cool!

Hehe, and here I thought it was all about the pr0n, obviously I was mistaken.

I kinda knew it wasn't myself despite looking at it. :P

It might be a slightly different break down if I was able to get stats on submission types by categories. Like, what's general, adult, and mature based on flashes, stories, designs, etc. Over all, I don't think it would change too much. General content is pretty...generically dominant. x3

I second Gelltor, it's quite surprising how much of FA's submissions DON'T contain dicks. :P

You're forgetting the gigantic amount of lesbian solo female adult art that makes up 70% of all adult submissions! >:0

Kidding! :p

i always kept telling people that this aint a pure porn site. now we got proof in the form of some REALLY nice charts^^ nice!
but i agree. more frequent updates like this would make it easier to manage the site.

If I were to get more statistics from other sites, then we could compare sites and see which ones are more or less dedicated to porn.

Though I don't want to label certain sites as "porn" sites. Even here, the slight drop in submission numbers could be temporary and not spell the doom of FA. Heck, if most of China goes online and FA isn't censored there, then it is possible we'd see a jump in submissions. :o

But anyway! Thanks for thanking! <3

Yup. That was unexpected. XD

So basically we can draw from this data the following conclusions -

A) As time goes on, even though the total number of submissions increases, the amount of deleted content increases as well as a percentage, and mature and adult content decreases as a percentage of the whole.

B) As the amount of users increases over time, their perversion level decreases.

C) Newt Gingerich is an asshole.

I fear what these statistics portend.....

A) Somewhat! There is expected to be some deletions. Over time, artists will want to clean out old/bad art, or delete sketch versions of their completed works. Photos I'm sure get deleted often as well. So deleted content 'should' rise.

The percent it makes up is increasing, but it has slowed it's growth between 2011 and 2012. Also, the "large white bands" in the sources I used account for the largest chunk of deletions. Without those bands, deletions would probably be stable. This is just speculation though. I can't say for sure.

With another two years, I would be comfortable making predictions and using models to determine what the white chunks most likely were. From there, I'd try to figure out what the impact was and if it was any impact at all by those mass deletions. If they're just inflating deletion numbers but having no real impact, then, well, no problems are abound. If deletions steadily rise and all other content decreases, then there's an issue of course.

B) Hearing that the fandom used to be rather clean "back in the day", I almost wonder if it was merely a wave of perversion that washed over the fandom. Just speculating! I have nothing to back that up with.

C) I feel like Ross Perot with my charts. x3

But don't worry, from the looks of things FA is pretty healthy over all. Opinion, but still!
I keep saying it, but I would soooo love to get my hands on more detailed statistics. Ho baby, the species submission list alone is a treasure trove!

Interesting! Thanks for sharing that.

This is interesting and needs more love.

You have to take into account some considerations:

1. Photographs are found aplenty on FA, and none allow pronz.
2. Unless it's from a popufur, general submissions are given nowhere near the amount of *attention* (views, favorites, comments, et cetera) adult submissions tend to get in the majority.
3. Plenty of people don't tag submissions, correctly.

Unless extremely detailed data is given (from a legit source), I will never believe the furry world overshadows its adult entertainment department.

Errr.... Well,

1. Photographs can be furry in nature, whether they be of fursuiters, cons, art, whatever. So it's equally a bad idea to exclude them purely because they can't be adult content. Content is content and I wont' be biased against any, even if it makes the fandom look bad.

2. I'd say general attention would still far outweigh adult attention considering adult has to compete with "how are you doing?", "I am soooo drunk", and "Today I played X game, it was awesome" and the millions of others comments just like it. Even this right here is contributing to "general". So general takes up a gigantic amount and it's not really surprising at all.

I believe the reason why adult content seems to garner more attention is just because it's more concentrated. A million comments across several hundred thousand separate entities where you only see one or two comments at a time doesn't seem like much compared to a hundred comments on one entity. Comparatively speaking, it appears My Little Pony is the biggest TV series ever when you hear how many people are watching it, but when you compare it to every other show airing at the same time, the numbers show it's not as popular as first perceived. (And no, I don't watch the show.)

