casmin7~ said:
Foxes in love was liked by a lot of people so its surprising it was removed from the best place to view it and read it (As I would also prefer to read Faux Pas here) but I guess when standards change things end up shifting.

It was also liked by a lot of staff, too, so hot feelings sometimes flared up, especially this last time, so don't think we did this on a lark. But we couldn't come up with a sufficiently good reason to keep it, much as we wanted to (and we did try). As I've said several times before and likely will nauseate people with in the future, sometimes you have to murder your darlings, no matter how much it hurts.

rainbow_dash said:
Foxes in love was always right there on the border of the standard. That's what made it so hard to deal with. It's not drawn poorly, but it's also very simplistic. It made applying the standard consistently hard.

What is the policy on minimalist art?

Would love to know who kept pushing to have it all removed. No one ever seemed bothered by it. It's very clear a lot of furs love those cute little foxes, so why was there ever any internal debate about it in the first place?

brave said:
Would love to know who kept pushing to have it all removed. No one ever seemed bothered by it. It's very clear a lot of furs love those cute little foxes, so why was there ever any internal debate about it in the first place?

Just because a lot of people, staff included, loved those foxes doesn't exempt those Fox Peeps from the site's quality standards. Even taking minimalism into account, much of the art was below the quality standards. The reason so much of it was accepted was because a former staffmember kept accepting it despite consistent disapprovals on quality standards by other staffmembers, and because of that precedent, other staffmembers kept it up despite the quality issues frequently coming up in discussions. Several comics actually had been deleted for quality reasons until a fan cleaned them up. In the later comics, the foxes actually improved quite a bit, but the things they interacted with were often lumpy, unrecognizable, and indistinct, even for minimalism. The dialogue was frequently the only thing carrying the comics and dialogue by itself isn't sufficient enough to make something acceptable on the site. Let's face it, if it hadn't been "Foxes in Love", the comics would have been deleted long ago and few would have cared.

Basically, the disapproving staff wanted us to be more consistent with our standards even when it pains us to be so. Further, the exception that was "Foxes in Love" caused problems when other poorly drawn minimalist pictures got deleted and uploaders would point at "Foxes in Love" as getting in when other, slightly better (but still not quite good enough) pictures weren't.

And no, I'm not going to tell you who those disapprovers were. They don't need to be harassed for doing their jobs and caring about this site even when it means making hard, painful decisions that other people might disagree with.

A prime example of when a rule should be enforced, or adjusted and changed for the better...

And I never expected you to tell us the names of the disapprovers. Nor would it even matter. I was more curious as to *why* they would push for this

slyroon said:
After years of on-and-off internal debate, we have decided to remove the Foxes in Love comic from e621.

Now, the obvious question is why?

Simply because it doesn't fit the standard we set out with the uploading guidelines. While Foxes in Love has some sweet and wholesome dialogue, the art falls short.
While the art has improved over the 4 years we have hosted it, it is still not at a level where we would consistently approve it.

And finally we reach the conclusion to remove the entire comic, which was not an easy decision by any means.
As for the users whose upload limit was affected by this, it has been restored.

We understand that this may upset a lot of people given the popularity of the comic, but I must urge everyone to be civil on this topic.

As a final note, I suggest that everyone who is upset or wants to support the artist visit one of their pages and show them some love:

https://www.patreon.com/foxesinlove
https://twitter.com/foxes_in_love
https://foxes-in-love.tumblr.com/
https://www.instagram.com/green_fox_blue_fox/
https://www.fenrispublishing.com/order.php?r=g&s=toivo

I think this is one of the more unpopular decisions, since the Comic had it's Charme, it was well loved and it didn't need more than it had, there was no need for over the top drawing, it's called style... and it's a shame, since this was my, and many others, main way to read those comics since many Plattforms currently just go to shit

