coebalt said:
The purpose of my example of a hypothetical "Cute Comments" rules was not to compare the reasons for such rules existing, but to enforce exactly what you requested. A bit of Empathy. Many of the people I see posting in favor of this rule are actively promoting a toxic attitude towards the people who may be making these comments while ignorant of the rule. It is purely to foster a moment of introspection, not a true comparison of the premises as if they are similar in purpose.

you don't really see much toxicity twards individuals who make these comments, at least when it's a first offense. they get dinged with a neutral, which sits there for a few months, maybe a total of seven people even see that it's there, and then the record decays and can get removed.
most of the "toxicity" is for peeps who say stuff that make other users uncomfortable, get a neutral and then continue to say stuff that they know is against the rules and they know makes other users uncomfortable and/or for peeps who want to be able to say whatever they want to because "it's a porn site", despite the fact that a) no, it isn't and b) that shouldn't necessarily be a free pass anyway.

How dare the site have rules and standards, amirite?

thehuskyk9 said:
How dare the site have rules and standards, amirite?

Blatantly ignoring that I've mentioned several times that I acknowledge the need for rules isn't very mature.

coebalt said:
Blatantly ignoring that I've mentioned several times that I acknowledge the need for rules isn't very mature.

you know, not every comment made on this thread is aimed at you. when a forum post contains no quote target it's usually just a reply to the thread in general.

mdf said:
Please consider adding 'great time to login' to your list.

Hoping for the same, though I'm not expecting it. Genuinely baffles me why anyone commenting "great time to login" or similar thinks anyone will care about a glorified youtube-style "first" comment, yet they keep appearing over and over and over and over. It's literally just a braggart move that does nothing for anyone.

coebalt said:
Blatantly ignoring that I've mentioned several times that I acknowledge the need for rules isn't very mature.

Wasn’t responding to you. If I was, I would’ve quoted you. Chill out.

My bad. So used to fucking discord that the proximity of the messages made me jump to conclusions.

Hence why it's bad lol.

Maybe I just missed the comment, but what if at all is the line on “jokes” or something “said in jest”? I don’t normally read or even visit the forums, but it seemed like a funny coincidence that this rule change happened days after I got dinged for parodying the “Just to suffer?” meme. Granted, it was more graphic, but it was also in spoilers. In the context that this is a partial quote, it doesn’t include details of any actual personal experiences nor does it magically exceed the explicit rating of the picture. Is it still just “hope the staff get it”? These are important details for those of us who just want to make people slightly exhale through their nose.

kaiser-von-raubtiere said:
Maybe I just missed the comment, but what if at all is the line on “jokes” or something “said in jest”? I don’t normally read or even visit the forums, but it seemed like a funny coincidence that this rule change happened days after I got dinged for parodying the “Just to suffer?” meme. Granted, it was more graphic, but it was also in spoilers. In the context that this is a partial quote, it doesn’t include details of any actual personal experiences nor does it magically exceed the explicit rating of the picture. Is it still just “hope the staff get it”? These are important details for those of us who just want to make people slightly exhale through their nose.

now comments like that is where i have a problem with the creepy comments rule and i do hope that the rule change keeps the funny haha people like you and me from getting marks

qwazzy said:
Hoping for the same, though I'm not expecting it. Genuinely baffles me why anyone commenting "great time to login" or similar thinks anyone will care about a glorified youtube-style "first" comment, yet they keep appearing over and over and over and over. It's literally just a braggart move that does nothing for anyone.

I don't mind comments like that. They might not be original, but as least they're complimenting the art (I take the comment to mean "it's great that I saw this artwork today" rather than "it's great that I got to comment first").

I approve of this new version. Seen too many bans, weirdos or not, where I scratched my head and wondered, "That got them kicked out? This is a porn site, it's par for the course". Not that I necessarily like people getting thirsty in comments, but still. Getting graphic about it is an acceptable line to draw.

See, I get more offended by insults and edgy comments on hard fetish uploads than my fellow perverts getting too riled up. Dumb edgy shit that tells me people don't use their blacklists and got triggered. If FA had a built-in blacklist system (and filters against crappy Paint doodles by probably-underage users, let's be real), I would be on my knees blowing Dragoneer this very moment.

Which is why I adore e621. Moving on.

visited a lot of pron sites in my day, seen some really sick stuff on this one (my own fault for not using the black list, same can be said for "creepy" users tho, just block em and move on?) so i can't say i understand the standards around here. i can read them, the reasoning behind them, but it just doesn't click.
i'd give this site an award for most serious pron site. usually, i don't bother commenting...nothing i have to say is worth risking a ban from someone who volunteers their personal time to regulate comments on a pron site. i come here to handle my business, then i log off and feel the reasonable amount of shame as anyone else might.
forgive my speaking plainly, but could it be they WANT to say "keep in mind when commenting, there are minors here" because a reasonable adult is more than capable of utilizing an ignore feature and wouldn't need moderator assistance in dealing with their own personal problem with another user? even newgrounds was more lax back in the day than this.
-sorry for my comment, was more of a yiffstar guy myself.

notmenotyou said:
moderator stuff

watsit said:
reasonable stuff

coebalt said:
also reasonable stuff

This will probably be a bad take, but... what if the Meta tags and rating: system applied to comments as well?

It'd probably be a bit of coding work, but the way I see it, it'd fix a lot of issues that both sides of the coin have. If comments have a rating: system, then people who want the art aspect of e621 can just type "rating:safe" and won't have to see any creepy and/or sexual comments, and it would probably also allow the rules to be a little more lenient. The Meta tagging could also make it so artists can tell you what kind of comments they like. If they don't want creepy/sexual comments on their posts, they can add a tag for it, and for the weirdos who don't want pg comments, they could also specify.

