So, Dacad was just banned for art featuring canonically adult, yet short characters for no discernable reason. The provided explanation being they are 'young coded'.

Under this logic every single mlp post with the main 6 girls, should be counted as cub. Thats literally a quarter of the entire site.

Under this logic, every single goblin on this site is now 'young' for being short. Midna for example would now be 'young'.

If youre making the FA staff look like theyre doing a good job youre fundamentally failing your duty as a moderator.

Something is sincerely wrong with this ruling.

'Young coding' is not a thing.

Just use young adult_(lore) it's really not difficult. Feral characters are much easier to get away with not tagging as young because many feral animals are simply just small. Anthro characters usually do not follow this pattern, so small anthro characters are usually tagged young to avoid legal trouble.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Just use young adult_(lore) it's really not difficult. Feral characters are much easier to get away with not tagging as young because many feral animals are simply just small. Anthro characters usually do not follow this pattern, so small anthro characters are usually tagged young to avoid legal trouble.

I believe OP is talking about FurAffinity.

dsco said:
I believe OP is talking about FurAffinity.

Well Dacad was banned from here today: https://e621.net/user_feedbacks?commit=Search&search%5Buser_name%5D=Dacad I believe they were insulting the e6 mods for banning them and saying FA mods are bad, but e6 mods were worse? That's how I read it.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Well Dacad was banned from here today: https://e621.net/user_feedbacks?commit=Search&search%5Buser_name%5D=Dacad I believe they were insulting the e6 mods for banning them and saying FA mods are bad, but e6 mods were worse? That's how I read it.

Oh, weird. I didn't know about that.

Posts like this certainly do look and should be tagged young, IMO. I do find it interesting how people attack Zaush for making characters that look young and say they're really adults, as him trying to sneak through underage characters, but defend Dacad when he makes characters that look young and say they're adults, as what he says should be accepted at face value. I get that Zaush has a history of controversy and is less averse to cub art, but when you have the same disparity between how a character looks and what the artist says for a given character's age, they should be handled the same by TWYS.

(And it's worth pointing out it's only a 7 day temp ban, not a permaban)

demesejha said:
If youre making the FA staff look like theyre doing a good job youre fundamentally failing your duty as a moderator.

while banning artists is a pretty bad look; i certainly don't think it makes them worse than people who actively participate in media purging (although i know there are and have been quite the few artists who are happy in nuking their own works for all public places)

i will say that it's got to be really frustrating to be told that your art is "young-coded". twys or not i would be livid if someone told me that my nsfw art was secretly underage porn and i certainly wouldn't want to concede to that assessment by tagging my work as such

now if you'll excuse me i'm going to download all of dacad's stuff here because i sense a dnp coming, and quite frankly i wouldn't blame him

dripen_arn said:
while banning artists is a pretty bad look; i certainly don't think it makes them worse than people who actively participate in media purging (although i know there are and have been quite the few artists who are happy in nuking their own works for all public places)

i will say that it's got to be really frustrating to be told that your art is "young-coded". twys or not i would be livid if someone told me that my nsfw art was secretly underage porn and i certainly wouldn't want to concede to that assessment by tagging my work as such

Addendum

i'm only coming at this perspective from dacad's pov. personally: that rigby absolutely looks like a tween and i'm not saying that his works should be exempt from twys

now if you'll excuse me i'm going to download all of dacad's stuff here because i sense a dnp coming, and quite frankly i wouldn't blame him

My fear as well, we'd be losing another 1.2k artworks if that happens. Already lost so many thousands of artworks from this site.

Well if an artist wants to get upset that their art that looks like it features young characters must be tagged young for legal reasons and decides to purge their art from the site, that's on them, not the site that's following the law. Laws won't accept an artist essentially saying "but they're 18!" And when it comes to this stuff it's better safe than sorry.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Well if an artist wants to get upset that their art that looks like it features young characters must be tagged young for legal reasons and decides to purge their art from the site, that's on them, not the site that's following the law. Laws won't accept an artist essentially saying "but they're 18!" And when it comes to this stuff it's better safe than sorry.

