexually attracted to these things. Lolicons/shotacons have even less plausible deniability than cub porn lovers, to be honest, and should rightly be considered to have pedophilic tendencies. Cub, loli and shota consumers pretty much HAVE to be pedophiles, because if they weren't pedophiles, they wouldn't find depictions of children (bearing fur or otherwise) titillating.

Now, you can argue whether these latent pedophiles are doing anything actually wrong or not when they create and consume cub/loli/shota content. Unless the content in question is incredibly-heavily modeled after a specific or multiple specific real children's identities, to the point where a relative or acquaintance of that child could look at the picture in question and go "Holy shit, I know that kid", it's probably safe to call cub/loli/shota content "victimless", as it would not be victimizing an actual, real child. This, however, does not change the logical fact that a pedophile is the one who consumes that content, and the funny thing about pedophiles is that they don't always keep their pedophilia in the realm of the victimless.

In regards to furries and bestiality: There's a pretty shocking level of overlap between the zoophiles and the furries to begin with, and a pretty large amount of zoophilic/bestiality-focused artwork here on e6. I have personally encountered multiple furries who were both furry and zoophile and confessed that there were a great deal of zoophiles present in their circles.

The fact of the matter is that furries actually have a pretty serious problem with harmful paraphilias in general being allowed to run rampant throughout the furry community.

You don't know how ridiculous you sound right now. But, do cite yourself for all this, you're otherwise making uninformed claims that have been brought up and broken down before.

The whole argument cub = pedophilia is wrong because you don't recognize the boundaries of reality and fantasy, and the common stereotype of that argument exploits that. That is literally just it: once you know where the line is, then you can try that argument again.

Kavellrist said:
--stuff--

I have several fetishes, one of which being zoophilia, but just because I like it in fictional art does not mean that I like it in real art, or even that I would do it in real life*. This is the case with many people.
Even if a few people who like cub/shota/loli art are pedophiles, research shows that those with access to such art are less likely to actually harm children in real life. In a way it does benefit.

General rule of the thumb, if you don't like it and it isn't illegal on the server it is hosted on, don't look at it. If it is illegal where you are at, thats your problem, not the server's host. :v

*In fact, I would never harm a animal in real life, I love them too much(in a non-sexual way) that even if my life was threatened, the fact I harmed a animal would haunt me for the rest of my life.

Siral_Exan said:
You don't know how ridiculous you sound right now. But, do cite yourself for all this, you're otherwise making uninformed claims that have been brought up and broken down before.

The whole argument cub = pedophilia is wrong because you don't recognize the boundaries of reality and fantasy, and the common stereotype of that argument exploits that. That is literally just it: once you know where the line is, then you can try that argument again.

The boundaries of reality and fantasy do not matter when discussing whether there is an extraordinarily high prevalence of a paraphilia present in a community. Paraphilias are paraphilias, and how you choose to indulge in them does not change the fact that you have a paraphilia.

Chaser said:
I have several fetishes, one of which being zoophilia, but just because I like it in fictional art does not mean that I like it in real art, or even that I would do it in real life*. This is the case with many people.
Even if a few people who like cub/shota/loli art are pedophiles, research shows that those with access to such art are less likely to actually harm children in real life. In a way it does benefit.

General rule of the thumb, if you don't like it and it isn't illegal on the server it is hosted on, don't look at it. If it is illegal where you are at, thats your problem, not the server's host. :v

*In fact, I would never harm a animal in real life, I love them too much(in a non-sexual way) that even if my life was threatened, the fact I harmed a animal would haunt me for the rest of my life.

The funny thing about zoophiles is that they don't feel they are actually harming the animal when they engage in acts of bestiality. Your assurance that you would NEVER harm an animal doesn't actually tell me very much.

Kavellrist said:
The boundaries of reality and fantasy do not matter when discussing whether there is an extraordinarily high prevalence of a paraphilia present in a community. Paraphilias are paraphilias, and how you choose to indulge in them does not change the fact that you have a paraphilia.

Citation, please?

Kavellrist said:
The funny thing about zoophiles is that they don't feel they are actually harming the animal when they engage in acts of bestiality. Your assurance that you would NEVER harm an animal doesn't actually tell me very much.

Except I know lots about aninmals, including anatomical, behavioral, and in specific here, physiological. Animals, especially horses, have shown emotional distress after specific acts have been taken place on them. Some needing special psychiatric care afterwards.

YouWereNeverMyFriend said:
stuff

I don't know if you can read this currently, but I need to throw my two cents in. I went to Inkbunny after leaving FA specifically to make a statement on what banning cub porn really is, even though I personally am not a fan other than things that just happen to fall under casual nudity, and I don't really associate nudity with sexuality. I won't pretend to enjoy the sexual aspect of some cub art, but I'm also not going to pretend fictional characters are protected by real life human rights. It's the same thing people claimed about video games.

