All of their stuff seems to be nuked

Their work is still posted. Their artist tag was removed because VAs, editors, etc. are not tagged as artists on e6. To quote NotMeNotYou on the subject: "The artist tags are specifically for people that directly worked on making the visual parts of the submission, either drawing the image or posing the 3D models. Voice actors and sound editors are not credited in the tags but can be credited in the description"

kiranoot said:
Their work is still posted. Their artist tag was removed because VAs, editors, etc. are not tagged as artists on e6. To quote NotMeNotYou on the subject: "The artist tags are specifically for people that directly worked on making the visual parts of the submission, either drawing the image or posing the 3D models. Voice actors and sound editors are not credited in the tags but can be credited in the description"

Is that recent? I feel like i remember voice actors being credited/given artist tags.

This is not recent. It has been how the staff have operated for as long as I have been around. It's become somewhat of a losing fight, but we're still trying to enforce it.

kiranoot said:
"The artist tags are specifically for people that directly worked on making the visual parts of the submission, either drawing the image or posing the 3D models. Voice actors and sound editors are not credited in the tags but can be credited in the description"

But why?

kiranoot said:
This is not recent. It has been how the staff have operated for as long as I have been around. It's become somewhat of a losing fight, but we're still trying to enforce it.

Shame

kiranoot said:
Their work is still posted. Their artist tag was removed because VAs, editors, etc. are not tagged as artists on e6. To quote NotMeNotYou on the subject: "The artist tags are specifically for people that directly worked on making the visual parts of the submission, either drawing the image or posing the 3D models. Voice actors and sound editors are not credited in the tags but can be credited in the description"

Seems like a rule that needs to be revisited. I understand not flooding tags with musicians as that would be meaningless and messy but theres a big difference between career indie voice acting with a following, especially one that people are following explicitly, and plugging musician credits.

kiranoot said:
This is not recent. It has been how the staff have operated for as long as I have been around. It's become somewhat of a losing fight, but we're still trying to enforce it.

Furthermore if its a losing fight, it may be time to either choose to make this a more straight up offense where the tags are rendered invalid outright Or the more reasonable thing to do is classify a meta tag section for it.

People clearly want to tag it and not tagging audio in an audio based post seems silly. Especially that it ignores that sound designers are artists too.

strikerman said:
But why?

Because this is a (visual) art archive, audio is incidental. Good audio won't stop a post from being deleted if the image/video doesn't pass muster.

demesejha said:
Seems like a rule that needs to be revisited. I understand not flooding tags with musicians as that would be meaningless and messy but theres a big difference between career indie voice acting with a following, especially one that people are following explicitly, and plugging musician credits.

Is there a big difference? They both add audio to a video, that people may or may not follow explicitly. An "indie" isn't well-defined, there are "indies" that are backed by or working for the likes of Microsoft or EA (not to mention, someone's status as an "indie" can change on a whim, as they get hired by and leave studios.

demesejha said:
Furthermore if its a losing fight, it may be time to either choose to make this a more straight up offense where the tags are rendered invalid outright

Some tags have been invalidated/aliased to invalid_tag due to being editors or VAs. If there are editor or VA tags you see someone keeps tagging, make an alias request.

demesejha said:
People clearly want to tag it and not tagging audio in an audio based post seems silly.

e6 isn't interested in "audio based" posts. A post's acceptability is determined by its visual component, any audio is just along for the ride.

I mean, when flash was still prominent we used to have the people like the programmers of games tagged in the artist section. the later versions of breeding_season didn't have really any of hartistapipebomb's old dev art left in but he's still tagged, fenoxo is tagged on corruption_of_champions despite that game having no actual visuals other than a the title screen and a few sprites that were made by other people, there's probably some other examples, maybe paraphore-related stuff.
I don't see how tagging those people are really that much diffrent from tagging VAs.

darryus said:
I mean, when flash was still prominent we used to have the people like the programmers of games tagged in the artist section. the later versions of breeding_season didn't have really any of hartistapipebomb's old dev art left in but he's still tagged, fenoxo is tagged on corruption_of_champions despite that game having no actual visuals other than a the title screen and a few sprites that were made by other people, there's probably some other examples, maybe paraphore-related stuff.
I don't see how tagging those people are really that much diffrent from tagging VAs.