Just sad :(

Since this happened, I took the time to browse through the forum. Apparently people can get banned for mass down voting things rather than understanding how to blacklist tags. We're supposed to vote based on the quality of the art. But then you guys remove a well liked up-voted comic strip because it's "low quality", but continue to keep all the down-voted-into-oblivion trash...
I feel like you're trying to make some kind of point, and it's extremely unclear what that point is
If anyone didn't want to see the comic, they should just blacklist and move on

brave said:
Since this happened, I took the time to browse through the forum. Apparently people can get banned for mass down voting things rather than understanding how to blacklist tags. We're supposed to vote based on the quality of the art. But then you guys remove a well liked up-voted comic strip because it's "low quality", but continue to keep all the down-voted-into-oblivion trash...
I feel like you're trying to make some kind of point, and it's extremely unclear what that point is
If anyone didn't want to see the comic, they should just blacklist and move on

Amount of likes doesn't matter. If a post is sufficiently relevant and of sufficient quality, it can stay, even if downvoted to Helen Beck. (A good example is the now-Takedowned infamous cheese grater picture) If a post is not sufficiently relevant and not of sufficient quality, it gets curated out, even if upvoted to the highest sphere of the heavens. The issue wasn't that nobody want to see "Foxes in Love". It was that we did like it and that was hurting consistency in site curation.

If a point must be insisted upon, it's that we shouldn't let sentiment get in the way of doing our jobs properly.

clawstripe said:
Amount of likes doesn't matter. If a post is sufficiently relevant and of sufficient quality, it can stay, even if downvoted to Helen Beck. (A good example is the now-Takedowned infamous cheese grater picture) If a post is not sufficiently relevant and not of sufficient quality, it gets curated out, even if upvoted to the highest sphere of the heavens. The issue wasn't that nobody want to see "Foxes in Love". It was that we did like it and that was hurting consistency in site curation.

If a point must be insisted upon, it's that we shouldn't let sentiment get in the way of doing our jobs properly.

And here I was thinking your and this site's "job" was art preservation going of proud statements penned by Moderators I've read several times, but I suppose that's my mistake.

fast91 said:
And here I was thinking your and this site's "job" was art preservation going of proud statements penned by Moderators I've read several times, but I suppose that's my mistake.

Art preservation, not an art dump. We have standards amd if they're not met, too bad.

There's this too, how well does this tie in

Good Things to Upload:
Any art or animations that are relevant to "furries", i.e. contain anthropomorphic characters or animals.
Art you have created or commissioned.
Art the original artist has given you permission to post here.
High quality photographs (or scans) of traditional, drawn artwork on a paper canvas.
Photo edits/manipulations are also okay as long as they're high quality.
Image sets are allowed as long as they have an overarching story (i.e. comic) or otherwise a natural progression (i.e. transformation sequences) connecting the images.
Webcomics are allowed as long as not the entire comic is mirrored here, meaning only up to a maximum of five (5) pages total.
A webcomic counts as any comic that is exclusively hosted on their own page, exclusively hosted on a webcomic host, or monetized through ads.[/b]
Image sets where a single "base" is reused multiple times with only minor edits (and no story or natural progression) are not allowed.
Small excerpts (up to 10 at a time) are okay, though.

fliphook said:
There's this too, how well does this tie in
Webcomics are allowed as long as not the entire comic is mirrored here, meaning only up to a maximum of five (5) pages total.
A webcomic counts as any comic that is exclusively hosted on their own page, exclusively hosted on a webcomic host, or monetized through ads.[/b]

FiL does not count as a webcomic, it's hosted on twitter

donovan_dmc said:
FiL does not count as a webcomic, it's hosted on twitter

https://foxesinlove.net/

They do seem to have their own site, not much on there though, as well as twitter and tumblr.

purelyforablacklist said:
https://foxesinlove.net/

They do seem to have their own site, not much on there though, as well as twitter and tumblr.

A webcomic counts as any comic that is exclusively hosted on their own page, exclusively hosted on a webcomic host, or monetized through ads.