People who want to be able to make explicit comments on explicit posts could be able to, people who don't want explicit comments on safe posts can filter them out, mods can far more easily dictate what goes and doesnt go, and artists would be able to filter their audience a little bit more, it's just a win in all of the compass' directions.

Also,

RachelTheSeeker said:
stuff

Not a porn site.

dubsthefox said:
There it is. The "freedom of speech argument", I was waiting for. You didn't use the word, but I am pretty sure that's your point, right? Being creepy is not freedom of speech...
This is an art archive, so behave like you are in one. As if you were in a museum.
You see the Mona Lisa, and talk about it with a stranger. What do you do?
You say:
A: That slight smile is a nice touch.
B: I want to rip off her clothes and stick my willy in her.
I colored it for you, so the choice is easier.
^{_{(you'd be thrown out of the museum for one of them)}}

To be fair, most museums don't host pictures of niche fetish porn. You could argue that paintings like The Origin of Man or Greco-Roman statues/herms count, but that's a far cry away from modern furry porn made explicitly to satisfy fetishes and aid masturbation. I'd imagine a museum that would display that would have considerably different rules than, say, the Louvre.

maskednavajo said:
Also,
Not a porn site.

Just because this place hosts "Safe" pictures as well as porn doesn't make it not a place for porn

nashqueradier said:
Just because this place hosts "Safe" pictures as well as porn doesn't make it not a place for porn

e6 is not a porn site, it's an organized archive for all forms of art of furry and non-human characters. it just so happens that a lot of furry art is explicit or suggestive.

nashqueradier said:
Just because this place hosts "Safe" pictures as well as porn doesn't make it not a place for porn

A porn site is exclusively geared towards pornography. If there's any SFW or other non-pornographic material on it, it's mostly window dressing. A porn site's focus is porn.

E621 contains porn. There's no denying that. However, it also has a substantial focus on non-pornographic works. It would be better to say that e621 is an organized archive for furry and non-human characters that has a porn section. Just as you wouldn't go into a book store and claim it's an adult store just because it's got a section for adult-oriented books roped off to one side, adults only – please – thank you, in the same building as sections for childrens' and young adults' literature, you shouldn't log onto e621 and insist that it's a porn site just because a part of it is roped off for adults. Consider it part of the branding for e621.

clawstripe said:
Just as you wouldn't go into a book store and claim it's an adult store just because it's got a section for adult-oriented books roped off to one side, adults only – please – thank you, in the same building as sections for childrens' and young adults' literature, you shouldn't log onto e621 and insist that it's a porn site just because a part of it is roped off for adults.

pretty much everyone outside of e621 considers e621 a porn site though, and the age barrier to even using the site at all confirms it.

you know that one comic shop that's somewhere downtown that no parent in their right mind would browse through? they archive a ton of comics and resell them to some pretty off-kilter comic fans. everyone knows that store has over 60% AO/fetish content, so they consider it an adult store even though it's advertised as a comic shop. just because they take pride in keeping their store layout well-thought out doesn't mean they're not just openly selling adult work.

reminds me of something else now that i think about it.

maskednavajo said:
This will probably be a bad take, but... what if the Meta tags and rating: system applied to comments as well? \

People who want to be able to make explicit comments on explicit posts could be able to, people who don't want explicit comments on safe posts can filter them out, mods can far more easily dictate what goes and doesnt go, and artists would be able to filter their audience a little bit more, it's just a win in all of the compass' directions.

right, i suggested this a bit ago as DaxMarko brought up. It's a viable option, and shouldn't impact moderation for comments any more than what's existing already. aside from that, people will usually respect the existence of a place to put nasty comments if you give them one. if you build it they will come, they say.

notmenotyou said:
Do excuse the dust in here. The latest update is pretty straightforward, we renamed the rule to be a bit more objective and clarified more what exactly is inappropriate. In addition to that we've made a small help page to add some examples and explanations on what is and is not appropriate.

First of all the rule text:
And the help page:

e621:Inappropriate Comments

Link

In the interest of the success of the site we do not want people discussing their personal sexual encounters (past or present) or any explicitly detailed desires, fetishes, or fantasies. All users, artists, commissioners, the subjects of works of art, and other people browsing the website all have the right, within realistic expectations, to browse our website without seeing comments from our users that may make them uncomfortable.

Examples of inappropriate comments:

Comments that are overly focused on graphic /explicit details.

Don’t make up elaborate stories about what you wish would happen, or were to happen.

"Definitely going to need some happy aftercare time in a snug onesie and diaper. Don't forget to lock up the young kitten in a chastity with his mouth filled so he doesn't wake himself up from his nap in daddy's lap."
"Fine addition to my collection for erection."

Comments that detail your personal sexual experiences, fantasies or desires.

Any comment that describes your past real life experiences, roleplay encounters, or fap stories are going to be considered creepy by the broader userbase. Note that the comment doesn’t need to be long in order to share too much information.

Examples that will get you a record:

• I came so hard
• I wish I could get fucked like that
• I wish that vaporeon would breed me
• My boyfriend likes doing that to me!
• I wish my girlfriend would be doing that for me
• I want to lick those paws
• Wish I could get filled like that

Examples that (most likely¹) won’t get you a record:

• God I wish that were me
• I’m loving those tits
• That is one hot / wet pussy
• Pump that donut!

