Fur: Apologies for being so grumpy.

9 views
Skip to first unread message

Jeff Mancebo

unread,
Feb 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/5/99
to
boojum sighs as he reads over the posts he's been making of late,
rolling his eyes at the many typos and absorbing the way he's been
saying things.

"I am sorry for being so grumpy." He says to everyone, sitting for
a bit. "My life suffered a major setback a couple of weeks ago when my
Fiance decided she didn't want to wed me after all. I suspect I've been
out of sorts ever since. It's not an excuse, but it's something I
failed to be aware of."

The brown bunny shakes his head sadly, rubbing the spot between his
eyes that always seems to ache now. "I'll see you all around. I think
I need to retreat into my burrow and heal for a bit. Perhaps when I
emerge again I can have something nice to post. Or at least something
constructive."

boojum the brown
bunny

Donald E. Sanders

unread,
Feb 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/5/99
to
No problem there bunny, it seems like alot of us have been
getting a fair shake of bad events lately. Take a rest for
a while. I wish I could take my own advice, but would if I
could, my sense of justice wants to battle on.

--
Don Sanders

Dsan Tsan on #furry of Yiffnet
RoadKill Fur (Sun baked sorta but not burned!)
Artist at Roll Yer Own Graphics
http://www.dreamscape.com/dsand101/dsan.htm
(my furry page) Email dsan...@future.dreamscape.com

Jeff Mancebo

unread,
Feb 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/5/99
to

"Donald E. Sanders" wrote:

> No problem there bunny, it seems like alot of us have been
> getting a fair shake of bad events lately. Take a rest for
> a while. I wish I could take my own advice, but would if I
> could, my sense of justice wants to battle on.

boojum nods sadly. "I think I need to take a break from some things
and try to heal a little." He manages a quirky smile. "When your
arguing for the sake of arguing you discover that you grow tighteer and
tighter until all that matters is the argument."

He wiggles his nose. "I'll probably keep scanning and reading, but
I think I'll hold off the conversations until I can recover."

boojum the brown bunny

M. Mitchell Marmel

unread,
Feb 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/5/99
to

On Fri, 5 Feb 1999, Jeff Mancebo wrote:

> I need to retreat into my burrow and heal for a bit. Perhaps when I
> emerge again I can have something nice to post. Or at least something
> constructive."

Vaya con Dios, mi amigo. Enjoy your rest. :)

-MMM-

Skytech

unread,
Feb 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/5/99
to
boojum wrote:
>
> The brown bunny shakes his head sadly, rubbing the spot between his
> eyes that always seems to ache now. "I'll see you all around. I think
> I need to retreat into my burrow and heal for a bit. Perhaps when I
> emerge again I can have something nice to post. Or at least something
> constructive."
>

Understandable. You take you sweet time but remember we're here if you
need us.
--
La kashigada vulpo
Skytech

^^
<@@>
./

http://www.flash.net/~tsmiar/skytech/skytech.html

Allen Kitchen

unread,
Feb 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/5/99
to

Jeff Mancebo wrote:
>
> "I am sorry for being so grumpy." He says to everyone, sitting for
> a bit. "My life suffered a major setback a couple of weeks ago when my
> Fiance decided she didn't want to wed me after all. I suspect I've been
> out of sorts ever since. It's not an excuse, but it's something I
> failed to be aware of."

AWww. I'm sorry to hear that Boojum. I didn't know you were
engaged. I'm so very sorry about that Jeff. She doesn't know
what a prize she's losing.

Don't hide for too long. We will miss you.

Allen Kitchen (shockwave)
http://www.blkbox.com/~osprey/

VikThorKC

unread,
Feb 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/6/99
to

In article <36BB84EF...@jps.net>, Jeff Mancebo <boo...@jps.net> writes:

>
> The brown bunny shakes his head sadly, rubbing the spot between his
>eyes that always seems to ache now. "I'll see you all around. I think
>I need to retreat into my burrow and heal for a bit. Perhaps when I
>emerge again I can have something nice to post. Or at least something
>constructive."