... Site's hosted in the US, "the law" doesn't care if the artwork is of a character is 18 or not, it's artwork. Legal reasons outside of the US are really not E6's concern, or any NSFW content would be banned for being haram.

One thing that always gets me about this is how would you genuinly change that depiction of rigby to make them look "older" because rigby is just small thats just how he is and how he would be proportioned compared to mordecai and other characters. So the only real way to get a young vibe from a character is through own personal veiw of dacads artstyle with whatever elements of it you find to be young.

Theres no real visual themes or implied dialog that imply it, and if were going by hight canon we have seen young rigby in the show and he would be way shorter than the current early 20s something that he is in most episodes and the art dacad made. So like were is this sudden ban coming from? I wouldnt fully blame dacad for seeing this as potentially malicious when their stuffs been fine as is for so long and suddenly tagged as something that will make them a target for random people to harrass them for down the line against their intent.

Isn't there supposed to be a chibi tag or adult_(lore) for things like this?

votp said:
... Site's hosted in the US, "the law" doesn't care if the artwork is of a character is 18 or not, it's artwork. Legal reasons outside of the US are really not E6's concern, or any NSFW content would be banned for being haram.

The site operates worldwide, and would rather not have their content locked in specific regions due to not wanting to have young tagged... Staff have stated time and time again that it's legal reasons.

ksquid said:
Isn't there supposed to be a chibi tag or adult_(lore) for things like this?

It's supposed to be tagged young adult_(lore), but plenty of artists dislike their work being tagged as such.

ksquid said:
Isn't there supposed to be a chibi tag or adult_(lore) for things like this?

There is, and someone else put it on. young is for if a character looks young (whether due to art style, relative height, etc) and it is NOT relevant if they are young in lore, whether artist's interpretation of lore or otherwise. adult_(lore) and the other lore tags were added for when artist interpretation doesn't line up with what someone without any context would see. young still must be added in that case.

votp said:
... Site's hosted in the US, "the law" doesn't care if the artwork is of a character is 18 or not, it's artwork. Legal reasons outside of the US are really not E6's concern, or any NSFW content would be banned for being haram.

e6 doesn't change it's rules due to non-US laws, but the site does consider them. A big reason for the default blacklist, and said blacklist including young (and exclusions from it being done server-side, unlike normal blacklisting that's done client-side), was to help assuage complaints from countries where that stuff is a legal problem. Such a thing can't work if we can exclude the young tag from posts because it upsets some people to have it tagged. It would upset plenty other people who get into legal trouble because it wasn't blacklisted, where a defense of "but the artist said they're an adult" won't fly.

Right. While I am on Dacads side for this (Seriously short/slim people exist and lets not talk about the pokemon) this matter is clearly subjective and as a result we could argue in circles forever so... how about we approach this from a site functional perspective? Namely blacklisting

As it is now most of these 'young coded' characters have both the young and adult_(lore) Tags. If I want to blacklist underage characters using the young tag I now must ALSO blacklist all of these characters as well despite not wanting to! It's also clear that I'm not the only one who wants to be able to do this from the complaints that have been coming out.

As thus I would suggest we remove both the young AND adult_(lore) tags from these uploads and come up with a NEW tag specifically for 'young looking adults'. That way I can blacklist underage characters and still see these using the young tag blocked, and those who dislike seeing characters who simply LOOK young also have a tag they can use to blacklist those as well. Have the young tag SPECIFICALLY for canonically underage characters characters, and something like the 'youthful' or 'young looking' tag for adults.

And for heavens sake; don't ban people for mislabelling uploads with this new tag. It's a gray area for a reason, people are going to make mistakes!

aviananon said:
If I want to blacklist underage characters using the young tag I now must ALSO blacklist all of these characters as well despite not wanting to!