¹ Context is going to matter, see the two following sections for details

Comments that focus on a fetish on a picture that does not include that fetish.

Fairly self-explanatory, don’t bring any (controversial) fetish into an image that isn’t already featuring it, talking about how you’d wish any given image without X fetish should feature X fetish instead to make it “better” is always inherently creepy.

Fetishes falling under this category are the generally divisive ones like cub, watersports, scat, rape, humiliation of various kinds, and similar.

Comments that exceed the rating on the picture

In the shortest way possible, if something is rated safe nobody will want to hear about how you’d like to see the character getting lewded or fucked. Similarly goes for submissions rated questionable, nobody will want to know how you’d like them to get railed by a pack of 14 werewolves in the parking lot of an Arby’s if they’re only being suggestive or in the nude.

this is a great rework and I'm glad to see the work that's being done

aversioncapacitor' said:
pretty much everyone outside of e621 considers e621 a porn site though, and the age barrier to even using the site at all confirms it.

you know that one comic shop that's somewhere downtown that no parent in their right mind would browse through? they archive a ton of comics and resell them to some pretty off-kilter comic fans. everyone knows that store has over 60% AO/fetish content, so they consider it an adult store even though it's advertised as a comic shop. just because they take pride in keeping their store layout well-thought out doesn't mean they're not just openly selling adult work.

pretty much everyone outside of the furry fandom consider furry to be exclusively a fetish where people fuck each other while wearing uncanny valley animal mascot outfits, that dosn't change the fact that there's a lot more to it than that.

and even if there wasn't more to e6 than being a porn website, that dosn't mean that peeps ought to have free range to say whatever gross shit they want.

darryus said:
and even if there wasn't more to e6 than being a porn website, that dosn't mean that peeps ought to have free range to say whatever gross shit they want.

yeah, not objecting to that.

coebalt said:
I honestly can't understand how y'all let words on a screen scar you so badly that you have to censor people.

Like.. "A really bad comment can even damage/alter the way you see a piece in a manner that's not fair to it."

Really? People are so fragile that this is a thing? You can't just ignore it and move on with your life?

This site hosts cub porn, scat, goro and lord knows what other unspeakable things but y'all draw the line at reading some words that make you cringe?

A dude on here got warned for saying "I like dicks". He then proceeded to absolutely grill the moderation team after receiving said warning, specifically calling out NMNY for their ridiculous hypocrisy, and not soon after, this change happens.

thewhistler said:
A dude on here got warned for saying "I like dicks". He then proceeded to absolutely grill the moderation team after receiving said warning, specifically calling out NMNY for their ridiculous hypocrisy, and not soon after, this change happens.

uhh... source?
I'm not calling you a liar, but looking at the records, it really seems like that never happened. NMNY has given maybe a dozen records negative or neutral for creepy comments in the past like 6 months.

heck, even looking at all of the feedbacks given for Creepy Comments I'm still not finding what you're talking about. but to be fair, there are a fucking lot of them, and peeps sometimes hide the comment after they get dinged for it.

darryus said:
uhh... source?
I'm not calling you a liar, but looking at the records, it really seems like that never happened. NMNY has given maybe a dozen records negative or neutral for creepy comments in the past like 6 months.

heck, even looking at all of the feedbacks given for Creepy Comments I'm still not finding what you're talking about. but to be fair, there are a fucking lot of them, and peeps sometimes hide the comment after they get dinged for it.

Probably Mallicore (spelling?), not NMNY, he got quite a number recently.

I actually agree with change, though I think the core rule could be expanded more in addition to providing examples separately. Just social engineering - how many people would click links in text they read currently, especially when some popular browsers or browser addons stopped highlight and underline links, even in contradiction to CSS. The rating of comments sometimes hard to determine, but I think that rule should have been stated long ago.

snowwolf said:
So.. for example...

I am breaking the creepy rule. *bwooop-bwoop*

Not Cool: "Man! I want that fucking dick in my mouth. I want to feel to it throbbing between my lips!"

That's actually breaking explicit RP rule, it's RP in hypotheses form.

Those should produce more visible warning. And to be honest warning from Admins is practically invisible on desktop version of site. It would take time spot\register them. I saw Blacklist unusuage (why I have to use one if I don't dislike, and don't want to blacklist?) a week after it was done, because I opened site from phone. My feature offer: if such message from Admin present, it should REPLACE standard interface until person would click <I acknowledge> button. It shouldn't go to common email section, about which most people don't care or ignore.

PS. Oh! Does this rule apply to "emails" too? Or it would be covered by Harassment one?

Isn't there a user blocking feature on e621 that could be used like how the blacklist blocks kinks your not into? Just wondering cause I never understood the point of worrying about "creepy" or "tmi" comments

a_random_owl said:
Isn't there a user blocking feature on e621 that could be used like how the blacklist blocks kinks your not into? Just wondering cause I never understood the point of worrying about "creepy" or "tmi" comments

you can blacklist individual users, yes, but that does almost nothing for this case, the problem isn't "I don't want to see what this one user is saying" it's "we don't want to see people say stuff like this". comments don't get tags, so there's no way to avoid seeing people talking about their weird fantasies unless a) the admins discourage it and make it a punishable offense, or b) you just never read the comments on any post.

darryus said:
you can blacklist individual users, yes, but that does almost nothing for this case, the problem isn't "I don't want to see what this one user is saying" it's "we don't want to see people say stuff like this". comments don't get tags, so there's no way to avoid seeing people talking about their weird fantasies unless a) the admins discourage it and make it a punishable offense, or b) you just never read the comments on any post.