It's on twitter, it isn't exclusive

donovan_dmc said:
It's on twitter, it isn't exclusive

Oh shoot, didn't see that. My bad

Good to know

fast91 said:
And here I was thinking your and this site's "job" was art preservation going of proud statements penned by Moderators I've read several times, but I suppose that's my mistake.

I used to make some absolutely horrible sprite comics when I was a schoolboy. Much of it is stuff that simply has no merit in being archived on this site, even though I did technically feature furry characters, and I did have some fully original content thanks to Milkshape 3D.
I have no love for these old sprite comics and no interest in presenting these creations to others, so I simply never uploaded any of my comics to e621.
I would've been happy to let it disappear from the internet forever after I grew up, but my sprite comics are technically readable because data preservationists backed up more than 30,000 comics that were available on Smack Jeeves. In spite of the fact that e621 does not host my Sonic the Hedgehog sprite comic? Miraculously, my bad art lives on.

While Twitter is severely mismanaged, Foxes in Love is not in immediate danger of disappearing, and the artist also has their own site that they can host these comics on. The "art preservation" argument doesn't seem to apply here. There is a lot of cruft on the internet that does not pass muster.

purelyforablacklist said:
Art preservation, not an art dump. We have standards amd if they're not met, too bad.

"Quality standards" might be one thing,
but you might do well gaining an appreciation by creating some art yourself before deciding you have the right to tell people what is good and what isnt.
And don't tell me thats not what you're trying to do, its literally the first post you made on this account.
Apology if I presume too much by assuming you havent, your conduct just doesnt strike me as very empathetic with the craft.
Anyway, I'm off to use tumbler of all things, thats the one "good" thing finding this forum thread did for me.

fast91 said:
"Quality standards" might be one thing,
but you might do well gaining an appreciation by creating some art yourself before deciding you have the right to tell people what is good and what isnt.
And don't tell me thats not what you're trying to do, its literally the first post you made on this account.
Apology if I presume too much by assuming you havent, your conduct just doesnt strike me as very empathetic with the craft.
Anyway, I'm off to use tumbler of all things, thats the one "good" thing finding this forum thread did for me.

Why're you so offended for an art comic? and yes, we do have to say what's "good" or not, else we become just like r34, Furaffinity or any other non-curated art archive. I'm sorry e6 doesn't pander to you.

user_408284 said:
A prime example of when a rule should be enforced, or adjusted and changed for the better...

And I never expected you to tell us the names of the disapprovers. Nor would it even matter. I was more curious as to *why* they would push for this

Sometimes people are just that miserable and want to be "right" or matter I guess.
Just look at some of the comments here.
Instead of touching some grass and ignoring the stuff they didn't care for, they had to ruin it for the majority of people that enjoyed it. Wonder how much energy they put into probably years of complaints to have it removed.

k9not said:
Sometimes people are just that miserable and want to be "right" or matter I guess.
Just look at some of the comments here.
Instead of touching some grass and ignoring the stuff they didn't care for, they had to ruin it for the majority of people that enjoyed it. Wonder how much energy they put into probably years of complaints to have it removed.

Telling people to touch grass on e621's forums is quite ironic.

purelyforablacklist said:
Telling people to touch grass on e621's forums is quite ironic.

Idk why you personally have a problem with something that made people happy that you stalk this forum to reply to everyone that weren't even talking with you.

And what's with you saying "and yes, we do have to say what's "good" or not""? Do you think you are part of something? Why are you acting like an admin? Nobody asked your opinion on what's good or not.

This comic put a smile on people's face. I can't believe it would cause you so much frustration that you would actually complain about it instead of going over it. You wanted to matter that badly? No one cares that you are right or not. You are just being a smarty pants just for the sake of being "right" when everybody thinks the rule should be modified.

Also please change your pfp... I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself with all that edge. It's very disturbing how you chose to portray yourself as someone who is ending their life. Also very attention seeking and cringe. Get some help please and reflect on yourself.