Games have been a sore point of being irrelevant to the site, but hosted anyways for some historical reasons. Don't take the tags on these posts as an endorsement of how tags should be used. BTW. I am the messenger for this policy, so I can't hold a nuanced discussion for it. I figure people should have the official reason for it.

watsit said:
any audio is just along for the ride.

Exactly. It's already here, therefore we should tag the audio properly. Unless you want all sound-based tags to be deleted.

strikerman said:
Exactly. It's already here, therefore we should tag the audio properly. Unless you want all sound-based tags to be deleted.

There's a difference between tagging that a post has sound, and who made the sound. Just as we tag edit for third-party image edits, but we don't tag who edited the image (that can be mentioned in the description).

Honestly, I'm surprised so many posts with sound are being accepted, since I recall there being a policy against posts having real sounds of people having sex or masturbating. Given the number of sound posts that have moaning, sex talk, etc, it seems to me they're really towing the line of acceptability between acceptable acting or faked sound effects, and unacceptable real sounds of someone getting off.

watsit said:
Just as we tag edit for third-party image edits, but we don't tag who edited the image (that can be mentioned in the description).

you're bringing that up as if we wouldn't also like to tag the editor as well

watsit said:
Honestly, I'm surprised so many posts with sound are being accepted, since I recall there being a policy against posts having real sounds of people having sex or masturbating. Given the number of sound posts that have moaning, sex talk, etc, it seems to me they're really towing the line of acceptability between acceptable acting or faked sound effects, and unacceptable real sounds of someone getting off.

That... seems like a ridiculous policy, if you'll pardon me.

watsit said:
Because this is a (visual) art archive, audio is incidental. Good audio won't stop a post from being deleted if the image/video doesn't pass muster.

When i was looking at old flash posts that were highly rated, one of them was literally a music player.

strikerman said:
you're bringing that up as if we wouldn't also like to tag the editor as well

Editors can be tagged if they do significant work to the image. Adding or switching a pussy/penis wouldn't normally be significant enough to warrant a tag, but drawing in a whole new character and scenario into the image that wasn't there before may warrant it. Notably however, audio work, even if significant, isn't visible on the image, so wouldn't qualify.

strikerman said:
That... seems like a ridiculous policy, if you'll pardon me.

It's ridiculous to avoid having actual sound recordings of people actually having sex? Without knowing anything about who they are, and no way to verify any claims of who they are? It sounds like a completely reasonable way to avoid potential legal problems to me, especially given the kind of allowed content here.

Granted, I also think it's quite questionable to allow rotoscoped animations of real people having sex (whom we also know nothing about, let alone whether or not they consented to being used as models for animated animal porn), but it apparently is allowed as long as it "completely transforms" the original reference so no part of it is visible (which the point of rotoscoping is to keep the original underlying life-like body movement and shape, letting some of the original reference bleed through). So maybe that's just me.

benjiboyo said:
When i was looking at old flash posts that were highly rated, one of them was literally a music player.

The uploading guidelines used to be very loose, allowing many things that wouldn't be allowed today. Old content that was allowed at the time it was uploaded are grandfathered in, meaning the existing posts can stay even if they wouldn't be allowed if posted today.

watsit said:
It's ridiculous to avoid having actual sound recordings of people actually having sex? Without knowing anything about who they are, and no way to verify any claims of who they are? It sounds like a completely reasonable way to avoid potential legal problems to me, especially given the kind of allowed content here.

A blanket ban doesn't solve the problem; the exact same could be said for artists drawing on here.

strikerman said:
A blanket ban doesn't solve the problem; the exact same could be said for artists drawing on here.