3. I've seen general material labeled as mature or adult for various reasons by the artist, meaning general material may be even larger than indicated so I'll give you that (though probably not in the direction you're assuming). Of course, for all submissions you have only three options and it must be one of the three, so mistakes are cut down considerably. Moderation helps keep material in the correct category as well.

Also, you can do the math yourself. It's not hard. If a map generated by a computer program analyzing the database isn't legit enough, then we will always be in the dark about what there may or may not be. Switching between each submission map image, I can say tampering would be a headache and not worth the effort given how little attention the submissions themselves garnered by the entire community. Plenty of people did take notice, but it's not as if this is front-page statistical news that every member knows or could know about. If you check out the source images, you can see for your self that it's very difficult to even see the individual pixels, making it a mess. As many comment, it looks like TV static. There aren't any patterns or the whole thing is a pattern to us with little blips and lines of color.

This is all mute, of course, if you're accusing Yak of tampering with data. At which point I'd have ask for proof or evidence supporting the notion.

Additionally, I would like to add that I am being rather impartial and very objective. Rather than assume the large white lines in the source materials are all porn, I prefer to wait and have two more years of data. Then I can make at least three models to estimate what might have been deleted and be more accurate that make opinions. Is it a guarantee? No. But it's a more educated and reliable method than "I guess it's this" or "it's porn" with no research to back up the assumption.

I -would- like to get more specific data such as the maturity level of submissions of stories, etc. But until those are available, we'll have to work with what we have. As I had said before, if you doubt my data simply look at the source images in any program that can do histograms. Look at the number of pixels per color and write down each number. Then do the math and you'll eventually come to the same numerical findings. For graphing, I used excel and illustrator. Both showed identical results. Google can probably find free software for making charts and graphs if Google itself can't do it for you.

If you have a better solution for acquiring more or the same kinds of data, then please go ahead and suggest them.

1. I don't exactly understand the point you are trying to make here. Are you saying dressing up as a furry/in a fursuit is considered making the fandom look bad? I never mentioned how people view the fandom, for I don't care in the least. It's their business. What I *did* try to explain was that I needed much more specific details that had to do with how much attention certain work is given by the community, comparable numbers related to view count/favorites/comments, comparable data on how much (average) time users spend between general/mature-adult work, yada yada yada.
2. Even then, those drama cycles that attract so much attention that put the scales off-balance can be within either a general or mature-adult rated submission. There are too many elements involved to reach an actual conclusion based on data, alone. Thus, I shared what I've actually experienced and seen firsthand.
3. The labels are yet another example of how data alone cannot give a real definition as to what receives more attention. With that said, I've seen other so-called "charts" (posted on the forums by Dragoneer, no less) stating how mature artwork (not even adding adult artwork to the percentile) outweighs general artwork.

I can do the math ... *and* remember the history. I'm pretty sure you know this, but an actual reason that can be said for the mature-adult artwork being deleted (which, you are right in this case, the majority *is* mature-adult) is that the rules change. Constantly. While some rules have to do with what kind of photography or other general-rated submissions may be allowed, the vast majority that leads to substantial change (moving/deleting submission, users moving to SoFurry/Inkbunny/whatever) are those of the mature-adult nature. Just one example would be when the restrictions for cubs in mature/adult artwork came around. With that said, it wouldn't be by choice that a lot of people have their submissions deleted, unless they feel it doesn't belong in their gallery (in which case it *would* be their choice). Hell, some even try to get away with it by making the *original* content of their work known yet edited out if it is currently against the rules, so they can keep the submission (and by relation, the views/favorites/comments the submissions has so their work is more publicized) from being deleted.