Fair enough

swiftkill said:

Those should produce more visible warning. And to be honest warning from Admins is practically invisible on desktop version of site. It would take time spot\register them. I saw Blacklist unusuage (why I have to use one if I don't dislike, and don't want to blacklist?) a week after it was done, because I opened site from phone. My feature offer: if such message from Admin present, it should REPLACE standard interface until person would click <I acknowledge> button. It shouldn't go to common email section, about which most people don't care or ignore.

PS. Oh! Does this rule apply to "emails" too? Or it would be covered by Harassment one?

im pretty sure that you see a big bar at the top of the screen on both desktop and mobile saying "You Have Unread mail".

notmenotyou said:
Do excuse the dust in here. The latest update is pretty straightforward, we renamed the rule to be a bit more objective and clarified more what exactly is inappropriate. In addition to that we've made a small help page to add some examples and explanations on what is and is not appropriate.

First of all the rule text:
And the help page:

e621:Inappropriate Comments

Link

In the interest of the success of the site we do not want people discussing their personal sexual encounters (past or present) or any explicitly detailed desires, fetishes, or fantasies. All users, artists, commissioners, the subjects of works of art, and other people browsing the website all have the right, within realistic expectations, to browse our website without seeing comments from our users that may make them uncomfortable.

Examples of inappropriate comments:

Comments that are overly focused on graphic /explicit details.

Don’t make up elaborate stories about what you wish would happen, or were to happen.

"Definitely going to need some happy aftercare time in a snug onesie and diaper. Don't forget to lock up the young kitten in a chastity with his mouth filled so he doesn't wake himself up from his nap in daddy's lap."
"Fine addition to my collection for erection."

Comments that detail your personal sexual experiences, fantasies or desires.

Any comment that describes your past real life experiences, roleplay encounters, or fap stories are going to be considered creepy by the broader userbase. Note that the comment doesn’t need to be long in order to share too much information.

Examples that will get you a record:

• I came so hard
• I wish I could get fucked like that
• I wish that vaporeon would breed me
• My boyfriend likes doing that to me!
• I wish my girlfriend would be doing that for me
• I want to lick those paws
• Wish I could get filled like that

Examples that (most likely¹) won’t get you a record:

• God I wish that were me
• I’m loving those tits
• That is one hot / wet pussy
• Pump that donut!

¹ Context is going to matter, see the two following sections for details

Comments that focus on a fetish on a picture that does not include that fetish.

Fairly self-explanatory, don’t bring any (controversial) fetish into an image that isn’t already featuring it, talking about how you’d wish any given image without X fetish should feature X fetish instead to make it “better” is always inherently creepy.

Fetishes falling under this category are the generally divisive ones like cub, watersports, scat, rape, humiliation of various kinds, and similar.

Comments that exceed the rating on the picture

In the shortest way possible, if something is rated safe nobody will want to hear about how you’d like to see the character getting lewded or fucked. Similarly goes for submissions rated questionable, nobody will want to know how you’d like them to get railed by a pack of 14 werewolves in the parking lot of an Arby’s if they’re only being suggestive or in the nude.

I feel like being called out, but this time I'm glad cuz I were singled out (https://e621.net/user_feedbacks?search%5Buser_id%5D=252444) while others were untouched, so I feel like some justice has been served. Gives some credit to the staff cuz that was abusive and nothing unheard of.

rautamiekka said:
I feel like being called out, but this time I'm glad cuz I were singled out (https://e621.net/user_feedbacks?search%5Buser_id%5D=252444) while others were untouched, so I feel like some justice has been served. Gives some credit to the staff cuz that was abusive and nothing unheard of.

you weren't "singled out", Milllcore deals with upwards of 256 comment reports per week, lots of inappropriate comments get peeps dinged with neutrals and negs, some just slip by. _{also, I'm pretty sure that your comment there would still have gotten you a warning even with the rule changes.}

Now I'm here wondering what the difference is "God, I wish that was me" and "I wish i was her 🥵" (record #55994). Am I crazy, or are these identical in every practical way (just swapping the order of subjects and genderizing one)?

watsit said:
Now I'm here wondering what the difference is "God, I wish that was me" and "I wish i was her 🥵" (record #55994). Am I crazy, or are these identical in every practical way (just swapping the order of subjects and genderizing one)?

Yea I just noticed that too.

watsit said:
Now I'm here wondering what the difference is "God, I wish that was me" and "I wish i was her 🥵" (record #55994). Am I crazy, or are these identical in every practical way (just swapping the order of subjects and genderizing one)?

The spirit of the rules haven't changed, they were simply reworded.

You can say GIWTWM as long as it doesn't express sexual desire or fantasy.

aversioncapacitor' said:
The spirit of the rules haven't changed, they were simply reworded.

You can say GIWTWM as long as it doesn't express sexual desire or fantasy.

The current wording doesn't indicate that at all. Not saying you're wrong, but if that's the intention, the way it's worded would absolutely lead one to think saying "God I wish that was me"/"I wish i was her" on post #3374693 would be perfectly fine now.

The help page says:
Examples that (most likely¹) won’t get you a record:

• God I wish that were me

...

¹ Context is going to matter, see the two following sections for details

Comments that focus on a fetish on a picture that does not include that fetish.

...

Comments that exceed the rating on the picture

The first example of what's most likely to be okay, and two footnotes that don't apply to this case (and wouldn't apply to most cases of the statement, since it's not referencing fetishes not in the picture, and won't be more explicit than the picture already is).