Just use this on its own line on the blacklist:
young -adult_(lore)

aviananon said:
Right. While I am on Dacads side for this (Seriously short/slim people exist and lets not talk about the pokemon) this matter is clearly subjective and as a result we could argue in circles forever so... how about we approach this from a site functional perspective? Namely blacklisting

As it is now most of these 'young coded' characters have both the young and adult_(lore) Tags. If I want to blacklist underage characters using the young tag I now must ALSO blacklist all of these characters as well despite not wanting to! It's also clear that I'm not the only one who wants to be able to do this from the complaints that have been coming out.

As thus I would suggest we remove both the young AND adult_(lore) tags from these uploads and come up with a NEW tag specifically for 'young looking adults'. That way I can blacklist underage characters and still see these using the young tag blocked, and those who dislike seeing characters who simply LOOK young also have a tag they can use to blacklist those as well.

Add young -adult_(lore) to your blacklist to exclude young looking characters which are an adult by lore.

aviananon said:
As it is now most of these 'young coded' characters have both the young and adult_(lore) Tags. If I want to blacklist underage characters using the young tag I now must ALSO blacklist all of these characters as well despite not wanting to! It's also clear that I'm not the only one who wants to be able to do this from the complaints that have been coming out.

You could also just blacklist young -adult_(lore) which will blacklist all posts with young that do not also contain adult_(lore)

Edit:

donovan_dmc said:
Add young -adult_(lore) to your blacklist to exclude young looking characters which are an adult by lore.

I've been sniped while writing my comment lmao

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Well if an artist wants to get upset that their art that looks like it features young characters must be tagged young for legal reasons and decides to purge their art from the site, that's on them, not the site that's following the law. Laws won't accept an artist essentially saying "but they're 18!" And when it comes to this stuff it's better safe than sorry.

What law are you even refering to?

donovan_dmc said:
Add young -adult_(lore) to your blacklist to exclude young looking characters which are an adult by lore.

Oh I had no idea you could do that! Handy! I still think my suggestion is a decent one. Using the Young tag on characters who-are-not-young, is resulting in a lot of confusion.

neko3240 said:
What law are you even refering to?

Artistic pornography involving fictional characters is not legal everywhere in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_child_pornography

So this is

• Australia
• Canada
• Ecuador
• Estonia
• France
• Ireland
• Italy
• New Zealand
• Norway
• Poland
• Russia
• South Africa
• South Korea
• Switzerland
• United Arab Emirates
• United Kingdom

just on the list alone where young rating:e content would be illegal

aviananon said:
Oh I had no idea you could do that! Handy! I still think my suggestion is a decent one. Using the Young tag on characters who-are-not-young, is resulting in a lot of confusion.

The young tag includes actually underage characters and characters that look underage purely because we tag based off of Tag What You See, actual ages are outside of that (even if stated in the image). They have to be combined due to how our tagging works.

aviananon said:
As thus I would suggest we remove both the young AND adult_(lore) tags from these uploads and come up with a NEW tag specifically for 'young looking adults'.

That's exactly what adult_(lore) is. It's only applied to characters that look young, but are stated not to be.

donovan_dmc said:
The young tag includes actually underage characters and characters that look underage purely because we tag based off of Tag What You See, actual ages are outside of that (even if stated in the image). They have to be combined due to how our tagging works.

This is purely the stupidest logic ever. Regardless how long that's been the rule, it's just incredibly silly. Conflating both of those creates a stigma against artists who aren't actually drawing underage characters, while justifying creeps who actually get off to underage characters. But why would we care about how this affects artists it's just porn on the internet lmao.

(Also please don't go and change all of the uploads of my character to young just because it's a pokemon I will cry and then delete them all.)

donovan_dmc said:
The young tag includes actually underage characters and characters that look underage purely because we tag based off of Tag What You See, actual ages are outside of that (even if stated in the image). They have to be combined due to how our tagging works.

Fair enough! won't fuss any more for now. My main problem with this is mostly resolved in any case.

ksquid said:
So like were is this sudden ban coming from? I wouldnt fully blame dacad for seeing this as potentially malicious when their stuffs been fine as is for so long and suddenly tagged as something that will make them a target for random people to harrass them for down the line against their intent.

Isn't there supposed to be a chibi tag or adult_(lore) for things like this?