I myself have a fascination with psychologically breaking clearly-innocent characters. That doesn't mean I like to do that in real life. In fact, I'm a compulsive Pacifist. I'd take a bullet for my worst enemy. Harming anyone is actually a phobia of mine. Fiction is just an outlet for me to direct any anger I have, and it keeps me from lashing out at myself.

Thanks to the admins for banning the abundantly obvious troll.

Returning to the point, please:

Wow this thread certainly got lively,
A peep's already got bane for something they said and it's only been day.
Speaking of that dood, I'll got ahead and put my two heaven's onto the subject.

Kavellrist said:
Za stuff of stuff are stuff because they like stuff

Gonna have to go with a crowd on this one because just because a dood likes cub doesn't instantly make them Pedo bears. Things aren't as cut and dry like that,
peeps are dynamic and can like one this in a fantasy sense and not in a reality.
I mean I like to play classic Mario and Hunt deers with swords in Skyrim
(Because I never have arrows when I need them T T) But that doesn't mean I'm
gonna be stomping on turtles and chasing elks with claymors in reality ya know?

But in all seriousness:
Dude, There is a more then apparent divide between the peeps who like cub and
pedophiles. More apparent then the divide between being gay and pederasty.
(Seriously man, That was just offensive and inappropriate)
I won't deny that there are a few who are do drift into that territory but it's
not all of them. And grouping them all together, giving the shallow excuse of
it looks like B so A must be equal B is just a good get people mad at you =T

Am I the only who finds it hilarious how any mention of the words pedophile or zoophile guarantees an argument and has at least one person making a two-page response explaining how they are not either of those things when no one has actually called them that yet?

BlueDingo said:
Am I the only who finds it hilarious how any mention of the words pedophile or zoophile guarantees an argument and has at least one person making a two-page response explaining how they are not either of those things when no one has actually called them that yet?

Ikr?
It's like a trigger phrase or something ~ w ~)
But in a way it's good, Shows how many peeps are willing to stand up for what
they believe in/like in spite of what other others think of it ╹‿╹)

Aww man... I missed all the fun~

BlueDingo said:
Am I the only who finds it hilarious how any mention of the words pedophile or zoophile guarantees an argument and has at least one person making a two-page response explaining how they are not either of those things when no one has actually called them that yet?

what about "necrophile"?
can't forget those
or you're one fetish short of the dark triad (pedo/necro/zoo)

Munkelzahn said:
what about "necrophile"?
can't forget those
or you're one fetish short of the dark triad (pedo/necro/zoo)

post #123672

InannaEloah said:
Not many places allow cub porn these days, and in all honesty I don't blame them. There's been a "pedophile panic" going on for quite a few years now, similar to the Satanic Panic of the 1980's, where even the slightest thing that might potentially look like it could possibly have anything to do with pedophilia is automatically branded as child abuse and other such stuff. Since cub porn involves underage-looking fictional anthropomorphic characters, it gets targeted by the idiots who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction, as well as those who go on and on about the "gateway drug" effect despite the fact that the said effect has long since been debunked. When people are terrified and panicked and "thinking of the children," no amount of facts and statistics is going to make the stampeding herd stop to see that they're heading toward a cliff.

true

"When people are terrified and panicked and "thinking of the children," no amount of facts and statistics is going to make the stampeding herd stop to see that they're heading toward a cliff." pfft, seen this in particular plenty of times and it usually results in the attackers pulling up their own quotes and whatnot while talking out their ass with blind hatred.

Ratte said:
Around the time of the AlertPay thing on FA was not long after the launch of IB. Since IB was the shiny new toy of the time, cub porn peddlers left FA for the most part and went to IB. Before then, IB was like any other furry site.

that was one of the great FA related exoduses wasn't it?

kavellrist... well, the topic of cub porn was mentioned so this thread was inevitably going to attract at least 1 person of that type who would try to cause trouble. that happens pretty much any time this topic is brought up sooner or later.

Siral_Exan said:
The whole argument cub = pedophilia is wrong because you don't recognize the boundaries of reality and fantasy, and the common stereotype of that argument exploits that. That is literally just it: once you know where the line is, then you can try that argument again.

exactly

you also won't find cub porn on furry network due to the fiasco involving the market system it uses and the decision largely having been kept silent aside from those who opposed cub porn (abd ahyone caught showing the slightest amount of resistance got their posts on that thread downvoted to hell. pretty much a one sided argument outside the market system issue.