I still find it dumb that yall cant sort your shit out about the "comments"

ive been hit with a "creepy comment" strike after a few weeks when commenting on a old friend's art work, it had about 7 upvotes and the friend didnt mind and it wasnt even that creepy.

so is that no longer going to be a thing anymore?

Also if a comment is creepy enought it gets downvoted and then people's settings auto hide that shit, isnt that system enough already

leshorin said:
I still find it dumb that yall cant sort your shit out about the "comments"

ive been hit with a "creepy comment" strike after a few weeks when commenting on a old friend's art work, it had about 7 upvotes and the friend didnt mind and it wasnt even that creepy.

so is that no longer going to be a thing anymore?

Also if a comment is creepy enought it gets downvoted and then people's settings auto hide that shit, isnt that system enough already

well, no because a lot of the time actually creepy comments get upvotes, and very rarely do they get enough downvotes to be hidden. and just because a comment gets upvoted dosn't mean that it's not creepy.

verysadfox said:
Honestly only time will tell if this is enough of a change. Though imo there's still enough vagueness to make a shitty situation, and on the topic of context I do agree that it has more meaning than the words attached to it, so it should be the thing subject to judging. In terms of jokes I think we should really ease up because when you treat every person that explains to you that they wrote something with comedic intent as a liar, then that is how you essenitally create an unwritten rule that comedy is not allowed or censored based on what staff deems right and wrong either way making jokes a risk that new users - or users that were not informed by others - are not aware of because like I said its not written down. I myself made some comments that someone could definetly take out of context and report me because my joke was too much for them or something, honestly surprised I still wasn't given a warning because of that, few times I logged in expecting a message from staff thinking that if someone did miss the joke I could recieve negative score on my account

I too know exactly what you mean. There've been a few times I've made jokes that may or may not fall under the "No roleplaying" rule. With that said, us comedians do have 3 life lines.

1. "If they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you." -Watership Down. (sorry, I couldn't resist) *Ahem* The point that I'm trying to make is. You'll only get punished if someone finds your comment. Newer posts tens to get a lot of traffic. But a comment left on an older, more obscure post might not be seen for several months. That brings me to point number...

2. In practices, (As things are now) mods will only act upon comments that are less then a month old. (give or take)
And...

3. If you make 'em laugh, they may not bite the hand that makes them smile. While not universally true, (there will always be some curmudgeons) if you can make someone's day, they may be more willing to over look a comment that may technically be breaking the rules.

While I don't encourage you (or anyone) to willingly brake the rules, this may explain why you sometimes can getaway with something that was on the border line.

darryus said:
well, no because a lot of the time actually creepy comments get upvotes, and very rarely do they get enough downvotes to be hidden. and just because a comment gets upvoted dosn't mean that it's not creepy.

I wouldn’t be particularly surprised if they changed the wording because of upvotes in the first place. Creepy is a highly subjective term. Some people find animatronics creepy, others make fetish animations about them. If a comment - like mine, for example - has a lot of upvotes, that would indicate a generally positive reception by the voting audience, but you’d be hard pressed to justify striking beyond “one person reported it” or “not funny, mod didn’t laugh” in an argument of common sense rather than gray rules lawyering. But “inappropriate”, while still subjective, has at least more concrete boundaries than “creepy”. A lot of comments are “creepy” if you squint while doing a handstand, but could quite easily be called a certain level of inappropriate.

I’m not particularly displeased with this change since while it’s not really clear, it’s at least more clear. It’s still vague, hence why I hoped for a little clarification on what constitutes rule breaking with jokes specifically, but also why I’m glad there are some good notes in the rule. I know some fora need to leave things ambiguous for the wiggle room, but I’d like to not waste my decade old account and favorites catalog on another Metal Gear meme.

Also, it’s not particularly relevant to the conversation and you probably already know, but you can change your comment threshold. I lowered mine to -20.

Tiamat should be unbanned then. His comments were never creepy in the first place, and the old rationale that he made too many comments isn't supported by the positive record Iguanasarecool has for doing the exact same thing.

Also, it’s not particularly relevant to the conversation and you probably already know, but you can change your comment threshold. I lowered mine to -20.

-999. I like to live on the edge.

yetanothertemp said:
im pretty sure that you see a big bar at the top of the screen on both desktop and mobile saying "You Have Unread mail".

Wasn't big or something very visible on desktop if I missed it. At least, there is nothing "big" in desktop interface, all GUI elements after late updates are using very small text at usable scales (90%-100%) our UI doesn't fit into page.

There is a slo a problem Mail" is something that might be ignored by people who don't use it. My idea is that it should be something different, not something that may be ignored or missed , because ignoring comprises another offense.

racheltheseeker said:
I approve of this new version. Seen too many bans, weirdos or not, where I scratched my head and wondered, "That got them kicked out? This is a porn site, it's par for the course". Not that I necessarily like people getting thirsty in comments, but still. Getting graphic about it is an acceptable line to draw.

See, I get more offended by insults and edgy comments on hard fetish uploads than my fellow perverts getting too riled up. Dumb edgy shit that tells me people don't use their blacklists and got triggered. If FA had a built-in blacklist system (and filters against crappy Paint doodles by probably-underage users, let's be real), I would be on my knees blowing Dragoneer this very moment.

Which is why I adore e621. Moving on.