If your concern is about harassment, adult_(lore), while probably a valid tag in many instances here, still has to be applied in addition to the twys tag young.
If I was in that position, I could probably acknowledge that adding adult_(lore) would clarify my intent, but I would still expect that the kind of people who would choose to harass me about young-appearing characters would just change their arguments slightly, adding the claim that "adult_[lore] was merely a fig leaf to disguise my true depraved intent".

donovan_dmc said:
The young tag includes actually underage characters and characters that look underage purely because we tag based off of Tag What You See, actual ages are outside of that (even if stated in the image). They have to be combined due to how our tagging works.

I feel like if you're going to allow actually purposeful underaged characters and NOT underaged characters that have a youthful look, you should very clearly separate the characters as there are plenty of people who want the latter while avoiding the former. Damn near everyone likes youthful aesthetics, and while I'm not going to debate the morality of liking canonically minor characters in such ways as it's irrelevant to the point, having the two of those things combined is probably chasing enough people away from using the site worse than a legal ban would be from places that the site would get in trouble from if it wasn't tagged to begin with.

Banning an artist trying to avoid having their work lumped in with a tag that has actual underage content seems like a failure of the environment more than the artist. If I ever had art of my character younger than he normally is, enough to qualify for the "young" tag, I would sooner want it taken down for no other reason than to avoid association with being an actual child. I cannot understand why there's no differentiation other than a whole second other tag that MUST go along with the first one.

fyreflareon said:
I cannot understand why there's no differentiation other than a whole second other tag that MUST go along with the first one.

Because that second tag is the differentiation..?

fyreflareon said:
you should very clearly separate the characters as there are plenty of people who want the latter while avoiding the former.

this is the entire point of young adult_(lore). That is the differentiation

demesejha said:
So, Dacad was just banned for art featuring canonically adult, yet short characters for no discernable reason. The provided explanation being they are 'young coded'.

Under this logic every single mlp post with the main 6 girls, should be counted as cub. Thats literally a quarter of the entire site.

Under this logic, every single goblin on this site is now 'young' for being short. Midna for example would now be 'young'.

If youre making the FA staff look like theyre doing a good job youre fundamentally failing your duty as a moderator.

Something is sincerely wrong with this ruling.

'Young coding' is not a thing.

"Young coded" is not that good of an explanation, I'll give you that, but it seems like another case of "err on the side." Using this guide one of the Janitors said he uses on Discord, there's not much to go on on the Rigby post other than his height (3 to 3.5 heads tall) and maybe the way his head looks. The blue deer appears of similar height and leans more towards teenager. The anthro Eevee one is a bit tough of a call for me to make, tbh, but it looks like the characters look around 5 heads tall and can look like teenagers to people.

Dwarves and goblins aren't tagged as young just for being short. Try tagging it on these posts for instance and it'll be quickly taken off.

I do want to point out that thia doesn't seem to just be in response to the posts being initially undertagged, the posts had also had the young tags actively removed by Dacad from two of the posts in question as well.

at the same time, to be fair, there have been some pretty mixed messages from staff about what they'd consider +young and what they'd be consider -young in relation to Dacad's works.

fyreflareon said:
I feel like if you're going to allow actually purposeful underaged characters and NOT underaged characters that have a youthful look, you should very clearly separate the characters as there are plenty of people who want the latter while avoiding the former. Damn near everyone likes youthful aesthetics, and while I'm not going to debate the morality of liking canonically minor characters in such ways as it's irrelevant to the point, having the two of those things combined is probably chasing enough people away from using the site worse than a legal ban would be from places that the site would get in trouble from if it wasn't tagged to begin with.