I'm not suggesting a blanket ban on videos with audio, or even NSFW videos with NSFW audio, or even realistic NSFW audio. But if you make a super realistic NSFW drawing that could be confused for a real photo of genitalia, I would expect some scrutiny with it to ensure it's not real, similarly if an audio track could be confused for a real recording of people having sex, I would expect some scrutiny with it to ensure it's not real. Maybe my memory's playing tricks on me, but I recall a situation where someone drew realistic ferals with their genitalia that people thought was a real photo, and the artist had to show their work for the image to prove it was a drawing. Perhaps that was another site and not here, but the point is, there can be a point where it seems so real that you may need to have some proof that it's kosher.

watsit said:
I'm not suggesting a blanket ban on videos with audio, or even NSFW videos with NSFW audio, or even realistic NSFW audio. But if you make a super realistic NSFW drawing that could be confused for a real photo of genitalia, I would expect some scrutiny with it to ensure it's not real, similarly if an audio track could be confused for a real recording of people having sex, I would expect some scrutiny with it to ensure it's not real. Maybe my memory's playing tricks on me, but I recall a situation where someone drew realistic ferals with their genitalia that people thought was a real photo, and the artist had to show their work for the image to prove it was a drawing. Perhaps that was another site and not here, but the point is, there can be a point where it seems so real that you may need to have some proof that it's kosher.

Given your example, I'm not sure why you're singling out audio as a potential issue, then.

strikerman said:
Given your example, I'm not sure why you're singling out audio as a potential issue, then.

I'm not. We don't allow real images/photos of sex, and as far as I know, we don't allow real audio of sex. If a drawing is realistic enough to be confused for a real image of sex, I'd expect there to be some scrutiny to ensure it's not real, and if an audio track is realistic enough to be confused for real audio of sex, I'd expect there to be some scrutiny to ensure it's not real. I'm not singling out audio for anything special.

All of the tags were removed by a single user who was being petulant

https://twitter.com/ZiggyZackStash/status/1557029778334650368?s=20&t=YFqEXop2dTbHKdaVL5oCcw

In Normal circumstances that would be considered tag vandalism so why is it allowed now?

This is a populated tag used by many people and is commonly used, the community agrees on its use and the rule is over 8 years out of date.

Until this is accounted for, and appropriately discussed, removing the tags is harmful and should not be done.
Especially by someone doing it out of some perceived revenge.

demesejha said:
All of the tags were removed by a single user who was being petulant

https://twitter.com/ZiggyZackStash/status/1557029778334650368?s=20&t=YFqEXop2dTbHKdaVL5oCcw

In Normal circumstances that would be considered tag vandalism so why is it allowed now?

This is a populated tag used by many people and is commonly used, the community agrees on its use and the rule is over 8 years out of date.

Until this is accounted for, and appropriately discussed, removing the tags is harmful and should not be done.
Especially by someone doing it out of some perceived revenge.

it's not tagging vandalism to remove tags that are considered invalid. what? the removal was even confirmed by a tag lock by NMNY. ???

demesejha said:
All of the tags were removed by a single user who was being petulant

https://twitter.com/ZiggyZackStash/status/1557029778334650368?s=20&t=YFqEXop2dTbHKdaVL5oCcw

In Normal circumstances that would be considered tag vandalism so why is it allowed now?

This is a populated tag used by many people and is commonly used, the community agrees on its use and the rule is over 8 years out of date.

Until this is accounted for, and appropriately discussed, removing the tags is harmful and should not be done.
Especially by someone doing it out of some perceived revenge.

hell yeah, we finally devolved to twitter drama 😎

demesejha said:
All of the tags were removed by a single user who was being petulant

https://twitter.com/ZiggyZackStash/status/1557029778334650368?s=20&t=YFqEXop2dTbHKdaVL5oCcw

In Normal circumstances that would be considered tag vandalism so why is it allowed now?

This is a populated tag used by many people and is commonly used, the community agrees on its use and the rule is over 8 years out of date.

Until this is accounted for, and appropriately discussed, removing the tags is harmful and should not be done.
Especially by someone doing it out of some perceived revenge.

Did you just not see the site admin explaining how the tag is irrelevant and shouldn't be used, or...?

lonelylupine said:
Did you just not see the site admin explaining how the tag is irrelevant and shouldn't be used, or...?