Vik-Thor skritches Boojum (if you accept it....)
Heal well.
Vik-Thor

Heya Hey Heya
Heya Heya
May the gods be with you

Scott Malcomson

unread,
Feb 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/6/99
to

Jeff Mancebo wrote in message <36BB84EF...@jps.net>...

> "I am sorry for being so grumpy." He says to everyone, sitting for
>a bit. "My life suffered a major setback a couple of weeks ago when my
>Fiance decided she didn't want to wed me after all. I suspect I've been
>out of sorts ever since. It's not an excuse, but it's something I
>failed to be aware of."


<snugs> S'okay. You feeling any better now?

Scott Malcomson

unread,
Feb 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/6/99
to
Nick Brienza wrote in message <79i6ed$atu$1...@slave2.aa.net>...

>"When your arguing for the sake of arguing you discover that you grow
tighter and

>>tighter until all that matters is the argument."

>"You know, this is the smartest thing anybody has said on this newsgroup in
>weeks, and I'll bet its wisdom going to be completely lost on most of you.

Actually, I thoroughly support it.

>Arguing just to score little intellectual points of each other, working
from
>the position that the opposing side is just plain wrong by default and it's
>your mission to prove it.

If you're referring to me, you clearly haven't bothered to read what I'm
talking about. Of *everyone* on this newsgroup, who has actually proposed a
solution to any problem? Me. Who has flamed for kicks and, when presented
with the idea of arriving at a solution and stopping the wars for good,
preferred killfiling rather than compromise? Five of my opponents.
I am NOT here to "win"; that's pointless and a waste of sleep and
bandwidth. I want to goad people into thinking about *solutions* to these
problems! If we can solve the problems, the flames will die! Maybe not go
away forever, or totally, but at least the big ones can be killed off.

That's going to take reasonable argument and debate. My entire mission
here has been to deny people the pleasure of *irrational* screaming matches
by mocking them. Two days later, peace breaks out as five flamers engage
their killfiles and talks begin in earnest between other furries. That's
*progress*, even if it was painful. More painful was refusing to progress
in the name of quiet.

>How the hell are we going to solve any of our
>problems that way? That's not a rhetorical question. I demand one of you
try
>to explain how alienating your 'opponent' until they won't listen to you is
>going to convince them to change their behavior.

The major problem with this is that most of the "opponents" started out
alienated. The objective was not to win over everyone, but to clear the
field of the unreasonables and find the reasonable ones hiding within. Not
a single one of the people who killfiled me were going to, under any
circumstances, agree with anything I had to say of substance. It would have
been a fool's errand to try and rope them in.

>If any of you on _either_ side wants to start up a civil discussion of
furry sexuality, public
>morality, and the state of the fandom, my address is nf...@po.cwru.edu.

I will take you up on it, with ONE question: how is a completely private
discussion supposed to affect a public matter? We don't have any authority
in furfandom. Anything we resolve in private will still have to be aired
publically to get a consensus. That said, here I come.

Allen Kitchen

unread,
Feb 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/6/99
to

Nick Brienza wrote:
>
> *Rubin gets out a little wooden pointer and smacks it up against this
> message with a loud snap.*


>
> > He manages a quirky smile.

> "When your
> >arguing for the sake of arguing you discover that you grow tighter and
> >tighter until all that matters is the argument."
>
> "You know, this is the smartest thing anybody has said on this newsgroup in

> weeks, and I'll bet its wisdom going to be completely lost on most of you. I
> can not even begin to tell you how disgusted I am with both sides of this
> disaster.

Umm.. He was talking about arguing with his girlfriend. The poor
bunny has enough trouble, so please leave him be.

allen Kitchen (shockwave)
http://www.blkbox.com/~osprey/

Nick Brienza

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
*Rubin gets out a little wooden pointer and smacks it up against this
message with a loud snap.*

> He manages a quirky smile.
"When your
>arguing for the sake of arguing you discover that you grow tighter and
>tighter until all that matters is the argument."

