a common issue I've seen on this site is the jumbled mess of approvers not being exactly sure how human a character can get before it's too human, this mostly applies to toads and elves, the only solution I can see being fit is the eradication of both in art pieces that don't display any furry-like features other than "mushroom hat" and "pointy ears"

Yeah, that's not happening. The rules say they're allowed, and people like them.

I think a better solution would just be to have a few more people with approval privs that have some interest in the slightly less animalistic characters allowed on here.

The line must be drawn somewhere, and I guess changing it would just be moving the goalpost, keeping the amount of complaints roughly the same.

I would guess it's ok/healthy as it currently is.

Who is "not exactly sure", it's spelled out exactly.

Uploading Guidelines
The things that make humans not-human under our rules are visible, anatomical deviations from the standard human.
Examples are the presence of animal body parts (dog ears, cat tail, pig snout, horse penis, etc.), alien body parts, plant body parts, etc.
This means that orcs, elves, plant-people, humanoid aliens, are all fine.

A different skin color does not make a human relevant.
Costumes, clothes, accessories, etc. do not make a human relevant.

If any sort of non-human traits are present, the character in question is no longer a pure human, but a humanoid for tagging purposes.

tortured_torchic said:
a common issue I've seen on this site is the jumbled mess of approvers not being exactly sure how human a character can get before it's too human

This reasoning is awful.
If this is a problem, the solution is modifying existing guidelines, creating new ones and/or having a discussion with relevant parties. Not nuking the issue from orbit.

This makes me wonder if koppaites from Pikmin look too human due to their rounded ears… koppaite_(pikmin)

dimoretpinel said:
This makes me wonder if koppaites from Pikmin look too human due to their rounded ears… koppaite_(pikmin)

Some depictions possibly? But there hasn't been a single post here which doesn't also include a non-human creature of some kind which makes the post site-relevant anyway.

... Jesus, did ya have to word the title like folks were getting their jackboots on?

Yeah, I find it as obnoxious as you do what "is too human" versus what isn't, given a little bit of a point to an ear is "less human" than the entire surface of a character's body being an obviously inhuman colour, however, I prefer to approach the humans on e6 issue from a very simple "is it relevant to the furry fandom" stance rather than species. A human character wearing a fursuit it, by the rules, still considered irrelevant while a generic elf is.

votp said:
[..] however, I prefer to approach the humans on e6 issue from a very simple "is it relevant to the furry fandom" stance rather than species. A human character wearing a fursuit it, by the rules, still considered irrelevant while a generic elf is.

It does beg the question of how elves are relevant to the furry fandom? It seems a bit odd to me to have furriness defined by departing from human form rather than the presence of animalistic features. I imagine the argument is somewhere around that if you start banning things around being not-animal-enough you hit a Slippery Slope of starting to ban significantly non-human aliens that simply aren't animal-based enough or arguing about whether devil horns/tails are animal or not, but as far as I'm concerned if I'm looking at elf-on-elf porn I'm looking at two humans that have merely been No Homod.
Strawman argument: Several photorealistically-rendered humans gangbanging an Among Us Crewmate isn't Furry, but would be allowed here.

magnuseffect said:
as I'm concerned if I'm looking at elf-on-elf porn I'm looking at two humans that have merely been No Homod.

post #4188447 post #4206015 post #4253970 post #4253972
No-homosapien.

magnuseffect said:
It does beg the question of how elves are relevant to the furry fandom? It seems a bit odd to me to have furriness defined by departing from human form rather than the presence of animalistic features. I imagine the argument is somewhere around that if you start banning things around being not-animal-enough you hit a Slippery Slope of starting to ban significantly non-human aliens that simply aren't animal-based enough or arguing about whether devil horns/tails are animal or not, but as far as I'm concerned if I'm looking at elf-on-elf porn I'm looking at two humans that have merely been No Homod.
Strawman argument: Several photorealistically-rendered humans gangbanging an Among Us Crewmate isn't Furry, but would be allowed here.

I think having e6 serve slightly out of the strictly "furry" space and more into the slightly more general fantasy/scifi spaces. there is some amount of overlap, and also I think alowing us to have robots, aliens, elementals, demons, animate_inanimate, etc., etc. is potentially an easier line to draw.

watsit said:
post #4188447 post #4206015 post #4253970 post #4253972
No-homosapien.

If I see a human IRL with green (or blue or purple) skin, I'm going to render aid. Or run away from whatever just poisoned them. XD

I think the elves thing came because frigging Star Trek, of all things? Or the association with other fantasy creatures like dragons and gryphons, and how it would seem asinine to draw lines in the middle of a popular fandom among furries? Remember, this was about 15 years ago, and Babylon 5 was still fresh in people's memories, too.

alphamule said:
Or the association with other fantasy creatures like dragons and gryphons, and how it would seem asinine to draw lines in the middle of a popular fandom among furries? Remember, this was about 15 years ago, and Babylon 5 was still fresh in people's memories, too.

If I had to take a wild guess about the elves thing, I'd say it's this. Some depictions of orcs have them as pig-like. And orcs are somewhat of a staple in fantasy, often seen in the same setting as elves

See, the problem is that even if we throw more janitors at it, they would remain at the end of the unapproved queue because they are edge cases and barely allowed. No one wants to outright delete them, but no one wants to hit that approve button either. Quite the dilemma.

popoto said:
If I had to take a wild guess about the elves thing, I'd say it's this. Some depictions of orcs have them as pig-like. And orcs are somewhat of a staple in fantasy, often seen in the same setting as elves

The "Elves in Furry" you can blame ElfQuest for.

rainbow_dash said:
See, the problem is that even if we throw more janitors at it, they would remain at the end of the unapproved queue because they are edge cases and barely allowed. No one wants to outright delete them, but no one wants to hit that approve button either. Quite the dilemma.

I know! I have the solution!

Just use furry characters in the comic's other pages as a pass!

Seriously, though, I've sometimes seen furry comics have pages not get approved/get deleted because uploader failed to add them to a pool, because that specific page didn't have furry characters.

Are Juusou from Made in Abyss allowed, or are they considered too human-like?

They are people born as narehates, instead of transforming into one via curse or blessing.

Here is an example https://twitter.com/toriaezuDES/status/1699800780327514117

Nishagora is also juusou, but looks very animalistic.

dimoretpinel said:
Are Juusou from Made in Abyss allowed, or are they considered too human-like?

They are people born as narehates, instead of transforming into one via curse or blessing.

Here is an example https://twitter.com/toriaezuDES/status/1699800780327514117

Nishagora is also juusou, but looks very animalistic.

Case by case, depending on what form they take exactly.