Frankly, I see it kind of similar to the crediting problems voice actors tend of have in general. Also, the tagging guidelines only mention artists, which voicework is an art in and of itself.

Wouldn't be surprised if it turns into a situation where a group has to do sweeping takedown requests to change the rules again, especially if it is for them to be recognized for their work in this case.

deadoon said:
Wouldn't be surprised if it turns into a situation where a group has to do sweeping takedown requests to change the rules again, especially if it is for them to be recognized for their work in this case.

"again"? when have takedown requests as protest ever actually done anything to change rules? also, I don't think that VO edits have nearly the presence on the site to make a change like that that happen.

darryus said:
I don't think that VO edits have nearly the presence on the site to make a change like that that happen.

not including any of the sound edits that greatly surpass their originals in up votes and favorites, i see

darryus said:
"again"? when have takedown requests as protest ever actually done anything to change rules? also, I don't think that VO edits have nearly the presence on the site to make a change like that that happen.

Lore tags, something that had to be added despite being contradictory to how the site was run previously. Making tags for character genders outside of twys due to artists going full dnp on all their work due to the former rules on it.

Also where are you getting edits from? This is about Voiceactors getting credit for their work in general, as they are artists themselves and some people might want to see what things they were a part of creating.

deadoon said:
Lore tags, something that had to be added despite being contradictory to how the site was run previously. Making tags for character genders outside of twys due to artists going full dnp on all their work due to the former rules on it.

Also where are you getting edits from? This is about Voiceactors getting credit for their work in general, as they are artists themselves and some people might want to see what things they were a part of creating.

I'm not saying I agree with the admins here; I to believe that VOs ought to be credited. Heck, I also believe that 3d model creators ought to be credited too, since they did the real hard work.

I was just saying that it was obviously site policy to the person whingeing about tag nuking.

dripen_arn said:
not including any of the sound edits that greatly surpass their originals in up votes and favorites, i see

there's only like six posts in this category that have more than a 33% like/fav increase over the original no_sound version. and even ignoring that, it's only like 64 posts total, not nearly enough to have an impact that'd lead to a sweeping rule change.

deadoon said:
Lore tags, something that had to be added despite being contradictory to how the site was run previously. Making tags for character genders outside of twys due to artists going full dnp on all their work due to the former rules on it.

I'm not sure that's why lore tags got added, those got added with the big site overhaul, that added several new tag categories also we already had tags that required prior knowledge like incest and crossgender, so it really wasn't that big of a change. and if anything the change was to try to cut down on the literal constant tag wars that were happening around the time. from memory the only person who really made a big thing about the TWYS rules was Whygena and fans of Whygena. looking at some random samples from the implication history for avoid_posting it doesn't seem like there's any really big uptick in artists going DNP around the time that all was happening, it seems like the rate has been pretty steady across years.

deadoon said:
Also where are you getting edits from? This is about Voiceactors getting credit for their work in general, as they are artists themselves and some people might want to see what things they were a part of creating.

because the most of the time the people who seem to be tagging themselves/being tagged in the first place are ones that are making the VO edits. also, that's what the end credits and description are for.

It seems I'm a little late to the topic. Fortunately, a few individuals were kind enough to notify me of this forum.

kiranoot said:
Their work is still posted. Their artist tag was removed because VAs, editors, etc. are not tagged as artists on e6. To quote NotMeNotYou on the subject: "The artist tags are specifically for people that directly worked on making the visual parts of the submission, either drawing the image or posing the 3D models. Voice actors and sound editors are not credited in the tags but can be credited in the description"

I have very little to argue in regards to the rulings of e621. Frankly, my artist tag only really began as others had posted the edits I made. When I later realized it was how a majority of my audience found my works, I continued supporting it up until everything was removed. Judging from the responses and reactions I've gotten from the post I made, as well as this forum thread being created, it seems a lot of people feel rather negatively towards this decision. While being credited in the description of a post is always nice, it doesn't exactly offer the same reach on e621 as an artist tag does.

