if its a fan, they are ok.
if its a brony in general, its not ok.

It's an interesting phenomenon, actually. The group of people dedicated to a show built to instill proper morals and friendly ideologies into children, teens, and young adults is full of those that exhibit the exact opposite of those very qualities. Granted, it has a few exceptions (bronies that aren't the same as the group), but that's what they are: exceptions. The majority of the group responds in the less than appealing manner to just about all situations, utilizing the basic frame of mind presented in hive-organizations like /b/: "Is it Pony? Can we claim it? Can we meme it? Can we insult it? Can we burn it? Can we break it? NO?! No good to us!"

It's a marvel to look at externally, if you're attempting to appreciate the social tendencies therein as a subset of group-based psychology, but outside of that, you are correct. Bronies, in general, tend to be of a rather destructive and closed-minded ideology, despite boasting similar views to the furry fandom in that they are in a "looked-down-on" group, with a connection to animal-based identities. It's interesting to me that they are almost our inverse. If you look at all of the things OUR fandom is known for, then look at the core of the group, you do see differences. Furries, in general, reflect the ideal set of open-minded, positively inclined, and otherwise friendly outlook that the MLP demonstrates.

There's a connection that's dangerous to draw: Furries, comparable to bronies. I'm a furry. I'm not a brony. I can, however, see the connections. We are similar in that we admire human-based traits in an animal world. We both appreciate the concepts ideal to a more accepting and open-minded society, but the bronies fail primarily in expressing and harboring those qualities. Furries succeed, in general. Some could argue that we don't give them a chance, but that's not true. Your attempt to entertain their community is proof enough of that. An olive branch, nay, many olive branches from our community have been extended to theirs. We occasionally receive one from them.

I used to think that the primary reason furries and bronies disagreed was set in the way they were viewed by the public. It seemed simple, actually, to say that we are considered by many at face value for being "sex-addicted animal fuckers." That isn't the case. They are considered "Odd adults interested in a kids' show." The difference is, the majority of people will accept their fandom, because it isn't linked with a few bad eggs that caused large social issues. It isn't, in the public eye, a group dedicated to fetishes or raw adult ideologies. It's an interest in a kids' show to a nearly obsessive degree. They aren't called pedophiles. They aren't accused of bestiality. They aren't shunned from society, because society doesn't consider them a threat. THAT CHANGES WHEN THEY LOOK AT US. They see all those things in our fandom because a few bad eggs got major publicity. That's a whole shit-storm of a conversation waiting to happen, so I'll conserve the details and get back to my point: I used to think the tension between the group was set in the way they were accepted by the public in contrast to our being shunned. As such, I didn't consider them a problem.

I've learned since then that there is more to it than that.

I want to be clear: I'm not supporting them as a group, because they've gone far from their purpose. They have, in fact, become the opposite of their goal. I can't support a group that moves away from what they stride for in large, proud steps.

Part of me wishes I could agree with your initial idea that /maybe/ their reputation was like ours in that it was caused by bad eggs. I like the idea of accepting people as they are, and not shunning them as a group. It is unfortunate, to me at least, that their reputation is well-earned, and that it's expressed so blatantly throughout those that participate within their group. I'll be maintaining, however, that they do have exceptions. I know a couple of kind-hearted individuals with the misfortune of wearing their brand.

I apologize for the HUGE wall of text. Consider this an agreement with Pommy, with a minor addendum: exceptions exist, so individuals should still be considered on an individual basis, given that the base traits are kept in mind.