but what about the "Minors involved in SFW or non-sexualized interests, such as vore and transformation, are allowed" thing?

And the "pregnancy under 13 is not allowed", implying that if they're 13 and up it's perfectly fine for some reason?

Yeah, I think they included that clause because there are genuine, serious stories about teen pregnancies
But a child pregnancy is... im not sure who would even draw a child pregnancy as a serious story bcos it ltierally cant happen IRL xD
Though maybe there can be a 12 year old who gets preggo? Idk?????????????

But yeah the point of that clause is that teen pregnancy is not off the table as long as it's not the "sexual reward" of the art piece
Remember, they factor in context so when they look at a submission they will see what the artist likes and doesn't like.

So I'm fairly certain (not 100% sure though) that an artist is drawing a bunch of teen pregnancies with no context or dialogue, then it'll be pretty clear that they're drawing because they horny for preggo teens. But the rule also protects people that want to put it in some kind of story where the pregnancy is not sexualized. So if there's no dialogue but they know that the character's lore is that they are having a teen pregnancy and are dealing with the fallout of it, even if it's in a whimsical way, that's not sexualized and therefore ok.

(also, when I say things are OK or NOT OK, I don't mean morally, ethics are not what's in question here, what I'm talking about is strictly, what should we allow on FA or not, so if anyone reading my comment feels attacked, I'm not making ethical judgements out of you because that rarely accomplishes anything other than suppress people from open and honest communication)

Theere we go, that's the thing I wanted them to clear up.
In policy writing language is EXTREMELY important

What they mean here is that yes, Vore can involve minors, so long as it's not fetishized / as a sexualized interest.
So yes you can have a funny comic where a Mew gets vored because it's funny haha. Yes even if it makes you feel more than funny haha deep down. Whatever!

But if it's a vore fetish, if it's vorny (i love that word btw xD), then the characters need to be aged up
And by the way if you like them petite, you can always age them up into a shortstack. That's entirely ok!

Or we can accept that more than one body type exists and trying to police adult females' figures and deem them children if their tits aren't big enough is gross as fuck.

And maybe stop pushing this idea that Mew, an ancient single-stage Pokemon recognized as the genetic mother of Mewtwo, is somehow equivalent to a child. And that we should be forced to draw Pokemon looking nothing like themselves because a mod is offended by how they look due to the Pokemon artstyle.

It's weird to get a free pass on SFW art and fetishes as long as it's non-sexualized...
Though now I'm worried what they'll count as sexualized... how far will they consider what's Saturday morning material and what's not? This had never been cut and dry beforehand

Yep! It's actually stunning how I never really thought about how vague it is till this whole internal policy thing..
But IMO, and this is something i want them to clarify, that the "context in submissions" really means "knowing whether the user is fascinated with teens / children" ! Bcos I am starting to think that ultimately that's what they are looking for

When they get a report they try to see, is the artist known for cub stuff? Does the artist, deep down, feel like it's hot BECAUSE they are underage? So that is the what IMO the "context" should mean and how the more ambiguous cases will and have always been handled since the 1000 year old loli update in 2015

Apparently the vagueness of the previous rulings was due to not having the entire staff available at the time, you'd think they would have planned ahead. The obvious loopholes they left are....odd and specific, also they did the whole "banning certain species" thing that they said they wouldn't which can be read as bias.

I doubt this wa smore of a "umm this looks line a minor." too "Lol I'm gonna ruin this pervs day!" kind of mentality. I think this rule was only tightened because of bad faith actors.

It's still KIND of unfortunate that the feedback and backlash had to get this crazy to ge them to clarify EVEN FURTHER. However the clarification did give me some relief.

The real test of trust with the Staff isn't gonna come from just listening for me though. The real question is: Are they not gonna pass out bans like candy? do we know for sure the admins will think critically, because as the saying goes: actions speak louder than words.

Plus there's still the issue for those who draw the digimon pok'emon characters on model, and while I'm no fan of things like feral, it does affect these artists still to a degree. So it still hasn't done anything for them either.

Be it an attempt at a loop hole or not, the fact is that this caused way too much unnecessary stress, they should've been questioning every report more readily. I won't pretend that at least SOME people were breaking the rules, but super certain here that this was from bad faith actors.

Oh. Oh right. Oh that makes so much more sense that it came from bad faith actors. Let's think about it, when the rules are ambiguous they really can be used as a bullying vector. I wonder if this is why the staff have been doing all this?

And yes that is the **real test** of whether they care. Whether they are going to start passing out bans like it's Tuesday morning. Actions speak louder than words. So if there's a massive swathe of bans left right and center, I'm going to be petty heartbroken and disappointed.

Also it's true it does affect the on-model Digimon/Pokemon enjoyers but in those case idk what to do.
Cuz Mew reallllllllly looks like a kid.. but I genuinely don't know what to do bcos that's a case where I guess it's kindda too "child representing"

Remember they take the context in bans when there's ambiguity and they also peer-review their moderations. So at least they made a public statement about this and I can worry less about it.