BlueDingo said:
Am I the only who finds it hilarious how any mention of the words pedophile or zoophile guarantees an argument and has at least one person making a two-page response explaining how they are not either of those things when no one has actually called them that yet?

you so much as mention the topic of cub porn and 2 things will happen and result in an argument. 1. one or more people will appear and start carrying on about how cub porn is equally as bad as irl CP and 2. those who think otherwise (like me) will inevitably start arguing against the attackers. it's happened pretty much every time i've seen the topic come up. though i would think the "anti-cub porn" side might get a fair bit less support on somewhere like e621 or IB which allow such content to be posted freely.

Munkelzahn said:
what about "necrophile"?
can't forget those
or you're one fetish short of the dark triad (pedo/necro/zoo)

:/ not really into that stuff but to each his own i would say. that and i'd probably keep a fair distance from that and a few other things.

and i'd comment on what all, kavellrist, said but NMNY already took care of them and their argument didn't look like anything that hasn't already been debunked/etc. as million times already.

treos said:
that was one of the great FA related exoduses wasn't it?

Yes, back in 2010. Before then IB's content was really no different than FA's, but because FA wanted to keep AlertPay (they didn't, but technicalities), they moved to remove cub work and disallow further posts. FA wouldn't have done that otherwise, unless some other financial issue cropped up somewhere else.

Ratte said:
Yes, back in 2010. Before then IB's content was really no different than FA's, but because FA wanted to keep AlertPay (they didn't, but technicalities), they moved to remove cub work and disallow further posts. FA wouldn't have done that otherwise, unless some other financial issue cropped up somewhere else.

That and the users who had it removed were banned retroactively. There was no grace period to remove it. Just random banning for something it explicitly allowed before.

kamimatsu said:
That and the users who had it removed were banned retroactively. There was no grace period to remove it. Just random banning for something it explicitly allowed before.

That I don't recall.

Ratte said:
That I don't recall.

They were trying not to make noise while doing it, so posts mentioning it were deleted, usually getting the poster banned. I actually got a strike myself for a false accusation, and my gallery had always been empty. An admin told me herself (the same one to ban Jessica Elwood) that it's necessary to remove anyone who attracts angry users because "that's how pest control works". Basically, if you're being bullied, it's your own fault and the site is only protecting itself by banning you in order to appease the users.

kamimatsu said:
They were trying not to make noise while doing it, so posts mentioning it were deleted, usually getting the poster banned. I actually got a strike myself for a false accusation, and my gallery had always been empty. An admin told me herself (the same one to ban Jessica Elwood) that it's necessary to remove anyone who attracts angry users because "that's how pest control works". Basically, if you're being bullied, it's your own fault and the site is only protecting itself by banning you in order to appease the users.

That's interesting because I was staff there at the time and I heard nothing about it.

Kavellrist said:
The relegation of InkBunny to "cub pornography hub", while certainly unfortunate for the owners and operators of InkBunny, is probably for the better. It acts as a "containment site" for cub pornography aficionados (or as most people would call them, pedophiles).

Shut it. I like cub porn. I find real children a turnoff for me. Don't know why that's the case.

I know this whole thing is kind of ended, but FUCK YOU, MAN.

I like cub, shota, and loli, but if anybody where to ever do REAL CP or was a child molester, I'd be in jail for aggravated assault on that fucker.

It's almost as bad as the stereotype of guro lovers all being serial killers. Or, if you want something a little more close to home, all furries being bestiality-loving freaks who "yiff" in cartoon-y fursuits and believe they're a sand shark trapped in a human's body or something.

TL;DR Stereotypes kill, don't do 'em.

Clitheroe said:
I like cub, shota, and loli, but if anybody where to ever do REAL CP or was a child molester, I'd be in jail for aggravated assault on that fucker.

tabloid headline: "pedo killed by other pedo for being a pedo" or "how will the pedo-killer-pedo be treated in prison?"

Clitheroe said:
Stuff stuff stuff

Munkelzahn said:
Provoking stuff

Dood probably already notice this but I though I'd say it anyway because
I'm turbo dork ╹‿╹)

Don't fall for it dood, Munkel's trying to press your buttons to get an
outburst out of you. Replaying to this dood rashly will actually hurt your point.
~ w ~)

I know, again this is super obvious but, I just wanted to point these things out
whenever I see them because again. Super Duper turbo dork over here ◠‿╹)

Notkastar said:
Dood probably already notice this but I though I'd say it anyway because
I'm turbo dork ╹‿╹)

Don't fall for it dood, Munkel's trying to press your buttons to get an
outburst out of you. Replaying to this dood rashly will actually hurt your point.
~ w ~)

I know, again this is super obvious but, I just wanted to point these things out
whenever I see them because again. Super Duper turbo dork over here ◠‿╹)

In other words...

BlueDingo said:
In other words...

Exactly Dood!
Munkel-guys trying to trick/bait Clith-Guy into attacking his own cause
Don't do it Clith; It's a Trap!