Which is especially important for creators where sound edits or other similar works are their art of sorts. There have even been quite a number of users who not only found me through this system, but also other artists they likely never would've found before. I do of course feel there should be some limit with who receives an artist tag such as minor roles or when using readily available assets / music. Yet when it comes to those who have had a big impact on the creation of a particular piece of art, it's something to consider I believe. That's just my thoughts on the matter from what I've gathered. I would need to look into this rule a bit more before making anymore comments on it.

kiranoot said:
This is not recent. It has been how the staff have operated for as long as I have been around. It's become somewhat of a losing fight, but we're still trying to enforce it.

If this is indeed a losing fight, then is it really one that needs to be fought over? My artist tag has been making the rounds on e621 for nearly 2 years at this point, before a particular individual decided to remove them in an attempt to "help" sound editors.
Only after this happened was the rule enforced with my own tagged being removed and locked. I actually haven't learned of this rule until recently due to how long my tag last. In fact, I thought it was quite fine as did many others.

darryus said:
also, that's what the end credits and description are for.

because it's so easy and convenient to search for a given artist from the end credits

even the description, formatting can make it janky to search for stuff.

I guess my biggest question is... why not? Take away edits, take away NSFW sounds, what is the justification? If it's solely because e621 is just for the art, then that's been a moot point for years when there have been so many posts that rely on sound in some way. Times change.

Hell, dig through music long enough and you'll find plenty of recognizable songs being tagged as well. Is that also invalid?

ziggyzackary said:
If this is indeed a losing fight, then is it really one that needs to be fought over?

Just because it may be a "losing fight" doesn't mean it's not worth doing. The constant use of invalid tags is a losing fight; no matter how many of us try to fix and clean them up, they keep getting used. People even get in trouble for constantly using them after being told to stop, but other people come along and start. We'll never fully stop or get rid of invalid tags, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep trying to fix and clean them up.

strikerman said:
If it's solely because e621 is just for the art, then that's been a moot point for years when there have been so many posts that rely on sound in some way. Times change.

So many posts rely on sound? So many posts would be useless to have here if it weren't for having sound? I find that hard to believe. Some posts being less entertaining, sure, but "so many rely on sound" seems quite hyperbolic.

strikerman said:
Hell, dig through music long enough and you'll find plenty of recognizable songs being tagged as well. Is that also invalid?

I would say yes.

strikerman said:
because it's so easy and convenient to search for a given artist from the end credits

even the description, formatting can make it janky to search for stuff.

??? I don't see how that has anything to do with what I said, I was responding to was someone talking about VAs being _credited_, which you can just use the discription for.

strikerman said:
I guess my biggest question is... why not? Take away edits, take away NSFW sounds, what is the justification?

because it adds more names to the artist tag section, making it harder for users to actually search for the user who made the visuals for the piece, which is, lets be honest, what 99.99% of users are going to want to search for.

darryus said:
??? I don't see how that has anything to do with what I said, I was responding to was someone talking about VAs being _credited_, which you can just use the discription for.

That's my point. People are using the tags to credit them for the sake of searching.

darryus said:
because it adds more names to the artist tag section, making it harder for users to actually search for the user who made the visuals for the piece, which is, lets be honest, what 99.99% of users are going to want to search for.

Would it still be an issue if they were tagged, just not as artists?

ziggyzackary said:

If this is indeed a losing fight, then is it really one that needs to be fought over? My artist tag has been making the rounds on e621 for nearly 2 years at this point, before a particular individual decided to remove them in an attempt to "help" sound editors.
Only after this happened was the rule enforced with my own tagged being removed and locked. I actually haven't learned of this rule until recently due to how long my tag last. In fact, I thought it was quite fine as did many others.

This.

There is no tangible benefit to enforcing this rule and all it does is cause harm.

watsit said:
So many posts rely on sound? So many posts would be useless to have here if it weren't for having sound? I find that hard to believe. Some posts being less entertaining, sure, but "so many rely on sound" seems quite hyperbolic.