Like I said, I'll never believe the furry world overshadows its adult content just because charts have partial data. I never meant to make a big deal out of it, however, and I'm sorry if I came off as pompous or rude. I was just adding my experience in with what data you do have. I don't think your data is wrong at all. What I'm getting at is that, being only a piece to a puzzle, it's not something substantial enough to reach a definite conclusion.

I apologize for the curt-ness with my reply. I thought were accusing me or Yak of falsifying data and I got a little upset there.

1. I had thought you were saying that because photographs could only be general that they should somehow be disqualified. Sorry about that.

Aside from that, the comparable data you mention is, at best, the giant format screwed post below. Dragoneer's forum post is a lot easier to read thankfully. However, without more dates and just more data in general I can't make any assumptions that X is more popular than Y. All I can say is that, for the date given, adult content still garners a small percentage of attention.

Though time spent per submission data is probably never going to be available. As far as I'm aware, rarely do any sites track that kind of information on users.

2. Drama cycles are overrated if you were to consider the huge amounts of mundane comments. They're often ignored because they just don't stand out. As I liked to point out, 1000 views spread across 100 submissions makes it seem like nothing compared to 1000 views on one submission. Regardless, we have no data on comments but looking around at any piece of art, low or high quality, you'd see at least a few comments on general content despite being a majority of the submissions.

3. Mature artwork is incredibly broad and cannot be labeled as porn or nudes. It encompasses violence and disturbing imagery just as much, with a few smatterings of artists labeling their work as mature despite no mature elements present (likely a small minority, but worth mentioning).

That said, the numbers on mature artwork according to Dragoneer show miniscule amounts.
__532,859 - Mature
__486,858 - Adult
3,493,114 - General

Even together those submissions only equal to about 1/3rd of general content. Views and favorites on the other hand are different.

---

Views
282,419,291 Gen
286,016,228 Mat
107,776,786 Adult

676212305 Total

Percents (excuse hasty roundings)
42% Gen
42% Mat
16% Adult

---

Favorites
40,869,663 Gen
27,306,007 Mat
13,076,440 Adult

81252110 Total

Percents (same excusing)
50% Gen
34% Mat
16% Adult

---

In both situations, the data still points to pornography trailing general content. Mature works are a wild card, and it would far too presumptuous to label them as porn or clean, leaving them best as the category they are.

As for the deleted content, no where did I say mature/adult works a majority. I state there is a potential for a higher percentage, by which if I were to guess on the data it would be gaining 5% more at best. Remember, these were entire galleries deleted. Not 'just' adult content. If it were adult content, we would see lines and lines of red, blue, and black rather than the mottled noise we see instead throughout the rest of the maps. Therefore, it would be also presumptuous to assume it is all adult material purely based on...no evidence presented actually.

I have to ask, where ARE these charts? Where can I get them? Forum Archives? Where?
So far you've talked about what you think deleted content is, but I haven't seen any data showing it as such. For that matter, where is your statistical analysis that would point to these unknown deleted submissions being largely mature/adult in nature?

I want to see numbers, not assumptions. Here, I've provided numbers that can be verified and repeated. Sorry again if I seem curt, but I don't like it when opinions trump research. :(
I didn't do anything special here, and if I'm wrong or made a mistake, I want to fix it. But so far, I haven't seen any numbers indicating problems. I've seen an oddity with mature works having a near equal number of views, but otherwise the numbers seem to indicate what the graphs present.

No problem. It's understandable that I can come off as such, for I try to be blunt and to the point in most things. :P

1. I see. Ya, I meant that since photography only allowed general works, that both takes away a lot of possible mature-adult content while also adding the many random photos people like to post be they of any quality, since "artistic value is not judged here". Since they have to be general, it's all added to the general percentile. Personally, I'd like to see data that shows the percentile of photos in the general-rated pool of submissions to see how much of an influence they actually give.