Munkelzahn said:
tabloid headline: "pedo killed by other pedo for being a pedo" or "how will the pedo-killer-pedo be treated in prison?"

wew lad

Notkastar said:

Dood probably already notice this but I though I'd say it anyway because
I'm turbo dork ╹‿╹)

Don't fall for it dood, Munkel's trying to press your buttons to get an
outburst out of you. Replaying to this dood rashly will actually hurt your point.
~ w ~)

I know, again this is super obvious but, I just wanted to point these things out
whenever I see them because again. Super Duper turbo dork over here ◠‿╹)

I guess that Munkelzahn's "provoking stuff" was some kind of joke.

An apart question: why do you put a right parentheses at the end of every paragraph instead of a point? What that means?

O16 said:
I guess that Munkelzahn's "provoking stuff" was some kind of joke.

An apart question: why do you put a right parentheses at the end of every paragraph instead of a point? What that means?

(*Internal Cringe* Oh my spelling errors... Dyslexia why can't you go away. ~ ~)

As for your question: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The way I type is just something I developed over time to make my post more
easy for me go over since I have a tendency to make a LOT of errors and
spacing things out help me not to get lost in my own text.

It's not prefect and I'm pretty sure peeps who are big on grammar will
have an aneurysm when they see it but, That's A o.k with me lolz.
Not trying to impress anyone with my linguistics (Or lack there of T‿T)

As for the ")'s" I really love them tbh, Adds a lot more emotion in what I type ◠‿◠)
Again it's o.k if you don't like them, I know I can't make everyone
one happy but i'm gonna keep using them because I love them dood ╹‿╹)

Edit:
Also almost forgot to answer your sub point there lolz ◠‿◠)
Dood I know it's a joke but, for the party on the receiving end it isn't;
It's provoking. Tbh seeing it at a joke is actually another layer to that
now that I think about it brilliant bait.

If Clith-Guy did lash out, Munkel-guy wouldn't have just won in getting
outburst out of him but also seeing other peeps from the third party
(The one we're in)
lash back with "It was a joke man!" then he would argue, we would
argue back and Munkel-guy would be in the back ground like

Quite a cleaver troll imo, Well done Munkel-guy T ‿T)

SirBrownBear said:
wew lad

lol how many times would a jpeg pic have to be downloaded and reuploaded to be that bad?

and regarding Munkelzahn's post. i didn't know mimicing the mainstream media's tactics was baiting. o_O guess i know a new method of baiting now.

treos said:
lol how many times would a jpeg pic have to be downloaded and reuploaded to be that bad?

Zero. It's repeated saves that affects the quality, not repeated downloads.

TLDR: All cub artists/viewers are pedo.
All furriez are zoophiles.
All humans are murderers.

Welp, I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

DelurC said:
All humans are murderers.

Oi! I'll have you know that all my kills are legal and justified and delicious.

IB is the place for cub porn. You can add tags to block so you don't have to see any of it if that's what you're worried about.

Yeah, I really like that IB has a blacklist feature. Would love for FA and DA to implement the system.

I think some people don't tag it when they first upload it though, I have seen some stuff that looked like cub to me on the front page and I have it blacklisted. Sometimes can't tell the difference between actual age and artistic style though, so I never bring it up on there.

Notkastar said:

(*Internal Cringe* Oh my spelling errors... Dyslexia why can't you go away. ~ ~)

As for your question: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The way I type is just something I developed over time to make my post more
easy for me go over since I have a tendency to make a LOT of errors and
spacing things out help me not to get lost in my own text.

It's not prefect and I'm pretty sure peeps who are big on grammar will
have an aneurysm when they see it but, That's A o.k with me lolz.
Not trying to impress anyone with my linguistics (Or lack there of T‿T)

As for the ")'s" I really love them tbh, Adds a lot more emotion in what I type ◠‿◠)
Again it's o.k if you don't like them, I know I can't make everyone
one happy but i'm gonna keep using them because I love them dood ╹‿╹)

Edit:
Also almost forgot to answer your sub point there lolz ◠‿◠)
Dood I know it's a joke but, for the party on the receiving end it isn't;
It's provoking. Tbh seeing it at a joke is actually another layer to that
now that I think about it brilliant bait.

If Clith-Guy did lash out, Munkel-guy would have just won in getting
outburst out of him but also seeing other peeps from the third party
(The one we're in)
lash back with "It was a joke man!" then he would argue, we would
argue back and Munkel-guy would be in the back ground like

Quite a cleaver troll imo, Well done Munkel-guy T ‿T)

I have nothing against your parentheses (actually I like them), the question was just for curiosity.
I usually try to be open for the possibility of people don't want to offend and just didn't had expressed themselves well, because I sometimes have the same problem.