I'm more worried that every time some dumb FA uproar happens that it leaves more people jaded with the community. I want this community to be happy. But I also see bad faith actors and opportunists on both sides. Those who are on a moralistic crusade and believe that they are literally god himself, and those who are so angry at FA that they want to destroy it from the inside by pitting people against each other and encouraging them to link to their own Inkbunny accounts.

When I see people talking about power dynamics, that subset <X> of the community are monsters, that Staff are monsters, it really all just leaves me with a sad feeling.
And this sad feeling drives me to research, to dig, to see what the flying saucer fuck is happening and what is truth and what is conjecture.

In what universe does Mew look like a human child?

Spoiler: It doesn't.

Unfortunately people are already jaded when it comes to this sort of thing, been that way for years now in fact.

Still I will give you props for keeping up your optimism ^v^!

Ohhhh, I didn't realize that people were THIS jaded already :(
I probably would have worded things more cautiously, maybe even taken out my conjectures entirely

I noticed I stressed quite a number people out (and reassured others cos remember, I've been aggregating information so some people have been coming across and saying: "Oh phew, ok so I really AM in the safe zone"), and others have been helped because they can refine the concerns they want to raise to FA staff..

But it kindda makes me sad that words that I have written here have made some people sad.

I'm feeling optimistic because I proposed a strategy and I was listened to, and this made things genuinely better. There's a fascinating idea I would call "educating upstairs", because you know, maybe the people upstairs are also trying to figure things out. Maybe they're people who make mistakes. Generally what I've seen happen is that they will take the recommendations I give them, get the ones that make sense and present it as if they came up with it, but I don't care, what I care ultimately is that the big picture problem gets fixed. Because I'm seeing it happening in real-time at my work place by "educating upstairs" and so seeing it happen here can give me more hope that yes, if you put an effort and your optimistic, you can actually make a difference.

I don't want to accept that we'll always live in some cold, hard, uncaring reality and that that's just how to cookie crumbles. That makes me feel hopeless. There has to be a way, so I will do WHATEVER I can to make things work smarter. Learn myself so I can educate myself. The more we understand, the more we can fix. And the more the people upstairs understand, the amount of positive change they can do is enormous.

I say keep that energy and never lose it. ^v^ Though I may not trust the FA staff, or the way the world is right now, I still hold onto the idea things can always be better.

Have a good one ^3^

Okay so more 2 cents time.

This is certainly better than the initial announcement about all this. BUT, there is still more that needs to be done.

Okay so they gave us a list of Pokemon that CANNOT have lewd images made of them if they are in their canonical design. Okay that is good, the issue is that is only SOME of the questionable Pokemon.

So what I suggest is they NEED to all sit down and go through ALL of the Pokemon and Digimon. Start by weeding through the "obviously adult" ones so the list of Pokemon is now 25%-33% of all Pokemon. Now with that list ALL of the admins need to be present and vote or whether of not these Pokemon fall under the "do not draw canonical lewds" category and make the list public once done. That way instead of answering thousands of trouble tickets with 10's or 100's of images in them, they can instead direct the artist to the list. "If Pichu on the list, no canonical lewds. If Lucario is NOT on the list canonical lewds are permitted." This way it is 100% clear and irrefutable.

It will still be a bummer to delete the images I personally have in my gallery, however the absolute clarity of a list would lessen the sting rather than being vague about it.
The staff do still have a month to do this, and since there is no shortage of websites featuring lists of ALL the Pokemon (and Digimon) the task of doing this shouldn't be that bad, even if only 10% is done at a time.

Here's a better idea: We continue drawing whatever Pokemon and Digimon we want that aren't the obvious canon baby-classified ones, the FA staff stops trying to equate fantastical creatures to real animals or, far more bafflingly, human children, and anyone who wants to tell us what Pokemon and Digimon to draw or how to draw them can go sit on a cactus.

Literally everything about this "clarification" just emphasizes what a whole circus' worth of clowns the FA staff really are, and that this is entirely driven by bias against particular series and artstyles and will be enforced based entirely on which mod looks at a given pic and how they feel that day. Hell, how many people have noticed that it essentially bans any Pokemon that don't evolve at all too? So does this mean, for example, Mewtwo is now a child and should be forbidden? Snorlax? Kangaskhan? Latias? Zeraora? Ditto? Lapras? The list goes on and on. And in fact, if Rookie-level Digimon are banned, does that include Renamon? Or is she exempt from this because she meets an arbitrary height requirement and has tits? And yet Gatomon is a no-no despite clearly being the most adult of the original series' group AND a Champion-level Digimon, simply because she's small. And yet we're supposed to believe they won't go after chibi art, shortstacks and characters based on naturally small animals.

I also think it's very telling that people bringing up hypocrisies and inconsistencies and why this doesn't work are being banned on the FA Discord.

Whoof. Ok so let's talk: Do you want to support your cause? We need to be as reputable as possible. If you call them a circus you are going to destroy discussion. If you attack people's reputation or build a negative, untrusting narrative, we are going to get NOWHERE. What will you accomplish? The staff and people arguing against us are going to throw their hands up in frustration and stop listening to us. Because no-one wants to be called a clown.