"You know, this is the smartest thing anybody has said on this newsgroup in
weeks, and I'll bet its wisdom going to be completely lost on most of you. I
can not even begin to tell you how disgusted I am with both sides of this

disaster. This is the one and only encouraging thing I've seen on this
newsgroup today, because it describes _exactly_ what everybody's been doing.


Arguing just to score little intellectual points of each other, working from
the position that the opposing side is just plain wrong by default and it's

your mission to prove it. How the hell are we going to solve any of our


problems that way? That's not a rhetorical question. I demand one of you try
to explain how alienating your 'opponent' until they won't listen to you is

going to convince them to change their behavior. If any of you on _either_


side wants to start up a civil discussion of furry sexuality, public

morality, and the state of the fandom, my address is nf...@po.cwru.edu. Just
like always. Just like every other time you've all ignored the offer. But
give me about an hour to calm down. Right now I'm not feeling especially
friendly, myself."

*slams his paw into the blackboard and leaves*

Nick Brienza

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to

>>"You know, this is the smartest thing anybody has said on this newsgroup
in
>>weeks, and I'll bet its wisdom going to be completely lost on most of you.
>
>Actually, I thoroughly support it.


Good, that's one, but a fairly sensible one to begin with... Now we have to
start
working on the rest of the group, the ones that seem to be willing to

>If you're referring to me, you clearly haven't bothered to read what I'm
>talking about.

No, plain and simple, and I'm not sure where you got the idea. On the other
hand,
the way things have been here I can more than understand if you're a little
edgy.
Actually, the first couple of posts of your I read did jar me a little bit,
but I was
sensible enough to keep reading. I actually consider you one of the more
reason
folks in this debate...

>Of *everyone* on this newsgroup, who has actually proposed a
>solution to any problem? Me. Who has flamed for kicks and, when presented
>with the idea of arriving at a solution and stopping the wars for good,
>preferred killfiling rather than compromise? Five of my opponents.

No doubt... I still have a lot of catching up to do on posts, but I've seen
you
try to settle misunderstanding reasonably. And I'd be one of the first to
say
the fault lies on both sides. I'm tempted to express my opinions

> I am NOT here to "win"; that's pointless and a waste of sleep and
>bandwidth. I want to goad people into thinking about *solutions* to these
>problems! If we can solve the problems, the flames will die! Maybe not go
>away forever, or totally, but at least the big ones can be killed off.

I agree... But the pattern has always been that as soon as things settle
down and
solutions are discussed, somebody hijacks the thread and the cycle repeats
itself...
But the more people develop that healthy attitude that compromise is
preferable to
the impossible ideal of total victory, the better our chances are next time.

I think I have seen people overreact to attempts at constructive criticism
here, and
I think that's done a lot to slow down healthy debate. To answer your
question below,
that's why I've been trying to encourage more moderate "Burned Furs" and
lifestylers
to talk to each other on friendly, equal terms, on the off chance that we
can establish
a few friendships, or at least garner a little respect, between these two
groups. I think
half the problem right now is that each side sees the other as nothing more
than words
on a screen, and it's easy to demonize your enemy when you can reduce them
to an
image or a category. Once each group knows the other isn't purely out to
destroy
or humiliate them, we can establish a little trust and discuss our problems
without
constantly worrying about provoking offense.

> That's going to take reasonable argument and debate. My entire mission
>here has been to deny people the pleasure of *irrational* screaming matches
>by mocking them. Two days later, peace breaks out as five flamers engage
>their killfiles and talks begin in earnest between other furries. That's
>*progress*, even if it was painful. More painful was refusing to progress
>in the name of quiet.

I would respectfully disagree with your methods, though not with your
motives.
I personally prefer to show people their errors as gently as possible--it
tends to
confuse the *hell* out of my debate opponents when I consistently joke with
and
compliment them no matter how abusive they try to get, and that's a strong
advantage. But if you really think it's working, it's not my place to stand
in your way.