Tag suggestion as well, like on IB. but NOT free-roaming at tags, artists usually don't like how liberally their images are tagged here. Becuase what users see isn't always what they were offered.

swiftkill said:
Wasn't big or something very visible on desktop if I missed it. At least, there is nothing "big" in desktop interface, all GUI elements after late updates are using very small text at usable scales (90%-100%) our UI doesn't fit into page.

There is a slo a problem Mail" is something that might be ignored by people who don't use it. My idea is that it should be something different, not something that may be ignored or missed , because ignoring comprises another offense.

the new dmail notif box pretty fricken hard to miss, it takes up the entire top like 1/6th of the screen, the text is written with ~24 point font and it sits there on every page you visit until you click on it.

I'm just mildly satisfied this sites pedants can stop pretending this isn't a porn website. I swear that people got off harder on technicalities and random rules bullshit mongering than the actual literal porn. More often than not people just seemed to love to ride the edge of the rules by being douchebags to others with a veil of moral/ethical superiority with a vote by lowest common denominator to akin to other shitty websites. It made the majority of discussions toxic as hell.

I agree with the sentiment that if FA had a blacklist feature I would actually use it more. Search is a cesspool of a minefield of fetishes but in general the community doesn't have its head shoved up its ass, and as such, conflicting discussions and attitudes tend to be one offs and isolated than pervasive across the site and also tend to be more to the point than beating around the bush over who can say the biggest "gottem" while skirting the edge of the rules.

I gotta be honest some level of comment filter makes sense but there's not much difference between "I wish that were me" and "I wish I was getting fucked like that" which just goes to illustrate the arbitrary and subjective nature of some of these.

In my personal opinion if seeing either comment in any way damages your experience here, then you seem to have bigger problems than this website and should seek therapy.

nightfire said:
but in general the community doesn't have its head shoved up its ass, and as such, conflicting discussions and attitudes tend to be one offs and isolated than pervasive across the site and also tend to be more to the point than beating around the bush over who can say the biggest "gottem" while skirting the edge of the rules.

Counterpoint: Dragoneer exists.

nashqueradier said:
Just because this place hosts "Safe" pictures as well as porn doesn't make it not a place for porn

Just because a site hosts porn doesn't mean it is a porn site.

nightfire said:
I'm just mildly satisfied this sites pedants can stop pretending this isn't a porn website.

You mean the site's own staff?

lonelylupine said:
Just because a site hosts porn doesn't mean it is a porn site.

so when asking furries their favorite yiff site and e621 is one of the more common responses, i should just tell them "no"? because it also happens to host a few sfw bits, suddenly the majority of the content being nsfw is invalidated?

toki420 said:
so when asking furries their favorite yiff site and e621 is one of the more common responses, i should just tell them "no"?

For one, it depends on what you mean by 'yiff site'. e621 is a site for 'yiff', just like FA, Twitter, and Newgrounds can be sites for 'yiff'. That doesn't make them porn sites, though. Secondly, other people thinking of e621 as a porn site doesn't make it a porn site, just as other people thinking of InkBunny as a pedo site doesn't make it a pedo site. There are people that think DeviantArt is a porn site. Whether or not you "should" tell them no is up to you.

watsit said:
For one, it depends on what you mean by 'yiff site'. e621 is a site for 'yiff', just like FA, Twitter, and Newgrounds can be sites for 'yiff'. That doesn't make them porn sites, though. Secondly, other people thinking of e621 as a porn site doesn't make it a porn site, just as other people thinking of InkBunny as a pedo site doesn't make it a pedo site. There are people that think DeviantArt is a porn site. Whether or not you "should" tell them no is up to you.

never seen a porn site be in denial about being one...a porn site is a site used to access/view pornographic images*edit(other media forms, not just images)*, the majority of content (on e621) is pornographic, so it is a porn site. that doesn't mean it is exclusively a porn site, it can be other things too.

kemonophonic said:

thanks, was curious how much teh pr0nz gaps the rest. i have not exactly explored the site outside of viewing pleasure, but i remember yiffstar/sofurry having at least a decent community around their stories(fanfics) and even music with that shadowpaws fellow

Rating:safe also includes images with a clearly sexual focus. >= 20% of that category IMO.

The whole 'porn site or not' thing seems to come from a (knowing or unknowing) ignorance of the vagaries of words like 'is' . 'e621 isn't a porn site' and 'e621 is a porn site' are compatible propositions because what idea is being smuggled via 'is' differs between the two sentences. ('isn't BY DESIGN OR ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE' / 'is PER USER BEHAVIOUR')

I'm not really a fan of the whole idea of calling e6 a porn site because "that's what most of the content on the site is" or "that's what most people use it for". if you extend that logic to other things than YouTube is a music website, Twitter is a news website, and the WiiU is a matching set of paperweights.

savageorange said:
Rating:safe also includes images with a clearly sexual focus. >= 20% of that category IMO.

there's also, albeit a smaller percentage, a quite a bit of stuff in rating:q and rating:e that's rated as such because it's violent, gory, horror, etc. as well as stuff that might even be considered "SFW" that is rated explicit because x_anus or something

i'm enjoying these forums of public opinions, the one other time i checked the forums before, like nobody posting ever

darryus said:
I'm not really a fan of the whole idea of calling e6 a porn site because "that's what most of the content on the site is" or "that's what most people use it for". if you extend that logic to other things than YouTube is a music website, Twitter is a news website, and the WiiU is a matching set of paperweights.