O16 said:
I have nothing against your parentheses (actually I like them), the question was just for curiosity.
I usually try to be open for the possibility of people don't want to offend and just didn't had expressed themselves well, because I sometimes have the same problem.

Oh, thanks ma peep! ◠‿◠)
It's K man, Peeps ask me what's up with my typing all the time so whatevs
also Prinnies of a feather dood ◠‿╹)
Though I gotta say I have gotten better at getting my point across the
more I goof off on this site lolz ╹‿╹)

BlueDingo said:
Am I the only who finds it hilarious how any mention of the words pedophile or zoophile guarantees an argument and has at least one person making a two-page response explaining how they are not either of those things when no one has actually called them that yet?

It's called "protesting too much"

DelurC said:
All humans are murderers.

murder is a term humans created in order to criminalize the act of killing but even then it only has a fairly narrow range of application and in certain situations even humans killing other humans gets excused (such as with soldiers on the battlefield).

Welp, I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

humans truly are the worst of all creatures. but maybe if we ever manage to escape this rock, those of us who feel this way can leave and finally find somewhere better to live. or just do other things while off exploring the vastness of space.

I was not referring to actual murdering, with ecocide, poisoning everything, destroying species or actual murder or any sort of that stuff.

I was referring to watching movies or playing video games (you know, where you shoot stuff).
Since looking/drawing cub=pedo then looking/playing killing=murderer

I still think it's funny how FA will pick and choose which artists to ban for cub art. I've seen 2 popular artists get banned soon after posting cub, while other popular artists would post cub with no issue.

Dogenzaka said:
I still think it's funny how FA will pick and choose which artists to ban for cub art. I've seen 2 popular artists get banned soon after posting cub, while other popular artists would post cub with no issue.

It's called equality, some are more equal than others.

Notkastar said:
Is Inkbunny mostly 'cub' oriented or is it just me?

Short answer: "yes" with an "if". Long answer: "no" with a "but…"

Unlike Cub Central, Inkbunny was not created specifically for cub. But let's be honest: content is still king, and for many members - artists, story-writers, and fans - cub is IB's unique selling proposition. (That could be a good thing for other sites, as fewer try to upload content which they don't allow.)

Inkbunny has clearly cornered the market on cub porn. It's been like that for six years, when FA recommended it to departing cub fans along with SoFurry.

Even before then, Inkbunny had attracted many cub artists, in part because Starling was also co-founder of the infamous Softpaw Magazine. Many of the site's staff have cub characters - Starling invited those he knew personally, at least to some extent. So it was a friendly space for cub to begin with.Thanks to Inkbunny's promotion of popular artwork, based on short-term views after publication, artists with big fan-bases tend to get a lot of views. This is generally because they're creating good art - that's part of what it takes to get a large fan-base - but it also provides a bias towards content appealing to other members. This creates a self-reinforcing effect - cub art is popular, those who create it get more watches, which means they remain popular.Cub continues to be controversial, so there's a constant pressure for artists and their fans to use Inkbunny rather than other sites, helping to maintain a coherent community. A prior commenter called this "unfortunate" for Inkbunny's owners or operators, but I see it as a good thing… both for those on IB, and compared to the alternative of a site which few have a good reason to visit, let alone make their home. I'm sure you can think of a few examples.As it is, Inkbunny's traffic continues to grow - slowly, but steadily. Certainly, IB's features and regular updates help - many use it because of its ability to host multiple files in a submission, higher resolution, or larger videos. (You're also not quite as likely to find your PMs in a publicly-indexed database.)In the end, IB was created to support furry art, and stories, and offer their creators a platform to promote and sell their work and effort. There's no special deal for work featuring underage characters, or those creating it - if anything, we're liable to err on the side of caution if such work is e.g. overly humanish.Several other market segments are also popular, such as feral characters, Pokémon, Sonic and some MLP content. In part, I think these artists face pressure on other sites and prefer to upload somewhere they're less likely to be taken down. The same for more extreme themes, which are forbidden in on some sites for social reasons; on Inkbunny we rely on it being properly keyworded and people using the keyword block system.

GreenReaper said:

Thanks to Inkbunny's promotion of popular artwork, based on short-term views after publication, artists with big fan-bases tend to get a lot of views. This is generally because they're creating good art - that's part of what it takes to get a large fan-base - but it also provides a bias towards content appealing to other members. This creates a self-reinforcing effect - cub art is popular, those who create it get more watches, which means they remain popular.

To be fair, this feature is a strange one because as long as pornographic material is thrown into the mix it no longer showcases purely "good" art, but whatever most people can fap to. The reason for that is rather simple: People can fap to their fetishes even if the execution is mediocre, but they can't (or won't) fap to things that are of exceptional quality but have nothing else to offer the horny masses.

Case in point: Only 31 pictures in the popular section are (at this very moment) rated general out of 240 submissions total.