No one can truly make up the best possible formula in creating legit charts that show the exact data needed. If some genius in the fandom could do so, they haven't yet. XD
The data shown here shows the number of submissions divided by rating. The "general" pool is definitely larger than the "mature-adult" pools, but the attention each pool gets is another story. For instance, here are graphs dealing with the popularity of the pools based on the top 6 species:

http://forums.furaffinity.net/threa.....d-submissions-(graphs-and-crap)

However, even then like the poster says, the reason for that being could be because of the volume difference of images in each pool. Again, too little data to make any substantial conclusion. What we do know is that general submissions come in at a larger rate than mature-adult submissions.

2. To be honest, after the first couple of drama cycles I've seen, I've stopped too much attention. All I know is that it's a mixed bag. When it comes to mundane comments, rather they are on general or mature-adult submissions, I completely ignore those for obvious reasons. I can't give an actual opinion or point of view on that, nor do I care to try. :/

3. Again, I definitely believe the data that shows general artwork is of the majority when it comes to the amount of submissions added to the site. There's no question about that. What I'm saying is that the realm of popularity is too mixed to come to an definite evaluation. Knowing that, I only go by what I've experienced, and what I've experienced is that people like pronz. lol

Thanks for being understanding with me. I felt kinda bad about my choice of words and I didn't think even asking to be excused for them made up for it. So, thank you once more for forgiving me of that.

1. Ahhh, yes, I'm the same. I would like to see the numbers as well. It's kind of sketchy, but I don't doubt that mature and adult works would increase in popularity because of that. I just don't see it as a jump to 90%, as the stereotypes usually say. :P

And you are correct, even the models I plan to use to map out what might be deleted won't be perfect. For example, one will rely on deletion trends from a specific point in the earliest map and follow the changes between the other maps. It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing which is what our current state is. I'd like to have at least three options for users to pick from, since none of the three would be 100% guaranteed correct.

The only problem I have with his/her method is what you and they mention. Their sample size is way too small. It's only the top six results. Six submissions, which for adult and general are really inadequate scopes. Applying the results from six to over seven million is a really bad idea. It also lacks the mature rated ones, but 18 submissions total isn't much better. It also falls into the trap that, with a smaller number of adult submissions, the views per submission are higher due to concentration.

I feel Dragoneer's results are better for a total picture because it gives results for everything at that date, but they also lack more than one date. I was hoping he had posted more of the same things in the past, but I guess not. :(
Still, Dragoneer's numbers are more all encompassing. While I commend LizardKing for his/her efforts, it's just not adequate enough.

2. It's okay, most people have no opinion or care about mundane comments. They're forgettable and mundane for a reason. :P I have no opinion of them either. They're just there, like wallpaper..

3. In terms of popularity, Dargoneers numbers are pulled right from FA's databases and show exact figures for every submission category. I just never included them because it was a snapshot of one point in time and didn't mesh with the other data very well.

However, I think we can agree that neither of us has enough data at the moment to begin quantifying popularity. I know submission data alone isn't enough. I would also like figures on things like stories, photographs, etc. Without those, we won't have a full picture of what FA is like. And I know people like porn too, I just personally doubt it's as popular as the stereotype makes it out to be. So far, from the data I've seen, I'm inclined to say it isn't that popular. I just can't say for sure and prefer no one makes assumptions either way. We're both in the dark, I'm just hoping with more data we can get a better grasp of what FA and the fandom is like.

Maybe I can persuade Dragoneer or Yak to post more information. I'll see about contacting them some time. Not sure about the best method of doing it though.

Anyway, thanks again for patience with me. :(

i can relate to people's surprise but there was a popularity ranking for FA: http://popufur.com/

this rank was made for fun, but it kinda tells why most people are impressed.

it's not about "how many content", it's more about "which content is seen"...

everyone thinks FA is mostly of pr0n because most of the known artists draw porn.
everyone thinks that ALL of FA's porn is gay porn because most of FA's known pr0n artists MAKE gay porn (even straight artists produce homossexual stuff if comissioned).

i thank you and Yak, for this graphic, it's really enlightening, but reading the comments above made me want to explain my surprise. ^^

once again, i't not about the amount of content, but what is parts is seen the most.