Eh, personally I find a pragmatic approach to definitions produces the least silly results. Youtube can be a music sharing site to other people and a video sharing site to me. I like to be accurate, but objecting too much to the 'music' definition seems like manufacturing disagreement when understanding is readily available.

savageorange said:
Eh, personally I find a pragmatic approach to definitions produces the least silly results. Youtube can be a music sharing site to other people and a video sharing site to me. I like to be accurate, but objecting too much to the 'music' definition seems like manufacturing disagreement when understanding is readily available.

yeah, but there's a bit of a difference between stuff like "I like using YouTube to listen to music", and stuff like "stop complaining about comments; e6 is a porn site, lmao". heck, I often use YouTube to listen to music, and often use e6 to peruse porn, but trying to boil it down to black and white terms ignores the greater utility. e621 is so much more than just a website that hosts porn.

EDIT: heck, I'm not even sure if I'd really want to call something like E-Hentai/ExHentai to be a porn website because it's so good at just functioning as a really good archive of doujins in general, as well as being a really good way to view and follow any variety of webcomics, series, and other stuff like old videogame manuals and guidebooks-- and that shit has "hentai" in the name.

darryus said:
yeah, but there's a bit of a difference between stuff like "I like using YouTube to listen to music", and stuff like "stop complaining about comments; e6 is a porn site, lmao".

I presume that's a reference to the screencap recently posted. Do you consider that guy to be an accurate representation of the average person on e621 saying or thinking 'e6 is a porn site'?

savageorange said:
I presume that's a reference to the screencap recently posted. Do you consider that guy to be an accurate representation of the average person on e621 saying or thinking 'e6 is a porn site'?

what screencap are you referring to?

garfieldfromgarfield said:
what screencap are you referring to?

the table maybe? my best guess

kemonophonic said:

Rating	Post Count	% of Total
Safe	794,574	24%
Questionable	606,619	18%
Explicit	1,979,304	58%

garfieldfromgarfield said:
what screencap are you referring to?

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/813894224448847905/984536803690299462/unknown.png I think.

kemonophonic said:

Rating	Post Count	% of Total
Safe	794,574	24%
Questionable	606,619	18%
Explicit	1,979,304	58%

42% of posts here aren't explicit. I guess that's the answer.

savageorange said:
I presume that's a reference to the screencap recently posted. Do you consider that guy to be an accurate representation of the average person on e621 saying or thinking 'e6 is a porn site'?

it's in reference to the like half-dozen people who've more or less said the "it's a porn site" thing in this thread over the past week or so since the update.

notmenotyou said:
Do excuse the dust in here. The latest update is pretty straightforward, we renamed the rule to be a bit more objective and clarified more what exactly is inappropriate. In addition to that we've made a small help page to add some examples and explanations on what is and is not appropriate.

First of all the rule text:
And the help page:

e621:Inappropriate Comments

Link

In the interest of the success of the site we do not want people discussing their personal sexual encounters (past or present) or any explicitly detailed desires, fetishes, or fantasies. All users, artists, commissioners, the subjects of works of art, and other people browsing the website all have the right, within realistic expectations, to browse our website without seeing comments from our users that may make them uncomfortable.

Examples of inappropriate comments:

Comments that are overly focused on graphic /explicit details.

Don’t make up elaborate stories about what you wish would happen, or were to happen.

"Definitely going to need some happy aftercare time in a snug onesie and diaper. Don't forget to lock up the young kitten in a chastity with his mouth filled so he doesn't wake himself up from his nap in daddy's lap."
"Fine addition to my collection for erection."

Comments that detail your personal sexual experiences, fantasies or desires.

Any comment that describes your past real life experiences, roleplay encounters, or fap stories are going to be considered creepy by the broader userbase. Note that the comment doesn’t need to be long in order to share too much information.

Examples that will get you a record:

• I came so hard
• I wish I could get fucked like that
• I wish that vaporeon would breed me
• My boyfriend likes doing that to me!
• I wish my girlfriend would be doing that for me
• I want to lick those paws
• Wish I could get filled like that

Examples that (most likely¹) won’t get you a record:

• God I wish that were me
• I’m loving those tits
• That is one hot / wet pussy
• Pump that donut!

¹ Context is going to matter, see the two following sections for details

Comments that focus on a fetish on a picture that does not include that fetish.

Fairly self-explanatory, don’t bring any (controversial) fetish into an image that isn’t already featuring it, talking about how you’d wish any given image without X fetish should feature X fetish instead to make it “better” is always inherently creepy.

Fetishes falling under this category are the generally divisive ones like cub, watersports, scat, rape, humiliation of various kinds, and similar.

Comments that exceed the rating on the picture

In the shortest way possible, if something is rated safe nobody will want to hear about how you’d like to see the character getting lewded or fucked. Similarly goes for submissions rated questionable, nobody will want to know how you’d like them to get railed by a pack of 14 werewolves in the parking lot of an Arby’s if they’re only being suggestive or in the nude.

Those are pretty nice revisions, it makes it more clear and hopefully it will help with the comments.

darryus said:
it's in reference to the like half-dozen people who've more or less said the "it's a porn site" thing in this thread over the past week or so since the update.

Didn't notice them tbh, but maybe that's why the screencap I was thinking to was posted in the Best Comments thread recently.

toki420 said:
so when asking furries their favorite yiff site and e621 is one of the more common responses, i should just tell them "no"?

Yes.

Also, you should slap yourself for using the term "yiff site." It's not 2008 anymore.

lonelylupine said:
Yes.

Also, you should slap yourself for using the term "yiff site." It's not 2008 anymore.

Disavowing popular and well used slang just because its old? Cringe.

votp said:
Counterpoint: Dragoneer exists.