Alas, there is no good solution for that. Porn is popular for a reason, and the popular section just reinforces it further by pushing it at the top and keeping it there. At least you guys have the latest section just as easily accessible for users to view.
There should be a popular section for underdogs somehow, but I'm unsure how you'd filter the already popular users out automatically.

NotMeNotYou said:
To be fair, this feature is a strange one because as long as pornographic material is thrown into the mix it no longer showcases purely "good" art, but whatever most people can fap to.

Well, that depends on what you consider "good". There's a lot to be said for giving people what they want to see, especially if the alternative is not seeing them again. You want to give occasional visitors a reason to return, and to catch their eye if they drop by the front page. Guests initially see all-clean art.

There should be a popular section for underdogs somehow, but I'm unsure how you'd filter the already popular users out automatically.

We've been tossing around ideas internally. One possibility is a "Rising Stars" system, promoting work with a disproportionate number of +favs considering the number of the people watching the submitter. This would work because essentially all people in "Popular" are highly-watched already, hence unlikely to place.

GreenReaper said:
Well, that depends on what you consider "good". There's a lot to be said for giving people what they want to see, especially if the alternative is not seeing them again. You want to give occasional visitors a reason to return, and to catch their eye if they drop by the front page.

That's true, but it also means that someone who wants a "realistic" chance at being popular will have to go to porn since it has the advantage of being a supernormal stimuli.

GreenReaper said:
We've been tossing around ideas internally. One possibility is a "Rising Stars" system promoting work with a disproportionate number of +favs considering number of the people watching the submitter. This would work because essentially all people in "Popular" are highly-watched already.

I'd love to see a section like that, and that filter sounds like it would work with minimal effort. Other's would also probably welcome a section like that.

The lack of giveashit on IB regarding things that aren't cub porn is why I stopped bothering with the place. Having to scroll down to see new posts instead of popular ensured my work was never seen. Why post to a place like that? The popular don't need more popularity.

NotMeNotYou said:
That's true, but it also means that someone who wants a "realistic" chance at being popular will have to go to porn since it has the advantage of being a supernatural stimuli.

Well, yes. But as you said, that issue isn't unique to Inkbunny. I'm not sure it's even an issue. It's like saying chocolate sells better to kids than vegetables.

Some people love to grow vegetables, but that doesn't mean they're entitled to equal demand or pricing for the resulting product. Or shelf space; you don't see newsagents stocking cabbages next to the till, and that's because they don't keep or sell as impulse buys. You have to go to the supermarket for them.

Now, personally I love vegetables - and I like to see and encourage high-quality clean art on Inkbunny, too; the Inktober contest is one way we do that (and I admit to picking to promote the cleaner art in that, where available). But to succeed in the competitive market of furry art site hosting, you also have to be "realistic" about what draws people to a site to start with, and keeps them around.

As a practical matter, I think clean artists are liable to do better on DA than almost any furry-specific site; certainly when I was running surveys of dealer-room artists in back in 2011, DA was consistently second-place after FA, indicating a big "alternative market".

Ratte said:
Having to scroll down to see new posts instead of popular ensured my work was never seen. Why post to a place like that? The popular don't need more popularity.

You say that… yet, you admit you got watchers, comments and +favs, despite not posting. Clearly not all members restrict themselves to the front page… Popular or Latest.

On Inkbunny, your work seems to have gotten ~20-25% of the views and +favs as on FA. That may reflect a difference in audience size, rather than topic or Popular bias. As far as I can tell, we don't have 1/5th of FA's audience; maybe closer to 1/8th - so proportionate to our userbase, you may have done better on IB than you did on FA. In absolute terms, it may not be enough to justify spending much time; but that's what gallery management tools are for. This can help you build up your audience to the point where you start to get more out of the site, or maintain it as an alternate disaster-recovery account.

The point of Popular is not to promote individual artists, although I'm sure some of them see it that way. It's to show off the most appealing work the site currently has to offer, based on hard statistics - what people are choosing to view - and so get visitors to stick around long enough to create and use an account; and to get those who have accounts to look at more art and interact with more artists. People have limited time, and it is important to provide a reason for them to visit regularly, or they may drift off.

Ultimately this increases the chance of them taking the time to see all the art on offer, including yours. It encourages members to spend more time on their work, and on the site; even for porn, it can be a challenge to get on Popular. And to an extent, it's a low-pass filter; both in terms of artistic quality, and the audience it attracts. If you see lots of stuff you really don't like there, Inkbunny may not be the best site to join, since even if you can block it, it's likely you'll object to other topics. This decreases outbursts from new members, helping to preserve a positive experience.

Over the last few years we doubled the size of Popular to increase diversity while being careful to maintain a certain level of quality. Right now, a piece needs ~250 views within three days to get on there. That's high, but not insurmountable, and it's lower if certain ratings or keywords are blocked; for example, without 'cub', it's 150 views, while for guests it's ~50… or ~25 if they haven't adjusted their ratings.