Such is the conundrum of trying to get as close to the line of legality as possible. People like seeing "Young Hot Teen Fucked In Ass", and as long as there's something saying they were born about 6,574.5 days prior, they're able to rest easy. When it comes to fiction and art, a character's age is literally made up. A young-looking 17 year old character is indistinguishable from a young-looking 18 year old character, or even a young-looking 20 year old character, the creator just decided to use a different number when making the character that day. For this site's purposes, "young" isn't an age, it's a visual attribute. Think of it as a synonym for youthful (which there has been some suggestions to rename the tag to, though some people may interpret that term too loosely).

fyreflareon said:
If I ever had art of my character younger than he normally is, enough to qualify for the "young" tag, I would sooner want it taken down for no other reason than to avoid association with being an actual child. I cannot understand why there's no differentiation other than a whole second other tag that MUST go along with the first one.

Child is a separate tag, and not one that's usually at issue. The cub tag was recently kicked to the curb in part because it too strongly created an association to being a child, despite being applied to most characters that simply looked young.

The rulings on what is young and what is not young seem to be inconsistently applied. I have seen a few posts where young tag is locked, and characters do not look young. I have also seen posts which appear to contain young but are not tagged young. How about some consistency? Young tag inherently has the same problems cub did. Means different things to different people.

hjfduitloxtrds said:

I have also seen posts which appear to contain young but are not tagged young.

You can add it to the post unless it's locked to -young.

How about some consistency? Young tag inherently has the same problems cub did. Means different things to different people.

Unfortunately the staff did not approve of merging all the users into a singular hive mind, so we'll have to live with being imperfect for now

hjfduitloxtrds said:
The rulings on what is young and what is not young seem to be inconsistently applied.

this is the result of half of the locks being applied by different people, ~half by RD, ~half by NMNY. and both seem to have different (almost opposite, looking at them) views on what should have young locked on and off.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Just use young adult_(lore) it's really not difficult.

donovan_dmc said:
The young tag includes actually underage characters and characters that look underage purely because we tag based off of Tag What You See, actual ages are outside of that (even if stated in the image). They have to be combined due to how our tagging works.

cloudpie said:
this is the entire point of young adult_(lore). That is the differentiation

I just need to express how absolutely coco-bananas it is that this appears to be the "accepted "solution.

"Oh, just tag these adult characters, that are canonically adult, and we all agree are adult, as "young". Sure this is effectively declaring open season on yourself for harassment and abuse from a bunch of unhinged Zoomers, but that's our policy."

This is not a good solution. This is on-it's-face, plain-as-day nonsense. TWYS is not a defence of the indefensible, which is in this case tagging an explicitly and canonically adult character, drawn to their canonical adult proportions, "young" based on vibes.

watsit said:
I do find it interesting how people attack Zaush for making characters that look young and say they're really adults, as him trying to sneak through underage characters, but defend Dacad when he makes characters that look young and say they're adults, as what he says should be accepted at face value.

Dacad didn't create Mordecai and Rigby. They're existing characters.

There is nothing in that picture to suggest they are anything other than the 23 years old they are in the show.

They're not doing homework, they're not in a high-school, there is absolutely nothing even marginally young-coded about the image other than some extremely mild size_difference.

Does TWYS mean every size_difference pic on the site now needs to be tagged young too?

tygre said:
"Oh, just tag these adult characters, that are canonically adult, and we all agree are adult, as "young". Sure this is effectively declaring open season on yourself for harassment and abuse from a bunch of unhinged Zoomers, but that's our policy."

"canonically adult" is not a very useful way to tag. Is every user supposed to be familiar with the canon of every media containing 10k year old vampire dragon lolis? The same short character can be drawn to look like a child or an adult, it depends on style and artistic choices rather than "vibes". Appearance is the most neutral way to tag because the system is visually oriented.

gattonero2001 said:
"canonically adult" is not a very useful way to tag. Is every user supposed to be familiar with the canon of every media containing 10k year old vampire dragon lolis?

No, just enough furrys need to be familiar with The Regular Show, an incredibly popular mainstream cartoon featuring anthros that aired on Cartoon Network for 8 seasons with 200+ episodes, to accurately tag things.

Let's not act like accurately tagging a picture of Rigby, a character with over 1.6k images on the site, is some herculean effort beyond the ken of man.

tygre said:
No, just enough furrys need to be familiar with The Regular Show, an incredibly popular mainstream cartoon featuring anthros that aired on Cartoon Network for 8 seasons with 200+ episodes, to accurately tag things.