The more people are busy being angry or continue to contradict themselves, the HARDER it is for me to put forward my concerns that are in YOUR FAVOR. The language still has ambiguities I want them to clear it up.

I actually want the rules to be more a little more lax because I think that they way they use context needs to be clearer. What does context mean? Does "context" mean "they evaluate whether the art is fetishized because it is underage"? Because that's what it seems like. But they need to make that public as well. Ever since the community has been begging them to clarify this pandora's box they opened without involving the community (they're learning their lesson btw), they've done the right thing and started open and honest communication.

So now: you need to be as informed as possible so you can make the concerned part of the community as reputable as possible.
I'm part of that concerned group by the way. There are some submissions of MINE that are question marks.

Now, let's start by NOT ACCIDENTALLY SPREADING MISINFORMATION. Misinformation is a killer. Be very careful to get your facts straight with what has been publicly stated first.
I'm not trying to be some devil's advocate here: I'm trying to not give fuel for bad faith actors who will dismiss people like YOU and ME because "oh they're just stirring things up" and "oh don't know what they're fucking talking about".

So work with me here and understand: there are some misconceptions that are being over, and over and over.
There are also some things that the FA Staff themselves need to clarify, or re-word because language is ambiguous.

Mewtwo is now a child and should be forbidden? - No we can't say this, this isn't the entire decision making process. PLEASE see the official journal to read about how they take a decision!
Rookie level Digimon are banned - Where did they say this? There are some Digimon that look too baby-like, yes, like Gatomon. If you get Gatomon's canonical figure and slap a ---- on it, yes it kindda does look too kiddy. They will also take Context into account. Is it a one-off? Is the artist on other sites and have a bunch of art tagged by community members as "cub" or "young" and that it's not a tag raid? Are there any descriptions or comments going "cute i like that they look so small but are over 18"

So, the context part will save literally all the shortstack art unless the artist makes it clear, somewhere, that they're into it because it's cub art and that they're just trying to blur the lines. They will not go into a submission and ban it based on the figure alone. This is a common misconception being ad nauseum. Please read the journal CLEARLY before making assertions.

Now final thing is, people bringing up hypocrisies and inconsistencies are being banned on the FA Discord
This is technically true but the ambiguity paints are very different narrative.
Who are the people bringing up hypocrises? We can split them into two subsets: People who are doing it in a civil manner, and those who aren't, and are ridiculing, guilt-tripping, shaming, threatening staff / people that counterargue. The people who counterargue can be split into people who are being nice about it, and people who are doing it to get a rise out of people.

So please don't just throw a statement saying "they're bringing up hypocrisies and are getting banned on the FA Discord". It's much like zooming in on a picture and saying: see! my overall narrative is correct! But once someone unpacks and disambiguates an assertion like that, it falls apart. And you shouldn't feel bad btw: you are learning as I am. But every time misinformation is spread, the people who witness it loses a bit of trust in the group.

Do you want to be trusted? Fact check what you say, read around the subject, and truly caring about the cause means marching into the trouble tickets and creating a well structured feedback on what you think doesn't make sense so far. THAT can help the staff digest it a lot better, and you might actually make them realize that, oh fuck, they kind of forgot to add something. Or that oh fuck, the wording really is wrong.

So YOU, raising accurate concerns, is what is going to make a difference here.

I am saying, in these journals, that I have dug deep, DEEP into the history, scrutinized and took apart what they said carefully. And then send it back to them as feedback.
That hey, what is the Context of submissions? So far my journal has only provided a best understanding of what it MAY mean, but it's not visible yet.

Please, please spread this and encourage people to forget about fighting, forget about shaming, because YOU have a cause to fight for and that is making sure that people don't get wrongly banned, and that the community becomes healthy. Is it a good outcome for someone to leave the community? Or would it be nicer for them if the community was fixed and started working together?

A TL;DR version of all that would be nice.

I have fact-checked, and nothing about your attempt at a more positive look at this is changing my mind, or the fact that they've all but said "We aren't going after x, unless we feel like it." I also did read the official journal, and it boils down to design choices and artstyle being their prime determining factors, along with whether or not a Pokemon or Digimon is fully evolved, and whatever any individual mod deems "adult proportions" to be.

And just like Mew, for the record, no, Gatomon most certainly does not look "baby-like", and she sure as shit doesn't look like a human child. She looks like a stylized cartoon cat standing on two feet.

She's basically got the same proportions as Garfield, but he's ok and she isn't? There's also been examples where someone with a corgi fursona, who's an adult, was dinged and nuked for being "underage" just because he's from a naturally-short species...like a corgi usually is... Someone's kobolds have also been getting flagged, so it seems that pretty much any short species, with a large head or cute style, is being flagged as a child regardless of any possible context of the character itself.

However... On the FA discord there is a feedback channel for this. So...maybe they're taking feedback and wanting to change it after seeing how bad the reactions are? Or they could ram it through anyway, who knows?