These levels are well within the reach of mostly-clean artists, like Paco Panda - his work regularly gets into the entirely-uncensored Popular, if warranted. But not all work qualifies, and the key is it has to offer something to the viewer. That's true of any piece; it can be an evidently high-quality work which catches the eye just from the thumbnail; or it can feature a particular character or situation which is desired by them.

As for those who can't yet get there: search is heavily used, and we provide indexes of non-guest-blocked work to Google et. al. which they do access (notwithstanding that people have to turn SafeSearch off). Compare FA, which actively blocks indexing. People browse through other people's +favs on a regular basis; 'suggested for you leverages this to make recommendations, and by default a link to it is emailed to those who've enabled email notifications, on a weekly basis. (Of course, you have to actually watch people on the site for that feature to function.)

GreenReaper said:
You say that… yet, you admit you got watchers, comments and +favs, despite not posting. Clearly not all members restrict themselves to the front page… Popular or Latest.

I get about the same amount of interest not posting as I did when I posted. Amazing.

GreenReaper said:
On Inkbunny, your work seems to have gotten about 20-25% of the views and +favs as on FA. That probably reflects a difference in audience size rather than topic preference or Popular bias. As far as I can tell, we don't quite have 1/5th of FA's audience; maybe closer to 1/8th - so proportionate to our user base, you may have done better on IB than you did on FA. In absolute terms, it may not be enough to justify spending much time on IB. But that's what gallery management tools are for.

I have been part of the site since it was still new. I left because I got nowhere, especially regarding business. Nearly all of my business comes from FA, so no, I did not do better there and left because posting there felt like a waste of time. I did not roll with the status quo so I got little recognition or otherwise. If I actually got business there I would sing a different tune.

GreenReaper said:
The point of Popular is not to promote individual artists, although I'm sure some of them see it that way. It's to show off the most appealing work the site currently has to offer, based on hard statistics - what people are choosing to view - and get visitors to stick around long enough to create and use an account; and to get those who have accounts to look at more art and interact with more artists. People have limited time, and it is important that we provide a reason for them to visit regularly.

"Appealing." It's the same thing by different hands. Unless you are going there with the intent to touch your wiener there really isn't much the place has to offer. They're going there and signing up for a reason, just like they do here, FA, and other furdump sites. It isn't a place for people like me.

GreenReaper said:
Ultimately this increases the chance of them taking the time to see all the art on offer, including yours. It encourages members to spend more time on their work, and on the site; even for porn, it can be a challenge to get on there. And to an extent, it's a low-pass filter; if you see lots of stuff you don't like on Popular, Inkbunny may not be the best site to join, since even if you can block it, it's likely you'll object to other topics. This decreases outbursts from new members, helping to preserve a positive experience.

See above. I try to avoid places with "popular" sections because if I'm going to take the time to post something, I would like it to actually get some interest. That's why I don't post my own work here, only sometimes post to DA, and stay the fuck away from FurryNetwork. If I wanted my work to get buried in garbage I would just throw my work in the trashcan.

GreenReaper said:
Over the last few years we doubled the size of "Popular" to increase diversity while being careful to maintain a certain level of quality. Right now, a piece needs ~250 views within three days to get on there. That's high, but not insurmountable, and it's lower if certain ratings or keywords are blocked; for example, without 'cub', it's 150 views, while for guests it's ~50… or ~25 if they haven't adjusted their ratings.

I'm lucky to even get that on FA, which has a much larger userbase and greater post variety.

I have been on FA for three days short of nine years.

Okay.

GreenReaper said:
These levels are well within the reach of mostly-clean artists such as Paco Panda - his work regularly gets into the entirely-uncensored Popular, if it warrants it. But not all work qualifies, and the key is it has to offer something to the viewer. That's true of any piece; it can be an evidently high-quality work which catches the eye just from the thumbnail; or it can feature a particular character or situation which is desired by them.

Apparently not, because I have seen the opposite trend for longer than IB has existed. Further, that work is still cub, which people will look for on IB even if it isn't always pornographic. Wowee. You even prove my point:

GreenReaper said:
As for those who can't yet get there: search is heavily used, and we provide indexes of non-guest-blocked work to Google et. al. which they do access (notwithstanding that people have to turn SafeSearch off). Compare FA, which actively blocks indexing. People browse through other people's +favs on a regular basis; 'suggested for you leverages this to make recommendations, and by default a link to it is emailed to those who've enabled email notifications, on a weekly basis. (Of course, you have to actually watch people on the site for that feature to function.)

It would be nice if FA didn't block indexing but FA has rarely made good decisions. Surely this is a surprise to nobody.