Not to get into the number of posts that would be impacted, since there's not many posts with sounds, but if someone makes a high quality sound edit out of one of my animations, the *whole point* of posting the result is to showcase the sound. If you pull the sound out then you might as well just point people at the original post. So how do we handle people adding sound (assuming high quality here) to videos? Do you replace the original post?

darryus said:
??? I don't see how that has anything to do with what I said, I was responding to was someone talking about VAs being _credited_, which you can just use the discription for.

because it adds more names to the artist tag section, making it harder for users to actually search for the user who made the visuals for the piece, which is, lets be honest, what 99.99% of users are going to want to search for.

Add a "contributor" tag type, put it at the *bottom*. That way they won't push the important tags down or crowd out the primary artist(s). Make it explicit in the wiki that it is supposed to be used for video and sound editors, or otherwise people who had a direct impact on the work. I wouldn't say the 3d artist of a public model would count unless they are directly collaborating; someone using a public model is not enough.

You'll still get some butthurt people, but you'll have fewer butthurt people, and they'll be out of the way. And people can still search for their favorite editors, VAs, etc.

sentharn said:
Not to get into the number of posts that would be impacted, since there's not many posts with sounds, but if someone makes a high quality sound edit out of one of my animations, the *whole point* of posting the result is to showcase the sound. If you pull the sound out then you might as well just point people at the original post. So how do we handle people adding sound (assuming high quality here) to videos? Do you replace the original post?

Third-party edits never cause the original to get deleted/replaced. I don't know what the standards are for sound edits, but edits in general need to have enough quality to be allowed (and for visual edits, the edit needs to be further significant enough to allow the editor to be tagged).

sentharn said:
Not to get into the number of posts that would be impacted, since there's not many posts with sounds, but if someone makes a high quality sound edit out of one of my animations, the *whole point* of posting the result is to showcase the sound. If you pull the sound out then you might as well just point people at the original post. So how do we handle people adding sound (assuming high quality here) to videos? Do you replace the original post?

in most cases it seems like edits are uploaded to e6 by the editors themselves, so, you could just browse that user's uploads. although finding the user that upoaded a post is a bit roundabout ever since the site overhaul, so that's not really a perfect solution.

sentharn said:
Add a "contributor" tag type, put it at the *bottom*. That way they won't push the important tags down or crowd out the primary artist(s). Make it explicit in the wiki that it is supposed to be used for video and sound editors, or otherwise people who had a direct impact on the work.

it's been stated before in reference to another similar topic that adding a new tag category would be more difficult than you might think. another problem for this tag category would you would have to have two separate tags for artists that just "contributed" to a post vs the normal artist tag.

sentharn said:
I wouldn't say the 3d artist of a public model would count unless they are directly collaborating; someone using a public model is not enough.

I dunno, that's generally not how tagging works, and some modelers have some pretty distinct artstyles. for both searching and blacklisting purposes not having edge cases would probably be better.

This was linked on twitter so forgive me if its inappropriate to comment this late. But I agree that VAs and sound editors deserve a proper credit. High quality audio is a tremendous amount of work and anyone who's even attempted it should agree.

If 3rd party sound edits are judged for quality as to whether they're allowed, rather than being outright removed, then the site is acknowledging that the audio can add or detract from the value of what's posted (and likewise, is probably capable of distinguishing between deliberate voice/audio work being performed and someone playing aerosmith in the background). A site-wide requirement for visuals to accompany good audio doesn't change the fact that someone spent significant time and effort to make a final work more enjoyable for the viewers of the site. And it should be telling to anyone who searches by popularity that good audio work is broadly appreciated by the userbase.

Like it or not, e6 has currently established itself as one of the biggest hubs for furry art and is entirely dependent on these content creators. Denying the option to even credit some of these content creators reduces their ability to grow as artists, both in skill and prominence within the community; all while accepting the art they provide as a contribution to the site.

Side note: It does feel a bit silly to me how I'm keeping a running tab of twitter handles for VAs and sound designers that are willing to work on similar content as me, just because I know it will someday be a complete chore to find one if I don't. I genuinely have no idea how to even find an audio artist who hasn't worked on like 50 different things, since these artists are so dependent on collaborating with animators to even exist in this space.

I also strongly support tags for VAs. It is very useful information for searches, and by promoting voice acting in animations can have a lasting positive impact on the quality of furry animations and independent animation in general. None of the arguments against it make sense to me, and seem to come from semantics and tradition rather than serving the functionality of the site.