Who is the head that was shoved into him?
Counterpoint: Dragonneer doesn't act as a head of any community. Maybe a figurehead used as a plug to everything related to FA.

coebalt said:
Disavowing popular and well used slang just because its old? Cringe.

It's so well used, that it's all in holes. Slang by definition is a feature of subculture, i.e. a culture of a limited group of people. "Yiff" term was a fad disliked by many even in 2008. ANd I would argue, that by nature that would be rp site like a f-list, not an imageboard.

achakclaw said:
Those are pretty nice revisions, it makes it more clear and hopefully it will help with the comments.

I wish we could upvote forum posts. Yes, those are great improvements. Now if we can make people to read rules...

It's honestly bizarre how some people jump through hoops to argue that e621 isn't a porn site.

✅ Does the front page greet you with suggestive images?
✅ Does the website have an 18+ warning prompt?
✅ Does the website allow you to view porn by default, without signing up and verifying your age?
✅ Does the website allow explicit profile pictures?
✅ Is the majority of content porn?
❌ Is the website catered towards content creators?
✅✅ Is the primary use of the website for finding porn? Do porn images hold the large majority of upvotes/favs/comments?

Ironically, e621 is more of a porn website than Inkbunny is. Maybe they're thinking of e926?

Anyway, it's nice that the 'creepy comments' segment is finally getting some clarification, but like with most rules, it seems too dependent on arbitrary interpretation by whichever staff member comes across your post first. It'd be nicer for everyone if the rules were laxed a bit. It's not like place is going to fall apart the moment moderators stop proactively screening every single comment for the slightest hint of an infraction like beat cops on a quota. I get you're trying to keep the place looking classy(?), but when people have to worry about getting banned over mundane things you wouldn't normally think twice about saying on porn images, it kind of sets a hostile atmosphere and scares people away from interacting at all. At the rate of which people are being banned (about a dozen a day) and warned (dozens more a day), I fear this website will accidentally turn into a hugbox of the admin-selected elite (not intentionally, of course).

Both those are just my two cents. At the end of the day, I guess social interaction isn't really the focal point of this website, so it probably doesn't matter all that much.

fishyvap said:
✅ Does the website have an 18+ warning prompt?

there's a lot of other sites that have the 18+ warning that aren't exclusively porn sites, I'm pretty sure that most chans do, and despite a lot of chans having porn I don't think most people would try to argue that they are "porn sites", they're imageboards and sometimes people post porn.

fishyvap said:
✅ Does the website allow you to view porn by default, without signing up and verifying your age?

???

fishyvap said:
✅✅ Is the primary use of the website for finding porn? Do porn images hold the large majority of upvotes/favs/comments?

again, by that logic, YouTube is a music site, or maybe more accurately YouTube's a website for infants to watch the same 3 baby videos on loop every day for months on end, but YouTube has way more utility than that.
a website's primary use and it's primary utility are two diffrent things, e6 is way more useful as an art archive of art than it is as a porn site, even if that function isn't used as often.

heck that'd be like saying that the main utility of the entire fucking internet is pornography, which is _obviously_ not true.

darryus said:
there's a lot of other sites that have the 18+ warning that aren't exclusively porn sites, I'm pretty sure that most chans do, and despite a lot of chans having porn I don't think most people would try to argue that they are "porn sites", they're imageboards and sometimes people post porn.

???

again, by that logic, YouTube is a music site, or maybe more accurately YouTube's a website for infants to watch the same 3 baby videos on loop every day for months on end, but YouTube has way more utility than that.
a website's primary use and it's primary utility are two diffrent things, e6 is way more useful as an art archive of art than it is as a porn site, even if that function isn't used as often.

heck that'd be like saying that the main utility of the entire fucking internet is pornography, which is _obviously_ not true.

You can cherry-pick them apart individually, but it's more the collective whole of everything that I was going for. But alright, we can call it whatever we want—it changes nothing. At the end of the day, it's still a website hosts a majority of porn that anyone can instantly access, so seeing porn-related comments on porn images really shouldn't be unexpected.

fishyvap said:
You can cherry-pick them apart individually, but it's more the collective whole of everything that I was going for. But alright, we can call it whatever we want—it changes nothing. At the end of the day, it's still a website hosts a majority of porn that anyone can instantly access, so seeing porn-related comments on porn images really shouldn't be unexpected.

you say that but there's a lot more porn-focused websites than e6 and they have more or less totally non-cringe comment sections, and they don't even have rules against it. and in general I think that comments in the "god, I wish that were me" are generally unuseful to having comment sections that contain competent discussion and I think trying to discourage comments like that is almost universally good.

fishyvap said:
✅ Does the website have an 18+ warning prompt?

Lol. Steam asks me for my age all the time. And they have to have this prompt on e621, because there is porn.

fishyvap said:
✅ Does the website allow you to view porn by default, without signing up and verifying your age?

Reddit, Twitter, eh... google? I guess search engines are porn websites too.

fishyvap said:
✅ Is the majority of content porn?

42% to 58% is not the majority + there are many too strict rated pictures.

fishyvap said:
✅✅ Is the primary use of the website for finding porn? Do porn images hold the large majority of upvotes/favs/comments?

It's because there are not too many restrictions for porn, on e621. And people tend to go for porn, if there are no restrictions. That doesn't mean, this website is made for porn.

dubsthefox said:
Lol. Steam asks me for my age all the time. And they have to have this prompt on e621, because there is porn.

to be fair, Steam also has porn, so I guess it's a porn game service.