>The major problem with this is that most of the "opponents" started out
>alienated. The objective was not to win over everyone, but to clear the
>field of the unreasonables and find the reasonable ones hiding within. Not
>a single one of the people who killfiled me were going to, under any
>circumstances, agree with anything I had to say of substance. It would
have
>been a fool's errand to try and rope them in.

This is a question I've thought a lot about, and it sounds like so have you.
Yeah,
I admit, I'm about ready to give up on some people on both sides. I've
*tried* to
reach out to some, and generally if I get a hostile response I write them
off for
good now. But I've never let that stop me from approaching somebody, however
intimidating, just because of their reputation. I also worry sometimes that
other
people (no one in particular--not an accusation, just a concern) *claim*
they
approached their opponents with open arms when they really came with the
same
smug, confrontational approach they use on this newsgroup. For example, "Are
you
willing to repent of your sins, heretic?" is probably not a good way to open
up a
conversation with a lifestyler. :)

>I will take you up on it, with ONE question: how is a completely private
>discussion supposed to affect a public matter? We don't have any authority
>in furfandom. Anything we resolve in private will still have to be aired
>publically to get a consensus. That said, here I come.

Nonsense, and that is the one area where I seem to disagree *wildly* with
you.
The furry "community," such as it is, is fairly decentered and it's not too
hard to
get heard. Eric Blumrich is not an especially prolific or high-selling
(though
admittedly talented) artist, and SqueeRat is "just" a fan artist, but they
both managed
to get their voices heard with a simple webpage and a bit of notoreity. I
don't
believe that publishing and 'zines are the alpha and omega of furry, which
is why
I originally became interested in the "lifestyle" movement. I don't know
much about
the state of the industry, but I know furry has lost a lot of its importance
in my life
as a commercial phenomenon. It still drastically affects my personal
philosophy and
my chosen circle of friends, but there's really not much left these days in
professional
art or writing that catches my interest.* We don't need to be big publishing
or
conventioneering Personages to be important in the fandom any more than you
need a
Time-Warner contract to play the guitar. It's like writing to your senator.
You may
not change his/her mind, but it's likelier than if you do nothing. I'm not
mad at you or
offended, Scott, but I am a little tired of having fans spoken of as if we
don't matter
because we don't write fiction or draw. (OTOH, I am glad to see the rise of
a couple of
"furry culture" non-fiction zines... Much more up my alley.)

All the same, I agree that all I can do in a private conversation is change
your attitude a
little, prove that not every lifestyler is solemnly convinced that every
criticism is the
result of bigotry, or that our minority status makes us immune to basic
manners. My
messianic complex won't allow me to work on that small of a scale. :) I want
to see this
whole mess ended and for something *better* than Furry As We Know It to
arise from the
ashes. But for now if I can convince Eric Blumrich that some of us freaks
might have some
redeeming qualities (or at least reproduce quickly enough that it's a waste
of ammo ;) ),
SqueeRat that normalcy is a relative concept, and Xydexx to come down from
the water tower
with the Nerf High Powered Sniper Rifle (TM), I'll be happy.

--Rubin

*<plug>Shanda. Shanda. Shanda. Shanda. In case I haven't thanked Mike and
Carole and
the gang enough, I still think this is the best thing out there, written and
drawn by some
of the nicest folks... And, at the risk of provoking further controversy,
ASB. Romance is
romance, and I'm a sucker for it.</plug>

FUR

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
>Umm.. He was talking about arguing with his girlfriend. The poor
>bunny has enough trouble, so please leave him be.


*nodnod* Boojum, if you're still watching the group, I didn't mean to
get angry and increase the general stress level or use your unease
as a soapbox for a political point. :/ It just really upset me to see that
people jumping at each other's throats seemed to have driven one
of our calmest and kindest furs away for a while. In the meantime,
rest and take it easy. Best wishes!