Well, I still argue that a thousand comments spread across a thousand people won't make them appear as popular as 100 comments to one person. General content is still seen in great numbers, but it's spread out rather than concentrated. If you were to combine the total views of submissions by content, then you would probably find similar results. Adult and Mature simply can't compete with the mundane.

If we look at Dragoneer's post in the forums, we can see similar trends.*
http://forums.furaffinity.net/threa.....July-7-2011%29

Total Favorites
general | 40306573 | 42.7%
mature | 26944403 | 28.5%
adult | 12923928 | 13.7%
deleted | 14200068 | 15%

Unsurprisingly, the numbers still lean towards a general majority.
Of course, he also posts views which are less in favor of my findings. Excuse to odd alignment. I tried to fix it.

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+
| Category | Count | Views | Favorites | views/sub | Favs/sub |
+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+
| general | 3493114 | 282419291 | 40869663 | 80.9 | 11.7 |
| mature | 532859 | 286016228 | 27306007 | 536.8 | 51.2 |
| adult | 486858 | 107776786 | 13076440 | 221.4 | 26.9 |
+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

---

+

Now of course, we're going to throw out the notion of repeated viewings by the same person not counting. We can't account for those individuals so it's best to just footnote the whole thing with that tidbit of information.

Noting that Mature does not equate to nudity strictly, but can also include violence and some gore (adult can as well, depending upon severity), we can see that Adult views still only make up a fraction of what general views are. In fact, they're slightly less than half. What's interesting is that there are fewer mature submissions but yet they garner competitive viewing numbers to general material.

Aside from that, while the numbers aren't equal to submission types, they still support the notion that greater attention is placed on general content over adult content.

---

Now, moving on from the numbers I have a few non-quantifying points I'd like to make. Looking at the ranking, there are quite a few artists that produce gay or male/solo artwork. However, a good chunk also produce straight and female/solo art as well..and bisexual.

If we look at the furry sociological studies done, we can see heterosexuals and bisexuals outrank homosexuals, with some instances of bisexuals outranking heterosexuals.
http://www.furrysociology.net/report.htm
http://studyf3.livejournal.com/
http://www.visi.com/~phantos/furrysoc.html
There are more studies too, linked through "Other Studies" under the first link given.

What I am thinking, and I have no means of backing up these claims, is that there is a "just right combination" of factors that lead to this perception of homosexual dominance in the fandom. Specifically several factors:

1. As you point out, many leading artists make homosexual porn. However, why are they so popular? I suspect it appears they are popular because when you combine bisexual and homosexual audiences, it makes it appear more dominant to heterosexual audiences.
2. There is a tendency for people (not everyone!) to lump bisexuals into hetero/homo categories despite their....*ahem* equal opportunity interests let's just say.
3. There may be a similar situation with general content. Aside from the big name "popufurs" making gay art, can you think of a large number of non-popular furs making quality gay art? I honestly have trouble thinking of many. I suspect heterosexual art is common and widespread enough to dilute the numbers. With fewer quality homosexual art, it feels like there's more attention because a shoving a hundred favs onto one art piece makes it seem more popular than 100 art pieces.

Of course, I can't back up these claims. I would need a lot more statistics across multiple subjects to even speculate these are the causes.

Also, excuse the giant wall of text. I had a lot to say from doing the research I did and normally I would compress as much of this as I could down to a few lines like in the image I posted, but some of it was speculation I have been holding in for a long time with no real answer to... :(


* I would also like to note why I didn't include Dragoneer's numbers. It's pretty much just that with one sample size at a date not determinable from Yak's submission maps that I cannot integrate the two numbers at all. Without multiple dates, I also cannot create a separate set of graphs. So his data is important but only a snapshot with no real means to move forward or backwards in time.