Let's not act like accurately tagging a picture of Rigby, a character with over 1.6k images on the site, is some herculean effort beyond the ken of man.

Ah, so we should give arbitrary exceptions based on the character's popularity?
Or are you okay with tagging the various 9000-year-old lolis as adults too, because the creator said so?

cinder said:
Ah, so we should give arbitrary exceptions based on the character's popularity?
Or are you okay with tagging the various 9000-year-old lolis as adults too, because the creator said so?

How many 9000-year-old lolis are canonically adults on a TV show?

This website really cannot handle edge cases huh

Speaking of Dacad, here’s me experience with one of their posts:

post #3882882

I was angry and confused to see a hisuian sneasel post tagged with young when every other sneasel post is fine. I didn’t see the relevance of the tag other than the size difference between the sneasel and the sneasler.
I removed the young tag, but it was put back by someone else.

I’ve gotten used to having a blacklisted post in my own favorites… but the favorite is rendered pretty useless.

Edit: wait actually, is there a way to un-blacklist favorites specifically?

nrein said:
How many 9000-year-old lolis are canonically adults on a TV show?

I know of at least one that's over 400, at least.

nrein said:
How many 9000-year-old lolis are canonically adults on a TV show?

Comes to mind:

• Ilulu from Kobayashi’s dragon maid (an oppai loli the same age as Tohru)
• Faputa from Made in Abyss (150 years old, immortal and will stay child-looking forever, but acts very feral instead of child-like)
• Milim the destroyer from the slime anime

Genuinely not sure how I feel about how quickly that was answered with examples but, I guess I'll take the L on that one but the Dacad thing is still bs lmao.

I think “young coded” is nonsense as well. An artist should know how old the character is they are drawing. People also have different art styles that make them look that way. Is chibi art cub by this logic?

Like, imagine the situation for a moment. You’re an artist, you don’t intend for something to be considered cub, it gets tagged anyway, and you get banned for not tagging something you never intended to be tagged in the first place. That’s just not fair.

dimoretpinel said:
Edit: wait actually, is there a way to un-blacklist favorites specifically?

You can add -fav:DimoretPinel to the end of each query to un-blacklist posts you've favorited.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Because that second tag is the differentiation..?

cloudpie said:
this is the entire point of young adult_(lore). That is the differentiation

Then it shouldn't need the first one present at all. The point is, having any single tag, regardless of how many subsequent tags exist, associated with content you don't want, is unnerving. And not everyone knows how to blacklist in the very specific way to only block out a single tag ONLY IF another tag is not present. I didn't know until this thread. Not every person blacklisting "young" is reading this thread. It's a bad system due to the massive cracks people fall through either guided into content they don't want to see or not seeing content they do want to see.

fyreflareon said:
Then it shouldn't need the first one present at all. The point is, having any single tag, regardless of how many subsequent tags exist, associated with content you don't want, is unnerving. And not everyone knows how to blacklist in the very specific way to only block out a single tag ONLY IF another tag is not present. I didn't know until this thread. Not every person blacklisting "young" is reading this thread. It's a bad system due to the massive cracks people fall through either guided into content they don't want to see or not seeing content they do want to see.

If you clicked the "View help" link right below the blacklist text field, you'd find the blacklist help page, which explains that.

gattonero2001 said:
"canonically adult" is not a very useful way to tag. Is every user supposed to be familiar with the canon of every media containing 10k year old vampire dragon lolis? The same short character can be drawn to look like a child or an adult, it depends on style and artistic choices rather than "vibes". Appearance is the most neutral way to tag because the system is visually oriented.

I don't think it's really up to the viewer to determine what is or isn't. Just because something *looks* young in someones eyes doesn't mean it SHOULD be young. That's subjective in the best of circumstances. What's the threshold for deciding who gets to tag that? One viewer? 1% of viewers? >50%? The mods opinions? What's even the relative age where things are young anyway? If you're fairly older, LOTS of things look young, even well into adulthood. I understand there is young and there is... really young, but with all due respect, to my original point, I think if the artist never intended for things to be considered young, that is far more important than any viewers highly subjective opinion based on one of many conditions.

donovan_dmc said:
If you clicked the "View help" link right below the blacklist text field, you'd find the blacklist help page, which explains that.