Your site has a very clear direction and a very specific audience. While you and others can say it makes up only a minority of posts, those posts are still what people go there for. Most work on FA is general, but anyone with half a brain knows that isn't what people are there to view.

Ratte said:
Unless you are going there with the intent to touch your wiener there really isn't much the place has to offer.

Not necessarily. I'm actually on that site frequently and the only use I have for porn is laughing at how little sense it makes, and I can already do that here. I'm just there to write stories and hopefully improve my art, which is admittedly nowhere near the quality standards here yet. I'm also a fan of RP if it stays clean, and I'm not going to try RP here.

kamimatsu said:
Not necessarily. I'm actually on that site frequently and the only use I have for porn is laughing at how little sense it makes, and I can already do that here. I'm just there to write stories and hopefully improve my art, which is admittedly nowhere near the quality standards here yet. I'm also a fan of RP if it stays clean, and I'm not going to try RP here.

I need business in order to pay bills-- I don't go to sites to look at stuff, I go there to post stuff. Not getting business on a site means the site is a waste of time for me. I don't really make/post stuff "for funsies", and given I was there for 3-4 years with a single commission, I'm not likely to stick around.

What other people do is obviously their prerogative, but boy it is not the kind of place for me. Granted, I'm pretty convinced there are no places for my line or work, but I make do.

Ratte said:
I need business in order to pay bills-- I don't go to sites to look at stuff, I go there to post stuff. Not getting business on a site means the site is a waste of time for me. I don't really make/post stuff "for funsies", and given I was there for 3-4 years with a single commission, I'm not likely to stick around.

What other people do is obviously their prerogative, but boy it is not the kind of place for me. Granted, I'm pretty convinced there are no places for my line or work, but I make do.

Doods got a point,
I can't say from exp since for the most part I do make/post art for funsies
ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
But if I made the switch to charging so I could pay for the place that's keeping
from a cold park bench. I literally couldn't spend time setting up on a
site where most of the peeps that are making bank on that site working in
another department all together.

It'll be like trying to sell soup at a bakery. Just not worth it in
the long run when there are plenty of other places to set up shop where
peeps ARE looking for soup and would pay good money to get it ya know?
╹‿╹)

Ratte said:
I need business in order to pay bills-- I don't go to sites to look at stuff, I go there to post stuff. Not getting business on a site means the site is a waste of time for me. I don't really make/post stuff "for funsies", and given I was there for 3-4 years with a single commission, I'm not likely to stick around.

What other people do is obviously their prerogative, but boy it is not the kind of place for me. Granted, I'm pretty convinced there are no places for my line or work, but I make do.

I can respect that. I'm not an artist, but I could see myself saying the same about programming. You make a good point.

Ratte said:
Further, that work is still cub, which people will look for on IB even if it isn't always pornographic. Wowee. You even prove my point

Well… I think we can agree that most of Inkbunny's users - even if they also like other things - are fans of small, cute characters; and often of horrifying-yet-fictional things being done by/to them. The most-popular content reflects that. Part of its membership is only active on the site, and so it may be of value to some artists. But if there's not much overlap with the work you want to do, it's probably not going to provide much business. (And that's OK.)

Of course, audiences can change. I'm reminded of the time a young up-and-coming furry art site took on a bunch of gay porn artists who got thrown off y!Gallery and SheezyArt. They outlasted both, going on to absorb significant portions of their memberships, plus several other sites, ultimately leading to them supporting - to some extent - a few artists whose output was not gay, or even particularly pornographic.

To be honest, I don't see Inkbunny going all the way down that path… in part because waiting for sites to fold has never been a rewarding pastime, but also because we don't allow things many fans like (such as human erotica, and photography). On the plus side, that makes it cheaper and more pleasant to run; a major factor in why it's still around.

It's a bit off-topic, but I'm curious as to how you think your ideal site would work. My initial thought was something like ArtSpots, but I hear it lacked traffic, and you might not have got much business there, either. Many seemed to use it as a clean-dump, to give friends, family and employers something to look at - the average furry fan could get all that and more at FA, and eventually the owner shut it down. I've considered running a similar site on Inkbunny's code, but I fear the traffic might disappoint those who use it.

Notkastar said:
It'll be like trying to sell soup at a bakery. Just not worth it in
the long run when there are plenty of other places to set up shop where
peeps ARE looking for soup and would pay good money to get it ya know?

I guess one question is whether furry websites, or the fandom as a whole, is the right venue to sell a particular work, or your skills. Graphic novels featuring anthropomorphic animals pre-date the fandom (although it might be a good place to find a publisher); and if you can find a job, you're more likely to make significant income working for someone else. Of course, you typically have to work on someone else's ideas, too, unless you can convince other people that yours are worth making. [This is also true of furry programmers]