Shiiiiit. Darn you FA and your automated line creation, graph screwing, and lack of edit button ways!

anyway... even with thousands of variables, i'm not thinking in numbers, i'm thinking as a person.

the way you put it, yes the graph couldn't be more correct, but this is a graphic, it's looks at us from MUCH above, enough for we to be turned into numbers (for the sake of convenience).

but taking my point of view, i was saying i got surprised by how narrow-sighted i felt when that much information hitted me, most of the artists i know by name draw porn, even if seldomly.
as a number, only a small percentage of artists produce mature/adult stuff. But narrowing down to my point of view, they make almost half of my watch-list!

once again, your graph takes on a BROADER view of FA, that actually hitted me, you got the numbers, and i agree with them, they are possible enough to be real. but so far i only knew the adult side of FA and that is why your graph caught my mind, it showed me FA is not even remotely close to the mental-image i had of it.

Sorry again about the ugly ass wall of text. It was shorter and prettier in the comment box. ;-;

And I'm glad it hit you and got you thinking or rethinking FA/the fandom. That's all I wanted to accomplish with this really. I don't care too much if it's all porn that's super popular, I could laugh it off easily as a porn artist myself. But when I see the numbers, I get surprised too. I was actually rather surprised at the stability in the graphs the most, but yeah, the numbers were rather positive.

It's just a shame I can't answer why gay porn seems so popular. I have speculations but..well..I just can't answer your questioning with a correct answer. There may be no correct answer. :(

Also, thank you too for putting up with my possibly cold sense of demeanor. It's a left over from writing slightly argumentative papers in college. >.<

Edit~ Sorry for the 2 deleted comments. I thought I failed replying to you both times. *Retard moment* <3

Anyways, I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks this.

Thank you very much! Fascinating!!

The first big white ban was in fall 1996 when FA management decided to continue to allow sexual cub art; quite a few furrys left FA. I found this odd because sexual cub art was quite rare - about 0.1%.

The latest white band was when FA management banned sexual cub art because their payment processor insisted that they do so. Again, the amount of white seems disproportionate to the minute amount of sexual cub art that had been on FA.

The latest AUP prohibits rating photographs M or A. There has always been a ban on M or A content in photos, but some outstanding photographers such as  Sagefox rated their G content photography M or A so as to prevent it from being grabbed by search engines and other non FA members.

I don't remember what I was doing back in '96, but I don't think I was on FA or aware of the FA news at the time. I read your comments on Yak's maps and learned about the cub art drama that way. It's good to hear from someone on FA history. It's also good to know that photographs in the past could be Mature or Adult labeled. That could definitely throw off results for a model I was planning on using to determine deleted content. I'll have to footnote that for sure. Thank you for the information!

I figured most of the white bands must have been drama related. There's just soooo much white and it's boggling to me on how much was deleted. It's kind of stuck with FA too. It does seem like each rule change results in a chunk of deletions. Though, on the positive side it remains somewhat steady rather growing out of control. I would be worried if it curved really high.

What I hope to do later is shed some light on what might have been deleted. That'll take two more years though (but I'll release another one of these if Yak releases another in the mean time). I want to help people think and talk about the state of the fandom and FA. That, and help dispel myths like all the content on FA is porn. This definitely proves content is not porn-centric. Of course, even if I end up finding that everyone's a horn dog, that's fine too. I just don't like the lack of information the fandom has on itself and this is a step in the right direction. It's not as grand as the furry sociological studies since that provided new information, but at least my work can help make readily available information easier to read for viewers. :3

...Oh man, I rambled off... Sorry about that. Thank you for the wonderfuly helpful comment though. It's good to be aware of these changes in policies. I'll probably end up making a timeline at some point. to document everything. I was close to adding the SoFurry and Inkbunny dates on there but they didn't contribute anything, so..yeah. ...And there I go again, rambling! I'm shutting up now. Sorry. >.>;

Ooops! Typo apology! The first FA cub art drama and gallery deletionfest was in the fall of 2006, not fall 1996.