Good to know, but I also know how few people actually go into the documentation for how things work. My whole real life job is fixing things for people and often just.. doing things that could be found in similar documentation. That it can be done, that it's written somewhere how to do it, isn't enough of a solution, IMHO. I submit myself as evidence, even. I knew a blacklist existed, I know the basic use of it, I have it in use.. but despite the answer being right there, as said above: until this thread, I never knew it existed. I didn't care that much, myself, but I just feel like there's a better way. However that way mostly revolves around my previous posts point too, which I suspect not everyone agrees with.

cinder said:
Ah, so we should give arbitrary exceptions based on the character's popularity?

This isn't about exceptions. It's about inconsistency.

It's about an adult character, being drawn as an adult, but being tagged young for no obvious reason.

When there are no in-image indicators of a character's age I think it is reasonable to fall back on that character's canon age.

If I draw a picture of Miles Prower, absent any indicators in the image to suggest any sort of aging-up, I would expect that image to be tagged young because Miles Prower is canonically 8.

Given the reasons for the young tag, this seems a sensible position of precaution.

There are 1.6k images of Rigby on the site. A whopping 29 are tagged young. 21 of those are tagged young due to other characters in the image. 5 are tagged young due to obvious in-image indicators that he is being drawn as a child. The other 3 are by Dacad... and those three look like the same Rigby that isn't tagged as cub the other 1.5k times he appears.

fyreflareon said:
Just because something *looks* young

That's all that matters given TWYS. The tag is not saying "this character is totally jailbait", it's saying the character looks young. A term you can find on plenty of legal real life porn.

fyreflareon said:
What's the threshold for deciding who gets to tag that? One viewer? 1% of viewers? >50%? The mods opinions?

Ultimately the admins. They're running the site and say how tags are used on the site. If users disagree about whether a tag applies, they're the ones to settle it.

fyreflareon said:
I think if the artist never intended for things to be considered young, that is far more important than any viewers highly subjective opinion based on one of many conditions.

So we shouldn't tag young on anything an artist says is definitely not young, no siree, no cub here, and let users suffer any legal consequences despite trying to blacklist young looking characters that can be problematic?

tygre said:
When there are no in-image indicators of a character's age I think it is reasonable to fall back on that character's canon age.

My brother in Bast, the in-image indicator is the character

tygre said:
"Oh, just tag these adult characters, that are canonically adult, and we all agree are adult, as "young". Sure this is effectively declaring open season on yourself for harassment and abuse from a bunch of unhinged Zoomers, but that's our policy."

who the fuck is "we all"?

also, reminder that the artist in question draws, like, a _lot_ of rioli pokémon who, in canon, are considered litteral babies. if people were going to harass them, the fuel is already there, I don't think getting a Regular Show post locked +young is going to be what causes it.

watsit said:
That's all that matters given TWYS. The tag is not saying "this character is totally jailbait", it's saying the character looks young. A term you can find on plenty of legal real life porn.

I feel like TWYS is not meant to be "Tag What You Think You Know, Even If It's Not True."

watsit said:
Ultimately the admins. They're running the site and say how tags are used on the site. If users disagree about whether a tag applies, they're the ones to settle it.

Yes well then TWYS is "Tag What You Think Admins See," I guess. But yes, this whole threads point is mostly a big disagreement with said admins, especially because it was over the removal of an artist mostly trying to differentiate their work and the extreme actions taken to deal with it.

watsit said:
So we shouldn't tag young on anything an artist says is definitely not young, no siree, no cub here, and let users suffer any legal consequences despite trying to blacklist young looking characters that can be problematic?