--Rubin

Farlo

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
"Nick Brienza" nf...@po.cwru.edu wrote in <79i6ed$atu$1...@slave2.aa.net>:

>I demand one of you try
>to explain how alienating your 'opponent' until they won't listen to you
is
>going to convince them to change their behavior.

"My opponentz is a boogerhead and must be punished. Yah."
So sorry. I respond most poorly to "demands" for anything!

- Farlo, the bemused... =)
I demand Ice Cream! And Cookies! Right No-*Splat*-w...

Farlo

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
"Nick Brienza" nf...@po.cwru.edu wrote in <79iubv$srh$1...@slave2.aa.net>:

> "Are you willing to repent of your sins, heretic?"
> is probably not a good way to open up a conversation with a lifestyler.
> :)

It depends on whether or not the Lifestyler in question is a Mac user or
not, in which case it might be justifiable ... @_@

(You will be assimilated ... Mwuh hah hah ...)

- Farlo, proud PC lemming-dragon

xyd...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
Nick Brienza wrote:
>I agree... But the pattern has always been that as soon as things settle
>down and solutions are discussed, somebody hijacks the thread and the
>cycle repeats itself...

Most people are tired of the flames and want them to stop. Heck, even Rich
Chandler and I agree on that point. Unfortunately, it seems every time the
flames are about to die down, someone jumps in with guns a'blazing and starts
this crap all over again. And people are tired of it, because the only thing
it does is drive people off the newsgroup. I think Allen Kitchen's article
in Fuzzy Logic summed it up pretty well. That's the main reason I've been
staying out of this lately.

>that's why I've been trying to encourage more moderate "Burned Furs" and
>lifestylers to talk to each other on friendly, equal terms, on the off
>chance that we can establish a few friendships, or at least garner a
>little respect, between these two groups.

An admirable goal. Let's hope you have more luck than I did.

Purrsonally, I've got nothing against a little public decorum. As someone
who buys both erotic and nonerotic furry artwork, I think a good rule of
thumb is that the only time you see sexually-explicit material is if you're
looking for it. (i.e., if you're wandering around in the NC-17 section of
the art show, you have no legitimate reason to complain.) In the past I've
supported the idea of giving the Pet Auction less of a "red light district"
feel, because it just gives people the wrong impression of what furry fandom
is about. I'm opposed public BDSM displays and sex in public because it
makes people uncomfortable, and I think it should be kept in private rooms.
I've supported a furry convention which presents a more "squeaky-clean" image
to the fandom, and when people ask me what furry fandom is about, I direct
them to the general audience stuff first instead of the hardcore kinky stuff.

>I want to see this whole mess ended and for something *better* than
>Furry As We Know It to arise from the ashes. But for now if I can
>convince Eric Blumrich that some of us freaks might have some
>redeeming qualities (or at least reproduce quickly enough that it's

>a waste of ammo ;) ),SqueeRat that normalcy is a relative concept,


>and Xydexx to come down from the water tower with the Nerf High
>Powered Sniper Rifle (TM), I'll be happy.

I envision nothing short of a Furry Renaissance. I want furry fans to Work
Together. I want furry fans to help each other; to create, to build, to
learn from each other and improve this fandom; to make it something that
everyone can be proud of. That's going to happen by making friends, not by
making enemies. People who think the other guy is the "enemy" generally do
not help the "enemy", even when the "enemy" is on the same side they are.
I'm not the enemy --- I'm just someone who sees the potential for furry
fandom to be so much better. The bottom line is that we shouldn't be
fighting each other when there are more productive and beneficial things to
do with our time.

____________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony [ICQ: 7569393]
Xydexx's Anthrofurry Homepage:
http://www.smart.net/~xydexx/anthrofurry/homepage.htm

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Xydexx Squeakypony

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
Nick Brienza wrote:
>I agree... But the pattern has always been that as soon as things settle
>down and solutions are discussed, somebody hijacks the thread and the
>cycle repeats itself...