Thank you very much for your comments and clear graphical depictions of the statistics.

I'd love to see more written history on the development and growth of furry fandom. If one were interested in SF APAs, there is a wealth of material on the net, yet the far larger phenomenon of the furry universes just seems to be happening and the history seems to be becoming lost in the mists of entropy. There are some interesting studies on furries, themselves, though:
Furry surveys: http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey.php
https://sites.google.com/site/anthr.....ry-survey-2011

Comment statistics would be interesting, too. I have seen many fine pieces of furry porn with only a few comments. I guess the image pretty much says it all. On the other hand, some of my G rated photographs and photomanipulations have over one hundred comments, and I am by no means a popfur.

I'd love to know how many countries in which FA is banned and how that has changed with time.

Do you have any idea what could be causing the vertical lighter/darker bands in Yak's 2012 Map?
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/7232474

That's okay, happens to me all the time!
Now 2006 I might have been around for...I recall a little bit of that with gallery deletions. It's stretching my memory though. :\

And no problem! I'll probably do this again for the next year. At that point, I'll have stats for SoFurry and Inkbunny. Not sure how I'll fit it all together, since they update their statistics more frequently and...well, I plan to get the stats monthly if I can.

And those statistics are super interesting. I don't recall if I've seen those before actually. That also probably explains something I was unsure of how to answer, which was why gay furries seem to dominate the medium despite being a minority still. It's because the fandom is mostly male. The numbers would just naturally favor such things. Hmm... I'm wondering if I could somehow combine all these things to try and answer many common questions or misconceptions about the fandom. There's a lot of sociological studies now that all seem to be similar in their results. I'll probably consider it for the next one. Maybe a bigger and better stat sheet over all would help.

I'd love to know all of those things too. Maybe some time I can ask Dragoneer or Yak... Maybe a forum post could get that information. I'm just sort of hesitant to bother them over something like that. Heh.... >.>;

The vertical bars I'm not so sure. I would say it's a regularly timed submission, but the number of submissions between a regularly timed one would vary every time. Since each horizontal line doesn't represent a constant period of time (like one minute), it's completely random. So they're just noticeable to us because they defy the pattern. Sorry that it's not anything special, but they just happen to be random vertical lights and darks. :\

Thanks!

 nuka-kitty might welcome your help in displaying the massive amount of sociological data that he is gathering. He is very approachable, friendly, loves to talk shop, and is a really nice guy.

Sorry for the late reply, got caught up in other things and then my internet connection went out.

Anyway, thanks! I'll be sure to contact him about that. I'd love to get better at this sort of stuff. I took a few classes in sociology and loved it, despite it not exactly being my dream career. But yeah, thanks and I'll be sure to contact him. :D

wonder how it will look after internet censoring ;/

The numbers are flawed.

Photographs, music, stories and poetry must be filtered from the results to get a true, accurate representation of the drawn artwork.

How often does one submit a "mature" or an "adult" dubstep track?

Basically, the "General Audience" numbers are being weighted by false and misleading data.

This is content and submission statistics not visual (drawn) artwork in particular. So its not really misleading because the graph says it encompasses ALL submissions not just visual artwork.
However I do agree, a graph of visual artwork would be interesting but I would certainly not say the numbers are flawed.

Then treat each subtype of submission (Drawn art vs. Music vs. Photos vs. etc) as a separate category and then sort each category into the General/Mature/Adult pigeonhole. Sorting the total amount of submissions is meaningless because you're comparing apples to oranges.

I agree, I'm just explaining why the numbers are or seem flawed. The source of this data is completely indiscriminate as to what the upload is, all it records are the date and rating of the submission. So you shouldn't be commenting on this submission comment on the source of this data which is linked at the top.

Very fascinating. <:

nice result

Would be interesting to.see the same stats on deviantart. I bet its not that different.