Have you seen the legal texts that people are so worried about? All of them are based off human depictions, first and foremost. Second off, they're exceedingly rarely prosecuted and when they are, have only done so for human depictions. They're also locally stored files, not accidental viewings of a web page. If someone were to stumble across a deceptively tagged image that were to actually be a legal problem in one of these countries to the point a prosecutor would bother taking the time for it, I am not sure the case would hold much water if the source of the content was just web cache. My lack of concern is mostly due to a lack of precedent with any legal case having furry media in it yet. Precedent is big with that stuff. But I'm not a lawyer, or a resident of any of those countries, so I guess I dunno!

sipothac said:
who the fuck is "we all"?

also, reminder that the artist in question draws, like, a _lot_ of rioli pokémon who, in canon, are considered litteral babies. if people were going to harass them, the fuel is already there, I don't think getting a Regular Show post locked +young is going to be what causes it.

Are you saying that you disagree that a character who by all means has been acknowledged as an adult, is an adult? Actually insane, just sounds like trying to go against the majority of people who disagree with the decision for the sake of going against them.

watsit said:
anything an artist says is definitely not young, no siree, no cub here]

Re: this post specifically.

While I understand the skepticism given that artist in particular, I feel like a lot of that particular post is emphasizing my point. Fennec's are small, with body proportions that look youthful when compared to other species, or humans. Tagging a Fennec as young because those proportions look young when used on non-fennecs seems like an abuse of TWYS, because you are seeing traits from one species in another and judging that species unfairly. It's a similar argument that occurs a little closer to home with me for 1st stage Pokemon like Eevee or Vulpix.. or more controversially, Riolu. While Riolu is often cited as canonically young due to their creator, a whole lot of Riolu furs are very adamant about their OCs being far more older and mature and not young in any sense of the word. Yet some people out there will beg to differ.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Just use young adult_(lore) it's really not difficult. Feral characters are much easier to get away with not tagging as young because many feral animals are simply just small. Anthro characters usually do not follow this pattern, so small anthro characters are usually tagged young to avoid legal trouble.

watsit said:
[...] but defend Dacad when he makes characters that look young and say they're adults, as what he says should be accepted at face value. I get that Zaush has a history of controversy and is less averse to cub art, but when you have the same disparity between how a character looks and what the artist says for a given character's age, they should be handled the same by TWYS.

(And it's worth pointing out it's only a 7 day temp ban, not a permaban)

It was straight up Rigby from Regular Show. It's not even a case of "I'm actually 200 tee-hee~", it's straight up a short adult. I understand saying someone is "young coded" if in addition to having cub-like proportions, there's other elements of dress, behavior, environment, etc. But as it stands it's just based on their body type, which is IMO completely unreasonable.

nrein said:

Are you saying that you disagree that a character who by all means has been acknowledged as an adult, is an adult? Actually insane, just sounds like trying to go against the majority of people who disagree with the decision for the sake of going against them.

I didn't state my opinion on that subject at all, actually, but since you asked: 90+% of Dacad's art looks like cub art, and it should be tagged accordingly, regardless of whatever the character's "canonical" age is.

This is, like, the second time a thread like this has been made in the past 365 days?

Edit: second time in the past two months.
Third time in the past year-ish it seems

sipothac said:
I didn't state my opinion on that subject at all, actually, but since you asked: 90+% of Dacad's art looks like cub art, and it should be tagged accordingly, regardless of whatever the character's "canonical" age is.

Well you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Emblematic of the issue for sure.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Artistic pornography involving fictional characters is not legal everywhere in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_child_pornography

So this is

• Australia
• Canada
• ...
• United Arab Emirates
• United Kingdom

just on the list alone where young rating:e content would be illegal

I feel like that's just also a good reason why an artist shouldn't be forcibly misrepresented.
They insisted Rigby be called a baby and said the artist should just take it, along with any side effects of such classification.

pleasantapples said:
They insisted Rigby be called a baby and said the artist should just take it

That's not what is happening, and you know that.

I think we are done here, before this spirals further into pedantry and outright lies.
Dacad will not be granted an exception to TWYS. If they wish to appeal their ban, they can do so themselves.