Most people are tired of the flames and want them to stop. Heck, even Rich

Chandler and I agree on that point. Unfortunately, it seems every time the
flames are about to die down, someone jumps in with guns a'blazing and
starts this crap all over again. And people are tired of it, because the
only thing it does is drive people off the newsgroup. I think Allen
Kitchen's article in Fuzzy Logic summed it up pretty well. That's the main
reason I've been staying out of this lately.

>that's why I've been trying to encourage more moderate "Burned Furs" and


>lifestylers to talk to each other on friendly, equal terms, on the off
>chance that we can establish a few friendships, or at least garner a
>little respect, between these two groups.

An admirable goal. Let's hope you have more luck than I did.

Purrsonally, I've got nothing against a little public decorum. As someone
who buys both erotic and nonerotic furry artwork, I think a good rule of
thumb is that the only time you see sexually-explicit material is if you're
looking for it. (i.e., if you're wandering around in the NC-17 section of
the art show, you have no legitimate reason to complain.) In the past I've
supported the idea of giving the Pet Auction less of a "red light district"
feel, because it just gives people the wrong impression of what furry
fandom is about. I'm opposed public BDSM displays and sex in public
because it makes people uncomfortable, and I think it should be kept in
private rooms. I've supported a furry convention which presents a more
"squeaky-clean" image to the fandom, and when people ask me what furry
fandom is about, I direct them to the general audience stuff first instead
of the hardcore kinky stuff.

>I want to see this whole mess ended and for something *better* than

>Furry As We Know It to arise from the ashes. But for now if I can
>convince Eric Blumrich that some of us freaks might have some
>redeeming qualities (or at least reproduce quickly enough that it's

>a waste of ammo ;) ),SqueeRat that normalcy is a relative concept,

>and Xydexx to come down from the water tower with the Nerf High
>Powered Sniper Rifle (TM), I'll be happy.

I envision nothing short of a Furry Renaissance. I want furry fans to Work

Together. I want furry fans to help each other; to create, to build, to
learn from each other and improve this fandom; to make it something that
everyone can be proud of. That's going to happen by making friends, not by
making enemies. People who think the other guy is the "enemy" generally do
not help the "enemy", even when the "enemy" is on the same side they are.
I'm not the enemy --- I'm just someone who sees the potential for furry
fandom to be so much better. The bottom line is that we shouldn't be
fighting each other when there are more productive and beneficial things to
do with our time.

__________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony ICQ:7569393

Artax

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to
Nick Brienza wrote:

[snip]

Would you PLEASE stop cross-posting between alt.lifestyle.furry and
alt.fan.furry! Cross-posts between ALF and AFF are prohibited in the
ALF posting guidelines. Furthermore when you post to ALF and talk about
"this newsgroup" and make characterizations about it that are actually
germane to alt.fan.furry you create confusion and misunderstandings.
ALF gets new posters just about every day, and many of them aren't going
to know that you're not talking about alt.lifestyle.furry.


a res. | Artax
r p c | (Brad Austin)
t x o |
ax@i m | Oceanside, CA USA


Xydexx Squeakypony

unread,
Feb 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/7/99
to

Erf. Sorry for the crossposting to ALF. My bad. -:)

Scott Malcomson

unread,
Feb 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/8/99
to

Xydexx Squeakypony wrote in message
<8D6622503xyde...@news.smart.net>...

>Most people are tired of the flames and want them to stop. Heck, even Rich
>Chandler and I agree on that point. Unfortunately, it seems every time the
>flames are about to die down, someone jumps in with guns a'blazing and
starts this crap all over again.

One would tend to think that Xydexx is the last person with the moral high
ground to talk about who does and doesn't "jump in with guns a'blazing", or
"starting this crap all over again". He has a very long history of doing
exactly that, usually when someone else is trying to come to a solution over
a problem he thinks shouldn't be solved.

>That's the main reason I've been staying out of this lately.


With the exception, of course, of firing off a few flames when he feels like
it.