A shame that creating a contributor tag type doesn't look like an option. That would be the best possible solution for this.

Imo a meta tag would be enough, wouldn't take the space of an artist tag and I'd let you categorize voice actors and sound works efficiently and properly, as I'd assume only the ones who make the edits would upload works using said tags

roro_vevo said:
Imo a meta tag would be enough, wouldn't take the space of an artist tag and I'd let you categorize voice actors and sound works efficiently and properly, as I'd assume only the ones who make the edits would upload works using said tags

Even then, the actions and ruling that NMNY is doing does actually feel like taking credit away from those that collaberated on NSFW/SFW fan works just by doing sound alone, ZiggyZackary DID add sounds to inukebon Geek's work that Ziggy's water mark was featured in, it does not make sense at this point if someone wants to search Ziggy or an different content creator on this site, Rule34, etc and not see their tag at all because of an rule that is most likely well overdue for an revision because of the possibility of how much people like one content creator in particular at the very least, I agree with those that view not tagging other content creators to have the opposite effect in comparison of tagging them.

Edit: I fixed the word "sense" because of my phone keyboard, I honestly hate these kinds of keyboards.

I'm a voice actor and sound designer who works frequently in-and-out of the furry community and use this site to help tag all of the animations I've helped work on as either or both. I've worked with top furry animators and artists to bring their visuals to life with amazing audio quality. I've trained as a sound designer for years. I've gotten coaching from some of the top talent in the voice over industry. I do all of this because I like to help bring such amazing work to life as best I can despite the fact that it could potentially hurt my professional career.

The least I could possibly ask is to be allowed the credit I deserve. I'm an artist. I work just as hard, get just as tired, and I'm just as passionate. So for all of that hard work—all my blood, sweat, and tears—to get erased (not even erased because of course you still want it, you just don't want to credit us for it) because it's not "visual art" is a pretty pathetic excuse. But in that case let's remove your admin badges! Your colored names. All the special little callsigns to let people know how important you are here. It's not visual art is it, so it's just not important. We still want you to moderate and do the heavy lifting, yeah, but we just don't want to credit you for it. See the problem?

How about instead of erasing our credits so people can find our work, leave them up in the meantime until you can devise a solution so that we're not swept under the rug. Artists have no problem with us being tagged alongside them. People are smart enough to figure out who's who. Stop erasing our work from this site or else I'll start putting in clauses in my TOS that restrict my audio from ever touching this site and ask my friends to do the same.

Voice acting and sound design is art. This is our place too.

voidslutva said:
I'm a voice actor and sound designer who works frequently in-and-out of the furry community and use this site to help tag all of the animations I've helped work on as either or both. I've worked with top furry animators and artists to bring their visuals to life with amazing audio quality. I've trained as a sound designer for years. I've gotten coaching from some of the top talent in the voice over industry. I do all of this because I like to help bring such amazing work to life as best I can despite the fact that it could potentially hurt my professional career.

The least I could possibly ask is to be allowed the credit I deserve. I'm an artist. I work just as hard, get just as tired, and I'm just as passionate. So for all of that hard work—all my blood, sweat, and tears—to get erased (not even erased because of course you still want it, you just don't want to credit us for it) because it's not "visual art" is a pretty pathetic excuse. But in that case let's remove your admin badges! Your colored names. All the special little callsigns to let people know how important you are here. It's not visual art is it, so it's just not important. We still want you to moderate and do the heavy lifting, yeah, but we just don't want to credit you for it. See the problem?

How about instead of erasing our credits so people can find our work, leave them up in the meantime until you can devise a solution so that we're not swept under the rug. Artists have no problem with us being tagged alongside them. People are smart enough to figure out who's who. Stop erasing our work from this site or else I'll start putting in clauses in my TOS that restrict my audio from ever touching this site and ask my friends to do the same.

Voice acting and sound design is art. This is our place too.

The usual thing people mention is the descriptions and credits in videos themselves, but yeah, I imagine it's frustrating!