>>that's why I've been trying to encourage more moderate "Burned Furs" and
>>lifestylers to talk to each other on friendly, equal terms

>An admirable goal. Let's hope you have more luck than I did.

I haven't heard a word from Xydexx except in "encouraging" flames, via email
and here on AFF. On the other hand, I *have* been talking to lifestylers on
friendly, equal terms --- at least, those who deigned to be spoken with on
that level. So I'd rather not Xydexx take credit for "encouraging" the
moderate dialogue that's managed to get going perfectly well without him.

>Purrsonally, I've got nothing against a little public decorum.

Which explains why he's fought it tooth and hoof for years. When we were
talking about eliminating public bondage displays at CF, Xydexx did nothing
but flame the topic every which way from Sunday.

>As someone who buys both erotic and nonerotic furry artwork, I think a good
rule of
>thumb is that the only time you see sexually-explicit material is if you're
looking for it.

If Xydexx has tunnel vision RL, it's news to me. Even last CF, "the only
time you saw sexually-explicit material" was when you opened your eyes and
turned around in the Artist's Alley or Dealers' Room. BTW, a curious kid
looks for *anything* that might be of interest. By default, children tend
to stumble onto sexually-explicit work that isn't covered or hidden, simply
because it's there in plain view.

>In the past I've supported the idea of giving the Pet Auction less of a
"red light district"
>feel, because it just gives people the wrong impression of what furry
>fandom is about.

Actually, the only Xydexx posts I can recall on this issue are "if you don't
want to find sex, don't go to the Pet Auction". Same thing as he talks
about above; "don't look and ye shall not find".

On the other hand, *other* furries called for the Pet Auction to tone down
and were flamed. Xydexx didn't tap a single keystroke in the name of toning
down.

>I'm opposed public BDSM displays and sex in public

Which explains why he flamed the hell out of *me* when I opposed the same
thing. It also explains his very common statement at the time that he was
going to flaunt the no-public-BDSM debate by bringing inflatable animals
into the hotel lobby and see if anyone complained. He didn't, of course.

>I envision nothing short of a Furry Renaissance. I want furry fans to Work
Together.

Mind you, he's said *this* for almost as long as he's been flaming people
for trying to enact reforms.

Scott Malcomson

unread,
Feb 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/8/99
to

Nick Brienza wrote in message <79iubv$srh$1...@slave2.aa.net>...

>Scott Malcomson said:
>>I will take you up on it, with ONE question: how is a completely private
>>discussion supposed to affect a public matter? We don't have any
authority
>>in furfandom. Anything we resolve in private will still have to be aired
>>publically to get a consensus. That said, here I come.

>Nonsense, and that is the one area where I seem to disagree *wildly* with
you.
>The furry "community," such as it is, is fairly decentered and it's not too
hard to
>get heard.

Yes, but you must be heard *somewhere*. That means a public forum of some
kind. That means here, on a webpage, street corner, what have you, but my
point was I'd rather discuss it publically than in private email. Because
even if we solve every little thing in email, we still have to publically
present it to the rest of the fandom.

>I'm not mad at you or offended, Scott, but I am a little tired of having
fans spoken of as if we
>don't matter because we don't write fiction or draw. (OTOH, I am glad to
see the rise of
>a couple of "furry culture" non-fiction zines... Much more up my alley.)


My apologies, but that's not what I was saying at all. It's not that fans
don't matter; it's that fans don't, as individuals, have the ability to say
"hey, here's this great idea, now let's do it" and expect it to just be
adopted like that. We can work things out, but we'll have to petition
others to see if they'll accept it. That's all I'm saying.


>But for now if I can convince Eric Blumrich that some of us freaks might
have some
>redeeming qualities (or at least reproduce quickly enough that it's a waste
of ammo ;) )

I'll tell you right now, don't bother with Eric. You really will be wasting
your time, and that's coming from *another* guy with a messianistic complex.
He hates, apparently, for the sheer pleasure of hating.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages