BF-"Houston, you've got a problem..."
Cathead232
a GREAT deal of interest for the last 6 months or so and I must say I'm at a
loss for words. The load-mouth ninnies claiming to BE Burned Furs are actually
a collection of losers that have ALWAYS plagued this fandom; on & offline. What
are the most notable features of this shortbus of malcontents? Well, let's
see...
First off, they don't seem to have taken debate in school or joined the
ToastMasters judging by their marked innability to formulate an arguement. This
point was REALLY brought home to me as I was recently lurking on a BF "Private
MUCK" and was stunned at how foul-mouthed & vulgar some of these people were in
dealing with an "undesirable". Their online pronouncments are likewise
illconcived & poorly presented, be it trolls or the posting of MUCK logs.
Secondly, while their vague relationship to the original BF Manifesto aids them
in sucking in new recruits, these folks soon become dissaffected from their
recruiters. Why? Because these folks aren't actually about ANYTHING. This is
just a bitter little group of nothings who sit around & reassure each other how
cool they are. When asked to sight a comic or artist that furrydom should
aspire to, they either don't answer or name a "safe" dead artist whose not
likely to dissappoint them by drawing something naughty or telling them what a
joke they are. They don't like ANYTHING being done these days(they'll pay lip
service to Stan Sakai, but only if cornered).
And lastly, they never feel the need to back up their prattle with actions.
They're always"working on stuff" or are "honing their skills in private" to
spring their brilliance on the unsuspecting comics world with Super Nova like
effect. Funny thing is, when you spend all your time & energy just lobing bombs
at others, your own work just never seems up to the task, never quite perfect
enough. That's the biggest failing of this group of cicus pinheads, is that
they're all talk. They don't actually have a future because they define
themselves by who they AREN"T. They'll never submit stuff to zines because to
try is to risk failure. These folks above all CANNOT deal with being critiqued.
So there you have it; this is a war of attricien. You can't have a political
movement based on who you're not. What will these folks say if asked what it is
they do?
"Well, we sure as hell don't draw porn!"
"Yes, but what do you do?"
"You won't find any of us fucking animals!"
"Yes but, what do you do?"
"we don't draw Minerva Mink, that's for sure!"
"Yes but, what DO you do?"
"We can't let you see any art either...it's uh, ...not ready to show..."
"Yes, but what do YOU do?!"
...and so on. The Manifesto is actually VERY thought provoking & I'd ask
everyone to go back & look it over again; I make no bones about it, I'm firmly
behind a lot of the BF ideology, but my sentiments are more geared towards
building up the best elements of the fandom, not tearing them down. The winners
will be the ones that actually PRODUCE something, not just talk about how cool
this fandom COULD be. The loser will be the ones badmouthing the rest of us.
dig it...
Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com
"Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
to some agreement before we act?"
Hangdog
> In article <19990417175101...@ng-fp1.aol.com>,
> cathe...@aol.com (Cathead232) wrote:
>
> "private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
>
> > Why? Because these folks aren't actually about ANYTHING.
>
> We're Seinfeld??
I'm thinkin', hey, this could be a GREAT idea!!!
Eric Blumrich is Kramer
I'm Jerry
You're Elaine
Goth Tiger is...whozits, the bald guy...
Ben is Newman
And Squee is the Soup Nazi!
--Jerry Hangfeld
Kyle L. Webb
>
> In article <19990417175101...@ng-fp1.aol.com>,
> cathe...@aol.com (Cathead232) wrote:
>
>
> > I was recently lurking on a BF "Private MUCK" and was stunned at how
> > foul-mouthed & vulgar some of these people were in dealing with an
> > "undesirable".
>
> "private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
It is not a Burned Fur muck per se. It is, however frequented by some
notable members of BF, and from what I've heard, the BFs are some of the
more moderate sorts on it.
Kyle L. Webb
Hartree Fox on yiffnet
Mark Loggins
In article <37192F0E...@pdq.net>, Hangdog <peter....@pdq.net>
wrote:
> Lemu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> In article <19990417175101...@ng-fp1.aol.com>,
>> cathe...@aol.com (Cathead232) wrote:
>>
>> "private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
>>
>> > Why? Because these folks aren't actually about ANYTHING.
>>
>> We're Seinfeld??
>
> I'm thinkin', hey, this could be a GREAT idea!!!
>
> Eric Blumrich is Kramer
> I'm Jerry
> You're Elaine
> Goth Tiger is...whozits, the bald guy...
> Ben is Newman
> And Squee is the Soup Nazi!
>
> --Jerry Hangfeld
>
Gah! Now it makes sense they people flame the BF so much! I loath Seinfeld,
too.
--Random
kodak
> > We're Seinfeld??
>
> I'm thinkin', hey, this could be a GREAT idea!!!
>
> Eric Blumrich is Kramer
> Hangdog is Jerry
> Ezuli is Elaine
> Goth Tiger is...whozits, the bald guy...
> Ben is Newman
> And Squee is the Soup Nazi!
That's it!! NO SPOOGE FOR YOU!!! ;)
Lemu...@hotmail.com
{snip}
> I was recently lurking on a BF "Private MUCK" and was stunned at how
> foul-mouthed & vulgar some of these people were in dealing with an
> "undesirable".
Burned Fur, to my knowledge, doesn't have a MUCK. & if we did, & it were
"private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
> Why? Because these folks aren't actually about ANYTHING.
We're Seinfeld??
> They don't like ANYTHING being done these days(they'll pay lip
> service to Stan Sakai, but only if cornered).
Who's Stan Sakai? I like Dinotopia. Is James Gurney dead? Damn.
> {rest of stuff snipped cause it was silly}
--Ezuli
http://www.skunked.com/ezuli (don't bother. Shon says it's not anything. Oh
well.)
"Ceci n'est pas une lemur." --Not Magritte
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Cathead232
{snip}
>Burned Fur, to my knowledge, doesn't have a MUCK. & if we did, & it were
>"private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
The key word is "a" BF Private Muck
> {rest of stuff snipped cause it was silly}
--Ezuli
http://www.skunked.com/ezuli
But as if to prove my point you make several off the cuff quips but don't
address my points. The over-vocal group that highjacked the Burned Fur name(you
actually have to get off your butts & DO something to constitute a "movement")
was the focus of my attention & up you pop as spokesman.
The point I forgot to make is exactly WHY we must endure these Jihads every few
years or so. There is an odd misconception about what exactly IS furry fandom.
Several self-styled messiahs have popped up over the last 12 years or so, all
promising the fandom at large that if the reins of power were only turned over
to them, all worries would end. But that's the problem; the fandom isn't a
single thing.
This group could best be described as hundreds of specific interests with a
large overlap. That's why this fandom has been all but impossible to guide or
control all this time. Add to that the fact that the online voice is only a
thin sliver of the total fans worldwide & you get a sense of the problems by
the extreme fringe of the BF movement; the "ashes" if you will. Complaints
about this group or that group, if we just kick these people out, open graves &
the like will have no effect. The mass of indeviduals the make up the broad
group we know as furry fandom is just plain too diverse.
Within this group, WE the members know all the gossip, history & mythology of
the fandom, but keep in mind that people OUTSIDE the fandom don't. I myself
have several broad areas of interest & it's interesting to see how one group is
viewed by another. You'll probably know a little bit about the other group, but
not the details. That's why all of this prattle by the "ashes" doesn't mean a
whole hell of a lot. Here's a newsflash for you; Furry Fandom will never, EVER
be taken seriously by outsiders...BECAUSE NO FANDOM ANYWHERE IS TAKEN
SERIOUSLY!!!
Fandom by it's nature means we as fans enjoy something a lot more than just
your average consumer. God knows Trekkies & Klingon Language Camps haven't
stemmed the flow of Star Trek movie & shows. The existance of furries &
Confurence didn't stop Disney from making(arguably) furry films. We are NOT an
issue; companies aren't concerned about us because they KNOW we'll be there to
support them. We're a safe bet. So they go on the try & woo the mainstream. All
this weird crap I've heard for years about being a fan killing carreers oddly
never seems to have applied to me...or the people working for me...or my
friends. Listen up; YOU WILL OR WON'T GET PRO WORK BASED ON YOUR SKILLS & WHO
YOU KNOW. PERIOD!! Fandoms are for people to kick back & relax in; not "be
legitimate" so you look better when looking for art jobs.
And when all is said & done, my points remain; those who produce are the face
of the fandom. dig it...
Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
Farlo
That was great!!
Farlo
Urban Fey Dragon
http://www.dejanews.com/~furculture
Farlo
>> Why? Because these folks aren't actually about ANYTHING.
>
>We're Seinfeld??
You're losers. Reread his post. =)
>> They don't like ANYTHING being done these days(they'll pay lip
>> service to Stan Sakai, but only if cornered).
>
>Who's Stan Sakai? I like Dinotopia. Is James Gurney dead? Damn.
Poor confuzzled Lemur - it's not been one of her more lucid days.
>> {rest of stuff snipped cause it was silly}
>
>--Ezuli
Farlo
>Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
>
>"Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
> to some agreement before we act?"
*Boggle*
... a Burned Fur that's not a loser ...
... he can form complete thoughts ...
... he has perspective ...
... his primary concern is positive action ...
... he might even be good for the fandom ...
... he's not some rabid misanthrope ...
*Boggle*
I guess that there are bound to be exceptions in any group,
even the Burned Fur. Excellent posts!
Richard de Wylfin
> "Cathead232" cathe...@aol.com wrote:
> >Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
> >
> >"Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
> > to some agreement before we act?"
>
> *Boggle*
> ... a Burned Fur that's not a loser ...
> ... he can form complete thoughts ...
> ... he has perspective ...
> ... his primary concern is positive action ...
> ... he might even be good for the fandom ...
> ... he's not some rabid misanthrope ...
AND he draws bunnies with big hooters! Shon, you ROCK! :)
--
Shoes for industry! Shoes for the dead!
Flea collars for the furries!
http://www.furnation.com/deWylfin/nonaligned.html
Hangdog
GUFFAW!!! :oD Good one, kodak!
--Hangdog
Alan "TriGem" Kennedy
> So, the Burned Furs...new boogymen of the online fandom. I've watched this with
*snip for bandwith*
> Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com
>
> "Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
> to some agreement before we act?"
*quirks and eybrow* "Fascinating" Then goes back mindless reading up on more and
more useless stuff to get him nowhere.
--
Alan "TriGem" Kennedy ICQ #8781052 http://www.furnation.com/trigem
The technology we have weaved for ourselves is a double-edged knife of conspiricy
and publicity to be trapped within. -
Me Dammit!
Ashes to ashes, dust to dusts, if you don't take it out and use it, it's going to
rust! - Katana, Highlander II
Rat Shit, Bat Shit, Dirty old twat, 69 assholes tied in a knot, hooray, lizard
shit, Fuck! - George Carlin
Cathead232
and more useless stuff to get him nowhere.
Start with a dictionary. ^_^
(just teasing)
Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
"Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
Farlo
>Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
That BF label in your sig is just gonna make my widdle head explode ...
Michael Campbell
Kyle L. Webb wrote:
>
> > > I was recently lurking on a BF "Private MUCK" and was stunned at how
> > > foul-mouthed & vulgar some of these people were in dealing with an
> > > "undesirable".
> >
> > Burned Fur, to my knowledge, doesn't have a MUCK. & if we did, & it were
> > "private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
>
> It is not a Burned Fur muck per se. It is, however frequented by some
> notable members of BF, and from what I've heard, the BFs are some of the
> more moderate sorts on it.
And what's the adress for this place. This is the first I've heard of it...
GothTiger, Burned Fur
(tig...@execpc.com)
Michael Campbell
Hangdog wrote:
> > We're Seinfeld??
>
> I'm thinkin', hey, this could be a GREAT idea!!!
>
> Eric Blumrich is Kramer
> I'm Jerry
> You're Elaine
> Goth Tiger is...whozits, the bald guy...
George?!? You cast me as GEORGE?!? Hmm, chunky, neurotic, no luck with women...
Yep, that's me all right!
GothTiger (tig...@execpc.com)
Cathead232
>
It shouldn't & with a bit o' luck it won't be seen as a negative in the future.
Like I said, it's the Burned Furs that actually DO SOMETHING that will be
remembered, not the big talkers.
Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
"Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
Lemu...@hotmail.com
cathe...@aol.com (Cathead232) wrote:
> Lemu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> {snip}
>
> >Burned Fur, to my knowledge, doesn't have a MUCK. & if we did, & it were
> >"private", how'd *you* get there? Something you're not telling us, Shon? {;
>
Huh? now BF has more than one?
Last I knew, we just have a IRC channel. Whaddaya know!
> > {rest of stuff snipped cause it was silly}
>
> --Ezuli
> http://www.skunked.com/ezuli
>
> But as if to prove my point you make several off the cuff quips but don't
> address my points. The over-vocal group that highjacked the Burned Fur
> name (you actually have to get off your butts & DO something to constitute a
> "movement") was the focus of my attention & up you pop as spokesman.
Yeah, I just happened to be online at the time. Must have been an alignment of
the planets or something.
& that reminds me, who are you that you're off your butt & "doing something"?
& how is it that you know what everyone else is doing, Kreskin? Have you
asked? Or do I need to make an announcement for every job I get?
& you never did tell me who the hell Stan Sakai is.
> The point I forgot to make is exactly WHY we must endure these Jihads every
> few years or so. There is an odd misconception about what exactly IS furry
> fandom.
Well, duh. All this time I thought it was about anthropomorphics.
> Several self-styled messiahs have popped up over the last 12 years or so, all
> promising the fandom at large that if the reins of power were only turned over
> to them, all worries would end. But that's the problem; the fandom isn't a
> single thing.
That's funny, I thought it was about anthropomorphics.
> This group could best be described as hundreds of specific interests with a
> large overlap. That's why this fandom has been all but impossible to guide or
> control all this time. Add to that the fact that the online voice is only a
> thin sliver of the total fans worldwide & you get a sense of the problems by
> the extreme fringe of the BF movement; the "ashes" if you will. Complaints
> about this group or that group, if we just kick these people out, open graves
> & the like will have no effect. The mass of indeviduals the make up the broad
> group we know as furry fandom is just plain too diverse.
Too diverse for what? For us to ask them that they not share the tales of
their adventures in the sack with canines & ungulates? Too diverse for us to
expect that people know better than to find this big cozy furry incestuous
family & decide that within the bounds of The Fandom, everyone wants to know
about the adventures of their dick?
> Within this group, WE the members know all the gossip, history & mythology of
> the fandom, but keep in mind that people OUTSIDE the fandom don't. I myself
> have several broad areas of interest & it's interesting to see how one group
> is viewed by another. You'll probably know a little bit about the other group,
> but not the details. That's why all of this prattle by the "ashes" doesn't
> mean a whole hell of a lot. Here's a newsflash for you; Furry Fandom will
> never, EVER be taken seriously by outsiders...BECAUSE NO FANDOM ANYWHERE IS
> TAKEN SERIOUSLY!!!
Oh, okay. Shon says don't bother, y'all. Funny, I thought fandom was just
people. I guess all the people within the fandom who produce anthro
material better give up those dreams of being artists & writers & animators &
whatever, then. Shon says they don't have a chance, the best they can hope to
acheive is a table at The Naughty Craft Fair, as Random called it.
> Fandom by it's nature means we as fans enjoy something a lot more than just
> your average consumer. God knows Trekkies & Klingon Language Camps haven't
> stemmed the flow of Star Trek movie & shows. The existance of furries &
> Confurence didn't stop Disney from making(arguably) furry films. We are NOT an
> issue; companies aren't concerned about us because they KNOW we'll be there to
> support them. We're a safe bet. So they go on the try & woo the mainstream.
Uh. I think you have that back-asswards. They've GOT the mainstream. All ST
fandoms & furry fandoms are good for is free promotion. The humor in that,
for me, is that Fanboy Bob spends hours working on his Lion King Fan Fiction
& Fan Art & Fan Website & doesn't get paid a cent for advertising Disney. In
fact, Diz might even crack down & threaten him with infringement if they
don't like his stuff! I think that's hilarious.
> All this weird crap I've heard for years about being a fan killing carreers
> oddly never seems to have applied to me...or the people working for me...or my
> friends. Listen up; YOU WILL OR WON'T GET PRO WORK BASED ON YOUR SKILLS & WHO
> YOU KNOW. PERIOD!!
I get pro work fine. The people who need to see my furry stuff see that, & the
people who need to see my kids' book stuff see that, & the rest of em see
whatever I want them to see. No one trick pony, me.
> Fandoms are for people to kick back & relax in; not "be legitimate" so you
> look better when looking for art jobs.
& that is exactly why when you write to me, you're sending email to Ezuli, not
Kim.
So, "legitimate" isn't welcome here? I should just get with the program,
then, & not mind when the inevitable happens & one of these days while I'm
kicking back & relaxing & being a furry fan, I happen to watch Hard Copy run
a story about the new menace stalking children online? A ring of pedophiles
who draw kids in with online chat environments & web pages designed with
talking animals & cartoon characters, crafted deliberately to be attractive
to children, but really a front harboring sexual deviants of every flavor?
I mean, that wouldn't be an accurate, *legitimate* portrait of furry fandom,
would it. But legitimacy isn't welcome or appropriate here so it doesn't
matter.
> And when all is said & done, my points remain; those who produce are the face
> of the fandom. dig it...
>
> Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur
>
> "Why don't we wait til all the voices in your head come
> to some agreement before we act?"
>
--
--Ezuli
http://www.xoom.com/ezuli
Lemu...@hotmail.com
Farlo <stan...@abac.com> wrote:
> "" Lemu...@hotmail.com wrote in <7fb8dg$v4f$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>
> >> Why? Because these folks aren't actually about ANYTHING.
> >
> >We're Seinfeld??
>
> You're losers. Reread his post. =)
Oh Farlo. I am a little worried about you. You used, at one time, to be at
least somewhat coherent. Now you're reduced to this?
> >> They don't like ANYTHING being done these days(they'll pay lip
> >> service to Stan Sakai, but only if cornered).
> >
> >Who's Stan Sakai? I like Dinotopia. Is James Gurney dead? Damn.
>
> Poor confuzzled Lemur - it's not been one of her more lucid days.
Let me make that a little more clear for you, Farlo. I erroneously assumed
that here in this forum dedicated to discussing anthropomorphic material, a
reference with author's name & book title, to a bestselling book about
anthropomorphic dinosaurs wouldn't go over your head. Shon said that BFs
"don't like ANYTHING being done these days", & that they only like works
created by people who are now dead. I replied with the author & title of a
recent piece of anthropomorphic literature that I, a Burned Fur, happen to be
rather fond of, with a humorous comment that I did not know the author to be
dead. To my knowledge he is very much alive, you see.
You know, I get along fine with several people who are not Burned Furs. Thus
far, you're the only person going out of your way to be a dick to me. Why is
that?
> Farlo
> Urban Fey Dragon
> http://www.dejanews.com/~furculture
>
--
--Ezuli
http://members.xoom.com/Ezuli
StukaFox
: Let me make that a little more clear for you, Farlo.
You'd have to draw it in crayon for it to be clear to him.
Be careful he doesn't try to email-bomb your account. He thinks
he's being clever when he does that.
StukaFox
Cathead232
>
> {snip}
Absolutly amazing. I'm literally at a lose for words because, while I had been
warned about you...I never dreamed you'd be like this. I'm especially struck by
your "debating style"(for lack of a better phrase), in which you either just
plain didn't understand my posts Or you willfully misrepresented them in your
responces. Neither possibility speaks well of you. At first I thought of
rewriting my previous posts for your benefit; eliminating any tricky grammer or
big words. But truth be told, your not worth it. The flood of E-Mail I've
received is more than enough proof that I got my point across; you're on your
own. Like I said, an over-vocal minority hijacked the Burned Fur name; a
dedicated group could just as easily take it back. dig it...
...and no, I'm not gonna tell you who Stan Sakai is.
Shon Howell shon...@hotmail.com Burned Fur ^_^
"Y'know...you don't have to be an idiot ALL the time.
Its okay to take a break every now & again..."
Matthigh
His entire post *must* be a troll.
It is damn near impossible to be a reader of this newsgroup and NOT know who
Stan Sakai is.
Beware of trolls,
- Matthew
kodak
matt...@aol.comPINKMEAT (Matthigh) wrote:
> >& you never did tell me who the hell Stan Sakai is.
>
> His entire post *must* be a troll.
>
> It is damn near impossible to be a reader of this newsgroup and NOT know who
> Stan Sakai is.
Actually, I have found that MANY of the younger online artists (most of
whom don't read comic books, much less furry comics) have NO IDEA who Stan
Sakai is. Nor do they seem to care.
Instead of sneering at them and accusing them of being a troll, why don't
you answer their question for them?
xip
east...@spamaol.com (kodak) wrote:
> In article <19990420021010...@ng104.aol.com>,
> matt...@aol.comPINKMEAT (Matthigh) wrote:
<<chop>>
> Actually, I have found that MANY of the younger online artists (most of
> whom don't read comic books, much less furry comics) have NO IDEA who Stan
> Sakai is. Nor do they seem to care.
>
> Instead of sneering at them and accusing them of being a troll, why don't
> you answer their question for them?
>
Out of curiosity, how do you wind up furry, with starting with or eventually
finding your way to comics? Without them, its doubtful I would have known
furries existed, nor would I have known to type in anthropomorphics into
Infoseek so I could look at my computer and say "Wow, look at all this neat
stuff!!"
--
Din' I tell you to stay away from the candles!!
XIP--fastest 'roo on the net
Joe Rosales
> I replied with the author & title of a recent piece of
> anthropomorphic literature that I, a Burned Fur, happen to be
> rather fond of, with a humorous comment that I did not know
> the author to be dead.
As you seem to have offered yourself as a spokesperson, perhaps you
would care to share some of the more positive things about the Burned
Fur Movement. I have several questions which I would very much like
answers to, and someone like yourself may be able to help me.
Please, I would request that only Burned Fur members provide answers to
these; I need no replies from detractors or naysayers belonging to rival
ethought groupings. If you are from some other group, start your own
thread listing your own accomplishments other than not liking Burned
Furs.
My questions about the Burned Fur Movement:
What are its short- and medium-range goals? I have been unable to find
any sort of clear statements regarding this subject. There are only
vague allusions to some sort of end product which amounts to Things
Being Better Than They Are Now, with no details given. How are things
supposed to change, and how exactly are members supposed to go about
changing them? There seems to be only the idea that massed thought will
create some sort of palpable difference, with no in-between stages of
actual work. I have seen no plans, no rough schedules, no guidelines
for production and work. In fact, there seems to be no reason within
the movement to actually produce, purchase, or organize anything, other
than debating teams. What sort of specific day-by-day goals should
Burned Fur members set for themselves?
What sort of actions does the group support? This is also unclear to
me. When one is supposed to institute oneself as an alternative to the
mainstream fandom, how exactly does one go about it? How does one go
about encouraging aesthetic diversity? Does this involve anything other
than guestbook signing and stern, serious-sounding discussion? When a
Burned Fur member walks down the street, what should he watch out for,
and what should he seek out? What should he do when he finds something
that does or does not feel fits into the Burned Fur goals, whatever they
may be
What sort of accomplishments can the Burned Furs list to their name?
Certainly the Manifesto is an entertaining little diatribe, and is clear
enough; but that was the product of a single creator, made before the
group was formed. What has the collective manpower of the Burned Furs
produced and accomplished in the time since its inception, aside of
setting up its own website? What sort of accomplishments can we expect
of the movement in the future that will better the field and the fandom?
Who exactly are the Burned Furs out to "monkey wrench", as it says in
the Mission Statement
(http://members.tripod.com/burnedfur/bf_missn.htm)? Does this involves
some sort of actual 'hit list', and if so where can we find it? What
sort of action would be approved of if taken against them by Burned Fur
members?
Who would be excluded from joining the Burned Furs, outside of zoophiles
and pederasts -- i.e., those whose actions are almost universally
considered both illegal and immoral by furry fans and ordinary citizens
anyway? If there is some difference in the range and quality of Burned
Fur members as opposed to the hoi polloi, there must logically be people
who are excluded, and qualifications for those who are not. What are
the critera for those who are accepted, outside of self-reflexive
feelings of moral fortitude, and those who are excluded, outside of
outward signs of state and federal offenses?
And couldn't the Burned Fur Movement at least be "categorically opposed"
to bestiality? I know it may be somewhat strident language, but perhaps
you could find it in yourselves to do more than "strongly discourage"
such action.
-- Joe
Visit my website full of stuff at http://www.FurNation.com/Animus. Hey,
it's on the internet, so at least it's free!
Mark Freid
xip <x...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<7fhset$9s9$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> Out of curiosity, how do you wind up furry, with starting with or
eventually
> finding your way to comics? Without them, its doubtful I would have known
> furries existed, nor would I have known to type in anthropomorphics into
> Infoseek so I could look at my computer and say "Wow, look at all this
neat
> stuff!!"
Well, that is the case with you, and with me, and many others, especially
those that have been in the fandom for a while, but these days, a
significant percentage of fans discover the fandom via the Internet (i.e.
Furrymuck) and have never seen, read or sometimes even heard of any
anthropomorphics comics, or publications. Most folks in "furry" will
respond to you when you say "Lion King", but probably only half of them
(give or take) will know what Maus, or Pogo, or Usagi Yojimbo, or even
Furrlough is.
Mark
kodak
<x...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how do you wind up furry, with starting with or eventually
> finding your way to comics?
The majority of online people whom I have spoken with do not appear to even
know what "furry" comic books are. They might read "Garfield," or even
"Kevin and Kell," but they don't read comic BOOKS.
Even a good number of the hard-core furries don't read the furry comic
books. Mention "Shanda," "Furrlough," or even "Usagi Yojimbo" to them and
they'll go "huh?" If you're lucky, they /might/ have read an issue of
"Omaha" a long time ago.
Most of the online people seem to be more into the furry artwork, rather
than comics.
Hangdog
> > Lemu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > {snip}
> >http://www.xoom.com/ezuli
> >"Ceci n'est pas une lemur." --Not Magritte
>
> ...and no, I'm not gonna tell you who Stan Sakai is.
Shon, did you ever stop to think that an honest answer is
a more fit reply to honest ignorance than mockery? It
would certainly make you look better.
Ezuli, Stan Sakai is the creator/artist/author of Usagi
Yojimbo, a Samurai rabbit of feudal Japan. Loosely
based on a character in an old Japanese "Man-in-the-
Moon" myth, he's one of the few "furry" characters to
make it in mainstream comics. For more info, go to
the (quite cool) official website at:
http://www.usagiyojimbo.com/
Shon, the reason Ezuli isn't all that up on funny animal
stuff is because she's new to the fandom. Prior to this
she's spent most of her career earning a) a degree in
fine arts, and b) a living as a professional freelancer,
so she hasn't had much time to surf the web and read
comic books. That's why she doesn't know who Stan
Sakai is, and why she *does* know who Magritte is.
You do know who Magritte is, don't you, Shon?
--Hangdog
Hangdog
> My questions about the Burned Fur Movement:
My answewrs--my opinions, of course, but I don't think
those of other Burned Furs vary too widely from them.
I'm sorry if this runs on too long: I was trying to answer
every one of your questions. I'm sorry if some of my
answers sound terse: I was trying to keep this from
running on TOO long.
> What are its short- and medium-range goals?
Short-range: provide furry fandom with a focus of vocal
dissent from the bestialists, kinksters and New-Agers
(and their apologists) that have for some reason attached
themselves to the genre
Medium-range: change the public image of the genre.
Thanks to the efforts of the bestialists et. al., that image
is essentially of a subculture in which these things are
accepted, even celebrated. We want it to be known
that there are a good many fans and artists who do
*not* accept such behavior as part of the genre.
> How are things supposed to change,
See above.
> and how exactly are members supposed to go about
> changing them?
By exercising our rights to free association and free speech--
the same rights our opposition insists upon, but which they
seem to find threatening when exercised by those who
disagree with them.
> What sort of actions does the group support?
> When one is supposed to institute oneself as an alternative to the
> mainstream fandom, how exactly does one go about it?
> How does one go about encouraging aesthetic diversity?
Same answer to all three: by speaking out, thinking, debating, writing,
creating.
> Does this involve anything other than guestbook signing and stern,
> serious-sounding discussion?
Yes: though these are a part of the process. It involves creating art,
writing stories and editorials, volunteering at conventions--in short,
all the things we would normally do seperately. Being part of Burned
Fur allows a neutral observer to look at the people involved and
consider the movement as the sum of each individual member's acts,
then compare them to the sum of the opposition's acts, and judge by
these as well as by our arguments which side has the better claim to right.
> What sort of accomplishments can the Burned Furs list to their name?
> Certainly the Manifesto is an entertaining little diatribe, and is clear
> enough; but that was the product of a single creator, made before the
> group was formed. What has the collective manpower of the Burned Furs
> produced and accomplished in the time since its inception, aside of
> setting up its own website?
The "collective 'man'power" of Burned Fur has produced:
Ben Bruin's illustrations for John Keats' _Eve
of St. Agnes_, a Burned Fur project first proposed
on the Burned Fur forum--as well as his other
art on Yerf!
A series of illustrations done by Ezuli (a Burned Fur
member) for an animal shelter website created as
a class project/charitable donation by David Tapia,
another Burned Fur member.
Squee's art on Yerf! and Side 7, and her upcoming
publication by Radio Comics.
Eric Blumrich's art on Yerf!, his illustration of
Kafka's "The Bucket Rider" for _Huzzah #33_
his creation, with Scotty Arsenault, of animation
for a History Channel series on the Space Race, etc.
GothTiger's upcoming 'zine "Skortch"
My editorials and Con reports in _Fuzzy Logic_
There's probably more I've forgotten. There's
definitely more to come.
> What sort of accomplishments can we expect
> of the movement in the future that will better the field and the fandom?
See above.
> Who exactly are the Burned Furs out to "monkey wrench", a
The insular smugness of fans who think their kinks ought
to be part of the fandom, regardless of the consequences
to those who don't share, or even detest those kinks. We
will do this by speaking out, stopping mental evasion, exposing
lies and deceitful tactics, and generally prying up the rocks
under which a lot of this stuff hides.
> Does this involves some sort of actual 'hit list',
Only to our more paranoid opponents.
> and if so where can we find it?
Probably in one of Farlo's posts.
> What sort of action would be approved of if taken against them by Burned
> Fur members?
We speak out against them. That's it. We don't hack websites, mailbomb, or
threaten
violence the way our opposition does..
> Who would be excluded from joining the Burned Furs, outside of zoophiles
> and pederasts -- i.e., those whose actions are almost universally
> considered both illegal and immoral by furry fans and ordinary citizens
> anyway?
Actually, many Furry Fans don't consider bestiality to be illegal or
immoral--
that's one of our biggest problems.
As for the pederasts, they've been showing up on the MUCKs lately, and
surprisingly there are fans who would argue that there's nothing wrong
with their "age-play," either. (there was a big long thread about this a few
months ago, about the time Points and Slipstream retired from
the FurryMUCK Wiz Corps). This is a potentially BIGGER problem
> If there is some difference in the range and quality of Burned
> Fur members as opposed to the hoi polloi, there must logically be people
> who are excluded, and qualifications for those who are not. What are
> the critera for those who are accepted, outside of self-reflexive
> feelings of moral fortitude, and those who are excluded, outside of
> outward signs of state and federal offenses?
Right now, we're dealing with applications on a case-by-case basis.
The problem with becoming too doctrinaire is that it limits your
effectivity (cf. _The Life of Brian_ for an accurate parody of the
results).
> And couldn't the Burned Fur Movement at least be "categorically opposed"
> to bestiality? I know it may be somewhat strident language, but perhaps
> you could find it in yourselves to do more than "strongly discourage"
> such action.
Well, I'd prefer it that way: maybe the little we listen to the opposition
is still too much.
Anyway, my 2 cents (plain)
--Hangdog, Burned Fur
StukaFox
: Actually, I have found that MANY of the younger online artists (most of
: whom don't read comic books, much less furry comics) have NO IDEA who Stan
: Sakai is. Nor do they seem to care.
Actually, I've been here over five years and fall into the above
school.
StukaFox
Cathead232
>a more fit reply to honest ignorance than mockery? It
>would certainly make you look better.
>
As has been stated elsewhere, the idea that someone would post to this NG & NOT
know who Stan Sakai is stretches credibilty just a tad. Also, as stated,
Lemurzuli as such nominated herself as spokesperson to refute my points; if
your gonna debate, you better have your facts together. Lastly, my words were
WILDLY misinterpreted by Lemurzuli, so by what reasoning should I play along
with her foolishness. Might she have done a bit(3 min.s) of research before
attacking me? And BTW, a cursary Deja News search easily shows how "new to the
fandom" she is; how long must you be in a fandom before you're expected to know
what you're talking about. I guess the whole"holding people to a higher
standard" is a bit sunjective...dig it
Alan "TriGem" Kennedy
> >& you never did tell me who the hell Stan Sakai is.
>
> His entire post *must* be a troll.
>
> It is damn near impossible to be a reader of this newsgroup and NOT know who
> Stan Sakai is.
>
> Beware of trolls,
> - Matthew
*shrugs*
Nope, never knew till I read a bit on this thread. I was and am not really
interested in who creates something, but rather the content, call me
old-fashioned.
Tim Gadd
>As has been stated elsewhere, the idea that someone would post to this NG & NOT
>know who Stan Sakai is stretches credibilty just a tad.
I've been posting here for over 3 years, and I don't know him from a
bar of soap, whereas I certainly know who Magritte is - and just for
nothing if you want to see what I consider to be truly _great_ furry
art find a copy of Max Ernst's 'Une Semaine de bonte' (especially if
you like Edward Gorey's darker and most surreal stuff.)
"They are tantalizing glimpses into a disturbing world of dark dreams
that provide more questions than answers. Why is an apparently dead
man with the head of a rooster hanging from a tree by his trousers
while a woman in the foreground has her breast groped? Who is the man
with an Easter Island head sitting in the restaurant with a drunkard
and giant insects? Why are a woman and a dragon prostrating themselves
before a man with bird wings sprouting out of his back? '
--
Tim Gadd
Hobart, Tasmania
Lupercal .com
@wolf-web
Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Coffeehouse/1161/
'Some people never go crazy.
What truly horrible lives they must live."
Charles Bukowski
M. Mitchell Marmel
Hangdog wrote:
>
> Joe Rosales wrote:
>
> > My questions about the Burned Fur Movement:
>
> My answewrs--my opinions, of course, but I don't think
> those of other Burned Furs vary too widely from them.
Speaking for myself, I feel you're spot on.
-MMM-
Burned Fur
Michael Campbell
Hangdog wrote:
> Joe Rosales wrote:
>
> > My questions about the Burned Fur Movement:
>
> My answewrs--my opinions, of course, but I don't think
> those of other Burned Furs vary too widely from them.
> I'm sorry if this runs on too long: I was trying to answer
> every one of your questions. I'm sorry if some of my
> answers sound terse: I was trying to keep this from
> running on TOO long.
(mass quantities of snippage)
As a Burned Fur, I would like to say that I heartily agree with Hangdog's
observations. He has stated our goals intelligently and accurately. As our
self-appointed Spokesman, he has done an excellent job. Bravo.
Gothtiger, Burned Fur (tig...@execpc.com)
J.M.L.
: Hangdog wrote:
: >
: > Joe Rosales wrote:
: >
: > > My questions about the Burned Fur Movement:
: >
: > My answewrs--my opinions, of course, but I don't think
: > those of other Burned Furs vary too widely from them.
: Speaking for myself, I feel you're spot on.
Indeed. Though I usually hate making simple 'me too' posts, in this
case I'll make an exception. I think though I'd might want to add in my
support for Darrel Exline. I'd really like to see him succeed in his
efforts. He's a good man.
--
-- "Happiness is a deaf wolf".
http://ciips.ee.uwa.edu.au/~hutch/hal/HAL/Talk.phtml
Cathead232
>observations. He has stated our goals intelligently and accurately. As our
>self-appointed Spokesman, he has done an excellent job. Bravo.
>
>Gothtiger, Burned Fur (tig...@execpc.com)
>
While I didn't buy Hangdog's responce 100%, it was a VERY good laying out of
the facts. Well done Hangdog. I think where I differ is in my perseption of the
problem. I don't see the Zoophile/pedaphile/ new-ager menace as being all that
big in fandom proper. Please remember(and I KNOW I'm gonna get blasted for
this), online furries are an INCREADIBLY tiny percentage of the fandom as a
whole. "Betty" provided an interesting service last year in that after an
especially big flame war(I think over Zoophiles); she broke down the posts &
found that I beleive 80% of the post were by only 3 people(xxydex, dr.cat, &
Chandler). It's all too easy to let a small problem seem bigger than it is.
Much of this actually seems to be linked to Confurance; think about it, most of
the same artists & fans hit all the Furry cons in the continental US, yet none
seem to have the problems of...uh...well y'know, the problems that Confurence
has(hmmmm, huge attendace by effeminant young men who have NO interest in furry
stuff...that's odd). Alot of what you're talking about is limited to MUCKs &
Chatrooms; again, not the fandom at large. How exactly you stop this sort of
thing is anybodies guess.
But then the other problem(which I alluded to earlier), assuming it's even
possible to kick someone out of a fandom(which I doubt), what then? Do these
people dry up & blow away? What happens if all the banished groups unite into a
new but seperate furry fandom. They set up their own MUCKs, NGs & Zines. They
have their own conventions. They promote their very groovy furry lifestyle. And
we're all STILL mistaken for them. Do you honestly think these folks will stop
refering to themselves as Furries? Okay, so now we have an OUTSIDE group making
us look bad. Then what? If these folks & THEIR fandom are more in the public
eye, then to the outsiders, THEY are the furry fans. This is why I stressed
drownding out a minority not by shouting them down, but rather by proclaiming
ourselves. More zines, more art, more websites, more of an explanation of what
WE are all about. This is also why I go on about our place in the comics feild;
THAT is actually more of a public view on us than the web. WE must define
ourselves...dig it.
Richard Chandler - WA Resident
> Actually, I have found that MANY of the younger online artists (most
> of whom don't read comic books, much less furry comics) have NO IDEA
> Instead of sneering at them and accusing them of being a troll, why
> don't you answer their question for them?
If their attitude is that they don't CARE, I'd rather sneer at them and call
then non-furries.
(And for the clue-impaired, in the context of a.f.f, "furries" refers to furry
fans.)
--
The greatest tragedy is that the same species that achieved space flight,
a cure for polio, and the transistor, is also featured nightly on COPS.
-- Richard Chandler
Spammer Warning: Washington State Law now provides civil penalties for UCE.
xip
In article <990420190...@mauser.at.kendra.com>, mau...@kendra.com
My point though is how do you start looking for something if you don't know
it exists? Obviously with comics its easy, here's this interesting book
staring up at you unlike anything else, but how do you stumble into a furry
web site? You'd need to have some idea in order to come up with a URL or a
search.
Jim Doolittle
matt...@aol.comPINKMEAT (Matthigh) wrote:
> Back in the 1980's and early 1990's, the entry point into furry fandom was
> comics and fanzines. Nowadays, it seems to be sex mucks and the like.
I'm obviously a oddball outlier on your statistics plot, then. I got into
furry fandom via the net, and am now producing fanzines.
So there. ;P
-Jim, not at all amused by a.f.f. lately.
http://fuzzylogic.betterbox.net
Jim Doolittle
Clark/Steve Gallacci) wrote:
[snip of good commentary]
> Its all BS. Relax, have a beer, here are some old issues of Fusion to
> look at. See, fun SF/Furry cross-over, hard to imagine its about ten
> years ago.....
Steve, you rock. Let me buy you one of those beers, next time our
convention attending overlaps.
-Jim
--------------------------------------------------------
| Jim Doolittle Fuzzy Logic E-Zine |
| dool...@uiuc.edu http://fuzzylogic.betterbox.net |
--------------------------------------------------------
S.J.Laitila
who
>Stan Sakai is.
Isn't he that basketball player? The 16 million dollar man?
Farlo
<92465061...@rodelo.cyberverse.com>:
>M. Mitchell Marmel (marm...@drexel.edu) wrote:
>
>
>: Hangdog wrote:
>: >
>: > Joe Rosales wrote:
>: >
>: > > My questions about the Burned Fur Movement:
>: >
>: > My answewrs--my opinions, of course, but I don't think
>: > those of other Burned Furs vary too widely from them.
>
>: Speaking for myself, I feel you're spot on.
>
> Indeed. Though I usually hate making simple 'me too' posts, in this
>case I'll make an exception. I think though I'd might want to add in my
>support for Darrel Exline. I'd really like to see him succeed in his
>efforts. He's a good man.
Well, Hangdog's post was most interesting for me - I'm definately one of
those "new ager" people. Also, I have nothing wrong with anyones'
personal kinks - sex isn't a bogeyman for me.
Actually, this whole BF thing has taken a turn down the surreal highway,
and is becoming quite fun. I have never seen such smallminded intolerance
before, and it is too silly to be real.
There cannot be a large group of BF in RL in furry fandom.
I even toyed with the idea of a "Furry Freedom" party - we are the FURRY
RESISTANCE and the evil jackboots of Burned Fur will never crush our free
spirit!!!
I can play "Luke" to Hangdog's "Dork Helmet".
Or was that "Dark Helmet"? Does it matter???
Maybe "Obi Wan Farlo" is more my speed ...
Mwuh Ha haa!!!
Farlo
Urban Fey Dragon, Furry Freedom Fighter (FFF)
http://www.dejanews.com/~furculture
Matthigh
know who Stan Sakai is stretches credibilty just a tad<<
Actually, I think it shows rather well how far furry fandom has slipped away
from its roots.
Back in the 1980's and early 1990's, the entry point into furry fandom was
comics and fanzines. Nowadays, it seems to be sex mucks and the like.
Best,
- mlh
PS Ignore this message. It is a troll.
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
Matthigh <matt...@aol.comPINKMEAT> wrote:
>>>As has been stated elsewhere, the idea that someone would post to this NG &
>NOT
>know who Stan Sakai is stretches credibilty just a tad<<
No. There is a whole generation of fans who don't know who Steve Gallacci
and Albedo are, as well as furry fans more into "big foot" style comics,
as well as animation and any number of other venues and subgenres.
>
>Actually, I think it shows rather well how far furry fandom has slipped away
>from its roots.
>Back in the 1980's and early 1990's, the entry point into furry fandom was
>comics and fanzines. Nowadays, it seems to be sex mucks and the like.
Which is, of course, nonsense. The bulk of the total fandom doesn't have
net connection or web access, doesn't go to cons, and hasn't a clue about
the more sordid aspects of the fringe fandom. AFF and related groups
represent only a tiny self-filtering faction of the fandom, and even the
convention-attending fandom is mostly "mainstream", with only minor
excursions into the spooge-pond. the freaks and the politicals are jsut
very tiny, but disproportionally noisy, so, in these very limited forums,
they have the false apperance of being "important".
Joe Rosales
> It involves creating art, writing stories and editorials,
> volunteering at conventions--in short, all the things we would
> normally do seperately. Being part of Burned Fur allows a neutral
> observer to look at the people involved and consider the movement
So being a Burned Fur involves primarily doing what you were already
doing anyway, but merely with some sort of ideological self-affirmation
attached? That seems pointless to me. Couldn't people just achieve on
their own? Most creators in this genre are not involved in
collaborative efforts. In fact, most if not all of the major creators
in this genre, who I would argue are the true determinants of taste and
direction and public perception, have not joined the Burned Furs. With
that in mind, why should someone bother to join the Burned Furs?
> The "collective 'man'power" of Burned Fur has produced:
These are works, then, which would not have been produced without the
collective influence, planning, and direction of the Burned Furs? I
find that a rather dubious claim, as it seems to abstract credit that
more rightfully belongs to the individuals who produced the actual
work. As a mailing list or meeting place I can see the various Burned
Fur forums' cumulative benefit, but no more than any other mailing list
or meeting place. The meeting place is, in my mind, a rather secondary
concern -- that would be like me attributing Scott's inking of my
Romanics pages to the San Diego Comic Con, which is where we met and
discussed it, and I handed him the actual pages and went over the
directions. It was undoubtedly the forum, but not the reason -- that
was the work itself. It seems to me that Blumrich would be doing
illustrations of Kafka regardless whether he belonged to your group or
not, just as he did before he joined up.
What I want to know is, what sort of guidance did the group provide, and
how did the Burned Fur influence measurably change the nature and focus
of the material? Perhaps Eric or Ezuli would care to answer this point
personally.
>> Who exactly are the Burned Furs out to "monkey wrench"?
>
> The insular smugness of fans who think their kinks ought
> to be part of the fandom, regardless of the consequences
> to those who don't share, or even detest those kinks.
This is an incredibly evasive answer, to the point of meaninglessness.
There is no sort of definition or even rough direction of the people
being spoken of, which is usually a sign that the speaker doesn't know
himself, wishes to keep the term open in order to attack whomever he
pleases, or doesn't think it acceptable to show an easily recognizable
prejudice in public. You may as well use the term "deviants", which is
the accepted nonspecific insidious bogeymen word in classical
propaganda.
This is exactly the sort of muzzy thought and vague meaning that I find
so irritating and worthless in the Burned Fur Mission Statement itself,
and which I ask these questions in hopes of clarifying. Let us speak
plainly about these matters, so that those like me who wish to know can
make properly informed decisions. Who exactly are you talking about?
>> Does this involves some sort of actual 'hit list', and if
>> so where can we find it?
>
> Probably in one of Farlo's posts.
Bonus points to you for using a straight question to attack someone not
involved in the discussion at the time of your post. Can we stick to
the facts in the future? As indicated, I have a low tolerance for
propaganda.
>> What sort of action would be approved of if taken against
>> them by Burned Fur members?
>
> We speak out against them. That's it.
This is a point which you return to several times -- the act of
"speaking out". Who exactly have you been speaking to, and where? So
far I have perceived that you are primarily speaking to each other in
your own forums, and mostly in terms of simple affirmations that "we are
in the right". Otherwise, the only evidence that I have seen of debate
or speech has been the occasional blindside attack of someone on this
newsgroup by someone else claiming to be a Burned Fur.
Have you set up a list of select websites that are the kind of things
Burned Furs should see and why -- outside of mentioning Yerf, which was
set up many years before the Movement anyway? Have you set up tables at
conventions to publicly promote a certain type of material? Have you
started Burned Fur fanzines to showcase the kind of things you want to
see? What specific examples of this free speech have been used in the
broad and rather nebulous goal of "changing public perception", and how
do those differ from or improve upon anyone else's efforts?
> Actually, many Furry Fans don't consider bestiality to be illegal or
> immoral -- that's one of our biggest problems.
This is simply untrue. Speaking as someone who has seen all aspects of
the fandom all over the country over the better part of a decade, you're
simply wrong. The vast majority of members in this fandom have the same
taste and morals as the vast majority of the population, and to say
otherwise is simply a method of attempting to galvanize the entirety of
the fandom against someone most of them have never even seen -- a
version of the old propaganda trick of "you're being corrupted and
backstabbed without your knowledge or consent by outsiders living among
us". I find it not only unacceptable but outright hackneyed.
I cannot say I have never personally met a zoophile. I have met exactly
one in all of the years I have attended "furry" cons from coast to
coast, and that was years ago. He was treated like a complete pariah by
everyone who came in contact with him, and considered so creepy that no
one even made jokes about it. I have never seen him again. He was not
accepted or supported, nor was he considered part of the fandom by
anyone who encountered him or heard of him. Nor was he a continuing
part of the fandom, as his subsequent disappearance shows; he found no
home here.
This was years before the Burned Furs were even conceived of, and from
the reaction I observed at the time I considered the problem so well in
hand that it was a non-issue. Since then I have seen about as many
public advocates of bestiality in this fandom as I have seen
pro-vandalism lobbyists in city council meetings. Denouncing bestiality
is the furry equivalent of denouncing crack use -- do you really believe
that the well-organized pro-crack lobby is going to show up with
powerful and intelligent arguments that will sway the masses in their
favor? It is simply a safe thing to say that you're against, gaining
political points for your moral fortitude while not actually having to
do anything, because there's no chance that anyone credible will stand
up and say they disagree with you.
I mean, who was the last zoophile the Burned Furs took on? And how did
you do it, and what was the result? I think giving us some names and
methods would be a benefit to everyone here, so we can see the direction
and results of your decisive actions.
Personally I have seen little to no impact of zoophiles on the work of
this fandom (outside of the histrionics the very idea of them produces
in certain circles), and have encountered no perception of furry fans as
de facto zoophiles in my dealings with other professionals or with the
public. Everyone I have encountered (excepting the one
previously-mentioned guy who actually -was- one) considers them sick.
So what exactly are the Burned Furs doing about this "problem", and how
is it benefitting the fandom as a whole? Specifically, how is it doing
more than the collective efforts of the individual professionals of
those who are -not- members of your movement in improving the perception
of furry fans and artists?
>> What are the critera for those who are accepted, outside of self-
>> reflexive feelings of moral fortitude, and those who are excluded,
>> outside of outward signs of state and federal offenses?
>
> Right now, we're dealing with applications on a case-by-case basis.
> The problem with becoming too doctrinaire is that it limits your
> effectivity (cf. _The Life of Brian_ for an accurate parody of the
> results).
You are essentially saying, then, that there *are* no objective
qualifications? That the only test is the popularity of the individual
among whomever is judging applications? That seems massively biased,
and unlikely to promote the diversity that you claim is one of your
goals.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my previous questions. I hope that
these further clarifications merit as much attention, and translate into
some better statement of policy and action than currently exists for the
Movement regardless of my own position.
JML:
> I think though I'd might want to add in my support for Darrel Exline.
> I'd really like to see him succeed in his efforts. He's a good man.
I too think Darrel is a good person and an excellent organizer, which he
has proven on many other occasions. I also consider him to be these
things quite apart from anything having to do with the Burned Fur
movement; it's not as though the Polar Den BBS or his years of con work
were precipitated or directed by it. In the absence of Burned Fur, I
think Darrel would still have been named chief organizer of CFXI for his
competence, likability, and previous involvement.
Farlo:
> Well, Hangdog's post was most interesting for me - I'm definately
> one of those "new ager" people. Also, I have nothing wrong with
> anyones' personal kinks - sex isn't a bogeyman for me.
Are you, then, a target of the Burned Furs collectively? Or is it more
of a question that you have the same the 'enemies' you've always had,
and now everyone has group names to use?
> Actually, this whole BF thing has taken a turn down the surreal
> highway, and is becoming quite fun. I have never seen such
> smallminded intolerance before, and it is too silly to be real.
Points to you for attacking and detracting when I specifically asked
people not to in my original discussion.
If you have an axe to grind, I don't care. I am asking questions about
policy and operation, not personal "friends and enemies" lists. It has
been stated and agreed upon by Burned Fur members that there is no
specific Movement hit list; if you have evidence to the contrary, please
share it. Otherwise, I am uninterested in your ongoing personal
grudges.
interlink
cathe...@aol.com (Cathead232) wrote:
> after an especially big flame war(I think over Zoophiles); broke down the
posts
> & found that I beleive 80% of the post were by only 3 people(xxydex, dr.cat, &
> Chandler). It's all too easy to let a small problem seem bigger than it is.
Three people, /none/ of whom are Burned Furs. Which 'side' really is more
vocal?
It is also noteworthy that during Confurence 10 weekend there were
practically NO posts made to a.f.f. Most of the regular posters must have
been attending the convention. Traffic on Furrymuck was also noticably
lower during CF10 (but not nearly as much as a.f.f.)
Dr. Cat
: east...@spamaol.com (kodak) writes:
: > Instead of sneering at them and accusing them of being a troll, why
: > don't you answer their question for them?
: If their attitude is that they don't CARE, I'd rather sneer at them and call
: then non-furries.
Do people have to care about each and every single furry comic to remain
unsneered-at? Or only the ones that you personally think are really good?
And if they're people that haven't run into Stan Sakai's work yet, how
are they supposed to know in advance to care about it? Should they care
about everything they don't know about in life by default, and only feel
apathy about anything once they've investigated it and made sure it's No
Big Deal?
...but more to the point - HAS anyone explained yet who Stan Sakai is?
Since I think everyone else was too busy arguing to do so, I will!
Stan Sakai is the writer/artist who does the excellent comic book Usagi
Yojimbo, in my opinion some of the best work being done in the comic book
field today. The art has an elegant simplicity, and the stories, tales
of a rabbit samurai, have pacing, stories, characters, etc. that are
clearly inspired by some of the best of japanese cinema and mythology.
His comics are an utter treat to read, and the one time I met him in
person he seemed to be a very nice fellow, and pleasant to chat with.
He has done a lot of work with Sergio Aragones, including the lettering
for every issue of Groo through all the different publishers it went through.
A web page where you can find out lots more (and hear some japanese music
in MIDI format) is at http://www.usagiyojimbo.com/
Dr. Cat sez check it out.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: You don't have to care about any specific furry work to be a
furry fan. Just care about some of 'em and that's fine. :X)
(Disclaimer disclaimer: There's no way to avoid being sneered at. Even
if you were to care about ALL furry works, somebody would come along and
sneer at you for caring about something they thought was lousy. This is
sneer central here, it's sneer city! Make sure to put the sneer guards
up over your salad bar, so your lettuce doesn't get sneered on. (Ewwww!))
ELynne
> >& you never did tell me who the hell Stan Sakai is.
> His entire post *must* be a troll.
Her.
> It is damn near impossible to be a reader of this newsgroup and NOT know who
> Stan Sakai is.
> Beware of trolls,
> - Matthew
Damn! IIRC, this is the *second* time I've had my existence disproven
*just this month* on this very newsgroup! I can't be a female, because
that "furrydood" guy said I can't, and now I can't be a reader of this
newsgroup and not have known who Stan Sakai was until Hangdog explained
it!
I guess I must be a troll. Hm... wait, I make smart-ass one-shot
comments, I refuse to "take sides" in these flame fests, and most people
just ignore me.
Well, whaddya know! :D
-- Elynne, Just Trolling, Ma'am
"Look, I'm a troll! Lookit me!!"
ELynne
and all. :)
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, xip wrote:
> east...@spamaol.com (kodak) wrote:
> > matt...@aol.comPINKMEAT (Matthigh) wrote:
> > Actually, I have found that MANY of the younger online artists (most of
> > whom don't read comic books, much less furry comics) have NO IDEA who Stan
> > Sakai is. Nor do they seem to care.
> > Instead of sneering at them and accusing them of being a troll, why don't
> > you answer their question for them?
> Out of curiosity, how do you wind up furry, with starting with or eventually
> finding your way to comics? Without them, its doubtful I would have known
> furries existed, nor would I have known to type in anthropomorphics into
> Infoseek so I could look at my computer and say "Wow, look at all this neat
> stuff!!"
> XIP--fastest 'roo on the net
Me personally, I was interested in "animals-only" stuff from way back,
around grade school. I tried to read "Animal Farm" when I was in fourth
grade because it only had animal characters in it--I got about halfway
through, to the execution scene, and realized that I was just not getting
it. However, I greatly enjoyed "Watership Down," "Where The Red Fern
Grows," "Call of the Wild" and "White Fang," as well as a handful of other
books whose titles I can't remember. I was fascinated by the idea of
storytelling from the animal's perspective--included among my favorites
were the stories about Paul Revere's horse, and the one about the mouse
who lived with Ben Franklin (can't remember those titles for the life of
me!).
I got interested in roleplaying at around 17, and I was briefly exposed to
Albedo and the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG, but nobody else was into
those games, so I pretty much forgot about it until a couple of years ago,
when I saw repeated references to "furry" on the newsgroup I hang out in
most frequently. Curious, I bopped on over to this group.
My first thought was, "Wow! Lookit all this cool stuff--this is way
better than TMNT and that Albedo game!" My second thought was, "Er...
what's with all the spooge?" I wasn't offended (I'm *really* hard to
offend), but I was--confused. I still am, somewhat. But that's a
completely different topic. :)
After hanging out here for a while, I started checking Yerf on a regular
basis, went to a local con, and began collecting and drawing my own furry
art. I'm still not much interested in comics--I don't have anything
against comics, I just don't have the dedication to troop down to the
local comic stores every week and make sure I'm keeping up on all the
titles I'm interested in. I read compilations when I get my hands on
them, and gleefully browse the collections of friends; I'm just not the
comic-buyer type, I guess.
So, yeah. It's possible to find this "furry" thing more or less
accidentally, be interested in it on a mostly casual basis, and not read
the comics much. No, really, it is. :)
-- Elynne, Rambling
"Look, random babbling!"
Dr. Cat
: This is why I stressed drownding out a minority not by shouting them
: websites, more of an explanation of what WE are all about.
That's exactly what I always used to advocate in the old spooge vs.
antispooge flamewars here a few years back. It just seems so obvious
and sensible. Especially given that you can't really stop the people on
the other side from doing and talking and drawing the stuff they like.
On the other hand, that "prying up the rocks they hide under" thing that
Hangdog mentioned I think just ends up calling more attention to the
people and practices you don't like. They don't stop doing what they're
doing, they don't go away and leave the fandom, but they do yell a lot
and argue with you after you pry their rock up.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: The BF thing isn't about spooge or anti-spooge, apparently
they're more concerned with some more specific perversions and/or lack of
discretion in general. But the "present more of what you like rather than
trying to get your opponents to present less of what they like" strategy
is just as valid in this situation as it was in the arguments of a few
years ago, in my opinion.)
Xydexx Squeakypony
to skip it if you're familiar with the story...]
Hangdog wrote:
> We don't hack websites, mailbomb, or threaten
> violence the way our opposition does..
Gee, -I- seem to recall a certain Burned Fur---who had a big hand in writing
your mission statement and running your DejaNews forum---who also threatened
to put my head through a wall if he ever saw me at a furry con.
But I suppose next you'll be saying that was just "satire", right?
Feh.
______________________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony, who doesn't threaten violence like Burned Fur does
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
> There cannot be a large group of BF in RL in furry fandom.
They're a small minority that makes a lot of noise, that's all.
> I even toyed with the idea of a "Furry Freedom" party - we are the FURRY
> RESISTANCE and the evil jackboots of Burned Fur will never crush our free
> spirit!!!
Hey, I'd join. Do I get a secret decoder ring?
______________________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony, not a Burned Fur [ICQ: 7569393]
Farlo
<371D79...@NOSPAMstic.net>:
>Farlo:
>> Well, Hangdog's post was most interesting for me - I'm definately
>> one of those "new ager" people. Also, I have nothing wrong with
>> anyones' personal kinks - sex isn't a bogeyman for me.
>
>Are you, then, a target of the Burned Furs collectively?
It would seem so, if I have any "New Age" beliefs.
Hangdog did single out "New Agers" in his post, and I
likely qualify. It's not important.
> Or is it more
>of a question that you have the same the 'enemies' you've always had,
>and now everyone has group names to use?
Nope, these are new.
>> Actually, this whole BF thing has taken a turn down the surreal
>> highway, and is becoming quite fun. I have never seen such
>> smallminded intolerance before, and it is too silly to be real.
>
>Points to you for attacking and detracting when I specifically asked
>people not to in my original discussion.
It's not important.
>If you have an axe to grind, I don't care.
Good - this whole thing is pretty worthless.
Most people shouldn't even read these threads.
>I am asking questions about
>policy and operation, not personal "friends and enemies" lists.
You are being reasonable and looking for answers.
The type of response you get tells you what you need to know.
As for my response, that tells you something also - in addition,
I am cognizant of the implications.
> It has
>been stated and agreed upon by Burned Fur members that there is no
>specific Movement hit list; if you have evidence to the contrary, please
>share it.
Generically, the term "New Ager" was used. If I was, um, it's not that
important. Worry less, enjoy more.
>Otherwise, I am uninterested in your ongoing personal
>grudges.
That's as it should be. Grudges are pretty lame.
I have a purpose and grudges are lame.
What else am I doing? What could I be thinking?
Farlo
Urban Fey Dragon, Furry Freedom Fighter
FRM - Furry Resistance Movement
http://www.dejanews.com/~furculture
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
[...]
> Be careful he doesn't try to email-bomb your account. He thinks
> he's being clever when he does that.
You of cause have everdence of this?
--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
[...]
>We speak out against them. That's it. We don't hack websites, mailbomb, or
>threaten violence the way our opposition does..
Everdence for that stament., and we have at least one stament that is
clearly a threat of violence from a burned fur.
StukaFox
: Everdence for that stament., and we have at least one stament that is
: clearly a threat of violence from a burned fur.
What's up with the Perry Mason lames from you today? Been hanging
around Wanky again?
StukaFox
Farlo
<7fkns6$ccj$3...@phaedrus.zeta.org.au>:
>On 19 Apr 1999 22:48:51 GMT, StukaFox <stuk...@shell9.ba.best.com>
wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> Be careful he doesn't try to email-bomb your account. He thinks
>> he's being clever when he does that.
>
>You of cause have everdence of this?
He has nothing, or i'd be posting from a new ISP.
Service providers get real annoyed at lusers generating
denial-of-service attacks.
Stukapukafoxie is just annoyed that he had an argument with an
autoresponder. I found him ... amusing.
M. Mitchell Marmel
ELynne wrote:
> and the one about the mouse
> who lived with Ben Franklin (can't remember those titles for the life of
> me!).
"Ben and Me", by Robert Lawson. A favorite of mine as well; it was made
into a nifty cartoon by Disney in the 60's.
> So, yeah. It's possible to find this "furry" thing more or less
> accidentally, be interested in it on a mostly casual basis, and not read
> the comics much. No, really, it is. :)
While I've loved funny animals ever since I learned to read at age 3 (I
still have FA storybooks from my childhood at my mom's place), I credit
my intro to modern furry fandom to a cameo appearance by Cutey Bunny in
Normalman comics, circa 1985. That got me interested enough to look up
Army Surplus Comix at my comic book shop, which led me to ordering back
issues from Quag, which led to a correspondence back and forth, which
led to my collecting JQ 'roxes, which led to my hooking up with fellow
Quagfan Rich Chandler, which led me to getting hooked on Macintoshes,
which led me to my current career. Along the way, I got into Albedo,
Omaha, Fusion, Usagi Yojimbo and so forth.
Funny how these things work, neh?
-MMM-
Burned Fur
Alan "TriGem" Kennedy
is going orbital for length.
For what is is worth, I for one and TIRED beyond belief of trying to get new
headers for AFF and reading that about 90% or so are dealing with posts about the
burned furs, the frozen furs, the non-aligned and the like.
Who cares if there are soaked furs, give them an umbrella, the burned furs, take
some antacid, as far as the frozen furs go, get an electric blanket. Gessh! I
want to read sensible posts, not some bickering.
Thank you.
--
Alan "TriGem" Kennedy ICQ #8781052 http://www.furnation.com/trigem
The technology we have weaved for ourselves is a double-edged knife of conspiricy
and publicity to be trapped within. -
Me Dammit!
Ashes to ashes, dust to dusts, if you don't take it out and use it, it's going to
rust! - Katana, Highlander II
Rat Shit, Bat Shit, Dirty old twat, 69 assholes tied in a knot, hooray, lizard
shit, Fuck! - George Carlin
Paul R. Bennett
Karl posted it to AFF with followups to AFFP. Well, I don't get AFFP on this
server.
This is a new low. Karl. Remember back a while ago with the business about "All
L being Z" or "L are destroying the fandom." Remember that? If you bother to
remember I had some rather strong sentiments about such scapegoating. Do you
recall your comments? I am hearing the exact same thing neither you or I liked
then against the targeted groups right now. Only thing is, you are the one doing
it. Now if you said "So-and-So threatened violence, and left off the headline
tactics then there wouldn't be much I would say. However, you are using the
tactic of using a labeled group name and then using the example of a specific
individual in a specific instance to "Prove" your assertation. How is this one
whit different than the incidents of a nasty little flame war? Karl, there are
a number of very unpleasant names for this kind of conduct. I suggest that you
go back and read carefully a recent public discussion between Lemurzuli and
myself and think hard about it.
Oh yes. I just noticed a couple of other little details. Like... How did I
receive this when I don't have the politics newsgroup on my local server. Nice
try.... Something else I have noticed in the past, particularly with regard to
your little habit of posting selected "Burned Fur" Forum posts to the politics
newsgroups.
Paul
Xydexx Squeakypony wrote:
> [I saw this attempt at rewriting history and just _had_ to reply... feel free
> to skip it if you're familiar with the story...]
>
> Hangdog wrote:
> > We don't hack websites, mailbomb, or threaten
> > violence the way our opposition does..
>
> Gee, -I- seem to recall a certain Burned Fur---who had a big hand in writing
> your mission statement and running your DejaNews forum---who also threatened
> to put my head through a wall if he ever saw me at a furry con.
>
> But I suppose next you'll be saying that was just "satire", right?
>
> Feh.
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Xydexx Squeakypony, who doesn't threaten violence like Burned Fur does
Paul R. Bennett
Paul
Allen Kitchen
Joe Rosales wrote:
> I mean, who was the last zoophile the Burned Furs took on? And how did
> you do it, and what was the result? I think giving us some names and
> methods would be a benefit to everyone here, so we can see the direction
> and results of your decisive actions.
I've been asking the group as a whole to back up their claim that the
"zoo" crowd is taking over for some time now. I've asked for names and
evidence. So far I've had no concrete response. I doubt you will do
better, but I applaud your effort in trying to wrench data out of them.
In its entirety, the Pro/anti BF argument is pointless. Both sides of
the argument have become so polarized that they cannot see that the truth
lies somewhere between them. The BF really isn't as intolerant as they
seem, and the fandom is not becoming overrun by zoos either. And since
both gangs insist that everyone wear their colors, I'm simply ignoring
the lot of them. After all, the only power they have over me is that
which I grant them. Currently I grant them civility, but that's all.
Allen Kitchen (shockwave)
William Haskell
>
> Put some intra/outer atmospheric boosters on this thread folks, as it looks like it
> is going orbital for length.
>
> For what is is worth, I for one and TIRED beyond belief of trying to get new
> headers for AFF and reading that about 90% or so are dealing with posts about the
> burned furs, the frozen furs, the non-aligned and the like.
>
> Who cares if there are soaked furs, give them an umbrella, the burned furs, take
> some antacid, as far as the frozen furs go, get an electric blanket. Gessh! I
> want to read sensible posts, not some bickering.
>
Is this too much to ask for? On a.f.f.? Apparently so.
Personally I've gotten to the point that I just skim over the headers,
unless I see a familiar name or a *possibly* interesting subject - in
the latter cases I'm often disappointed, though not always.
It will be interesting to see what will dominate the headings in a.f.f.
this time next year.
> Thank you.
You're welcome.
Nick "Singe" Bousman
>
> Hangdog wrote:
>
> > > We're Seinfeld??
> >
> > I'm thinkin', hey, this could be a GREAT idea!!!
> >
> > Eric Blumrich is Kramer
> > I'm Jerry
> > You're Elaine
> > Goth Tiger is...whozits, the bald guy...
>
> George?!? You cast me as GEORGE?!? Hmm, chunky, neurotic, no luck with
> women... Yep, that's me all right!
>
> GothTiger (tig...@execpc.com)
Didn't most of them end up in jail at the end of the series? :)
-Nick "Singe" Bousman
Xydexx Squeakypony
this reply, so don't be surprised if portions of this message look
familiar...]
Hi, Paul.
Thanks for your comments. This is not a flame. Just thought I'd mention that
up front. I know I've snapped at you before, and that it was wrong of me to do
so, so I apologize for that. Hopefully this message will be a little less
harsh.
Anyway...
Paul R. Bennett wrote:
> My apologies to AFF. I just noticed what Karl J. pulled. If you all notice,
> Karl posted it to AFF with followups to AFFP.
Because this discussion really belongs on AFFP and not here. I was under the
impression that everyone here was sick to death of all the politics that swamp
this newsgroup, so I try to set a good example by posting there most of the
time.
Maybe it's just my imagination, but as far as I can tell Burned Furs have been
exploiting the fact that I don't post to AFF much these days as an opportunity
to swamp the newsgroup with their latest PR campaign.
Now, if folks have changed their minds about that I can resume my 30-40 posts
a day to _this_ newsgroup like I used to do... but purrsonally I like to
think most people on AFF are just as sick of hearing about it as I am, and I
already waste enough time with Burned Fur as it is.
As an aside, did you see my response to you regarding Brian O'Connell? (I
said I thought he was being treated very badly.)
By the way, if you really want to discuss things with me you'll get my
attention a lot easier if you call me Xydexx next time.
>If you bother to remember I had some rather strong sentiments
>about such scapegoating. Do you recall your comments? I am
>hearing the exact same thing neither you or I liked then against
>the targeted groups right now. Only thing is, you are the one
>doing it.
I'm well aware that I shouldn't be stooping to their level, yes.
However:
I don't mailbomb anyone.
I don't hack anyone's website.
I certainly don't make threats of violence.
Why is it suddenly okay to go around making blanket statements about "the
opposition", but not okay to do it to Burned Fur?
> Now if you said "So-and-So threatened violence, and left off the headline
> tactics then there wouldn't be much I would say.
If Hangdog said "So-and-So threatened violence" and didn't try to rewrite
history and claim that Burned Furs Don't Do That, there wouldn't be much I
would say, would there?
Fact is, Clint Forrester threatened to put my head through a wall if he ever
saw me at a furry con.[1] That is a verifiable matter of public record.
Therefore, Hangdog is outright lying when he claims nobody in Burned Fur has
made threats of violence.
I don't know about you, but when I go to furry cons, I like to have a good
time. Having to worry about watching my back at a furry con just because a
Burned Fur feels the need to make violent threats against me is not my idea
of a good time. Nope, not at all.
Of course, I don't think spending the weekend in jail would be Clint
Forrester's idea of a good time, either.
> However, you are using the tactic of using a labeled group name
> and then using the example of a specific individual in a specific
> instance to "Prove" your assertation.
Yes, I'm aware of that.
No, it wasn't very nice of me.
Is there some reason you're not criticizing Hangdog for doing the same thing?
(Out of curiosity, is this conversation being sidetracked into a discussion
about semantics and my posting habits in order to divert attention away from
the fact that Hangdog is lying? You've mentioned you didn't know all the
details, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.)
> Oh yes. I just noticed a couple of other little details. Like... How did I
> receive this when I don't have the politics newsgroup on my local server.
Because I posted to AFF and directed the followups to AFFP. No big mystery
there.
>Something else I have noticed in the past, particularly with
>regard to your little habit of posting selected "Burned Fur"
>Forum posts to the politics newsgroups.
The only reason I crosspost to AFFP from the Burned Fur forum is because AFFP
is actually an open forum. I really do not like wasting my time composing
replies on the Burned Fur forum only to have them deleted by people who can't
handle opposing viewpoints.
______________________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony, a member of the so-called "opposition"...
Xydexx's Anthrofurry Homepage:
http://www.smart.net/~xydexx/anthrofurry/homepage.htm
[1] If I ever see Clint Forrester at a furry con, I'm going to
wait until he's drinking a glass of milk and then make him
laugh really hard.[2]
[2] Unlike some of my critics, I actually have a sense of humor.
DivaLea
So you missed the whole American Jesus/Canadian Jesus/Imperial Jesus "Show
Howell is a wanker (like THIS was a secret) thread...
That's too bad. It's pretty damn funny.
1999 Eisner Award Nominee
Lea Hernandez
CLOCKWORK ANGELS, intro by Warren Ellis
Image Comics
http://members.aol.com/divalea
Xydexx Squeakypony
> In its entirety, the Pro/anti BF argument is pointless. Both sides of
> the argument have become so polarized that they cannot see that the truth
> lies somewhere between them. The BF really isn't as intolerant as they
> seem, and the fandom is not becoming overrun by zoos either. And since
> both gangs insist that everyone wear their colors, I'm simply ignoring
> the lot of them. After all, the only power they have over me is that
> which I grant them. Currently I grant them civility, but that's all.
Well, since I've got a reputation of being one of those "anti-BF" folks,
I'll just point out that folks like yourself, Tygger, Mike McGee, Kyle
Webb, Richard DeWylfin, Dr. Cat, and everyone else who's sick of all
this have summed up why I don't support BF a lot better than I ever
could.
Why am I "anti-BF"...
Because they're [allegedly] trying to clean up the fandom?
Because I have weird fetishes that they don't like?
Because I want to "link" something to furry fandom?
No, the crux of the argument for me, the one Big Problem I have with BF,
is that it's Yet Another Us Versus Them Crusade.
That's it. Period. At last, one of furry fandom's biggest secrets is
finally revealed.
Now that I've gotten that off my chest, feel free to
check out my sickening "anti-BF" artwork:
http://www.smart.net/~xydexx/squeakypony/antiburnedfur.htm
____________________________________________________________
Not a Burned Fur => Xydexx Squeakypony <= Not a Freezing Fur
"The only problem with not participating in flamewars is
that nobody notices you're not participating in them." -Me
Dr. Cat
: Because this discussion really belongs on AFFP and not here. I was under the
: impression that everyone here was sick to death of all the politics that swamp
: this newsgroup, so I try to set a good example by posting there most of the
: time.
Well I don't think it's *everyone*, just the vast majority. Close enough
though.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: The above is only an opinion, as I didn't actually go around
and ask everybody what they think in person to make sure. I could be way
off, and the reality might be that 63% of the folks here actually think
"Rhinoceroses aren't as cute as lemurs" and the other 37% believe "If I
wait until next tuesday I can catch more butterflies". How would I
know? I'm just guessing here, I freely admit it!)
J.M.L.
don't consider myself a BF proper (though a few of them like Ezuli I find
witty and charming *ahem!*), anyways...
I've said this before and it's probably been lost in the tirades of
posts both pro and con on this issue. My main issue has more to do with
the quality of the material. In other words, I'm tired of seeing
hackneyed artwork with no soul or depth, drawn simply to boost the ego of
the so-called artist. If you're drawing something with sex in it,
rationalizing that 'sex sells', I kind of think you've missed a point
here. Where's your spirit? Your spark of life? What's your motivation,
other than to get someone all hot and bothered, that is.
Drawing endless numbers of pinups of animal people, with no real
backrounds sounds like such a mindless chore I wouldn't even want to think
about it seriously. How some of these people can churn them out by rote
might be a testament to their talents, if they were able to switch to
other styles instead of steadfastly holding onto one they've claimed as
their own.
I'd totally be able to forgive a lack in drawing ability if the stories
themselves were rich or full of wit, humor or sarcasm. Afterall, the
story's the thing. Boring soap operas about a woman's love-life or a
college dorm chock full of homosexual zealots isn't exactly my idea of
entertainment. I'm sure there are people who go for that sort of thing,
but there's really room for so much more.
I'm pretty sure that explains where I'm coming from, but if you got any
questions, I'm sure you'll ask! I want to see more poignant peices that
spark the imagination or intellect, or strike the funnybone, and less
peices targetted to strike your loins. You'll impress a lot more people
that way, by showing them how a society of animal people might be
different or the same and how they interact with one another, as opposed
to showing us what their gonads look like.
--
-- "Happiness is a deaf wolf".
http://ciips.ee.uwa.edu.au/~hutch/hal/HAL/Talk.phtml
Michael Campbell
Nick \"Singe\" Bousman wrote:
> Michael Campbell wrote:
> > George?!? You cast me as GEORGE?!? Hmm, chunky, neurotic, no luck with
> > women... Yep, that's me all right!
>
>
> Didn't most of them end up in jail at the end of the series? :)
Indeed they did. I must think that I'm one of the three people on earth the
LIKED the final episode. It proved what I've been saying about these
characters for years: When it comes right down to it, they weren't very
likable people.
GothTiger (tig...@execpc.com)
StukaFox
: Because I want to "link" something to furry fandom?
Post your masturbating reindeer .sig again, Karl. Not trying
to link your little kink with Furry, huh?
StukaFox
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
>David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) <dfor...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
>
>: Everdence for that stament., and we have at least one stament that is
>: clearly a threat of violence from a burned fur.
>
>
> What's up with the Perry Mason lames from you today?
Both you and Hangdog made accusations of what are crimes, hacking and
mailbombing. If you wish to do this then you are going to have to
back it up with proof.
> Been hanging around Wanky again?
I've been asking for evedence in responce to unsubstatated comments
for long before Wanky was out of diapers[1]. If you look back into
dejanews you will see meany causes where I make simmler statements.
So Stuka, Hangdog are you going to back up your clames, or are we to
consider them to be untruthfull?
[1] Given that Wanky probly got out of diapers a week ago this is a
safe stgament.
Xydexx Squeakypony
> Post your masturbating reindeer .sig again, Karl. Not trying
> to link your little kink with Furry, huh?
Nope, I'm not.
And while it may be easy for you to go around claiming I do, it's a lot harder
for you to actually back up those claims with some kind of proof.
So, why don't you back up your claims with proof, huh?
You _do_ have proof, right? You know... evidence? Something to show that
you're just not making all this stuff up, y'know?
Let's review...
Does StukaFox Have Any Proof?, Item #4:
Explain what inspired the "masturbating reindeer" .sig, and
how it applies to AFF.
(I'll give you a hint: It has nothing to do with linking anything to furry
fandom. Feel free to use DejaNews to provide specific examples and cross-
references. I've got nothing to hide.)
C'mon, StukaFox. Here's your big chance. What are you waiting for?
Of course, if you can't explain any of the farfetched accusations you've made,
then it'll be pretty obvious you're making it all up and we'll know not to
bother with you in the future.
______________________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony: Nothing to Hide, Nothing to Fear
Xydexx's Anthrofurry Homepage:
http://www.smart.net/~xydexx/anthrofurry/homepage.htm
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
StukaFox
: StukaFox wrote:
:> Post your masturbating reindeer .sig again, Karl. Not trying
:> to link your little kink with Furry, huh?
: Nope, I'm not.
Gee! You were -SO- proud of it! You'll do anything to avoid posting
it now.
Does anyone have this .sig archived? Karl seems to have lost his nerve.
StukaFox
StukaFox
: Both you and Hangdog made accusations of what are crimes, hacking and
: mailbombing. If you wish to do this then you are going to have to
: back it up with proof.
Sure -- what do you want for proof? I deleted to messages, which
were the result of a flame-war which Farlo declared, then ran
screaming from when it got too hot (but not before taking it to
email, then trying to troll for backup in alt.usenet.kooks
[-AND- having his backup lose his account for net abuse! Baahahah!])
S'whaddawant? SMTP logs? What? Anything I post you can claim is
a forgery (it's all just text, right)?
That's why this "prove it! prove it!" is a lame -- you can NEVER
prove it.
: So Stuka, Hangdog are you going to back up your clames, or are we to
: consider them to be untruthfull?
WE? Mouse in your pocket, David?
: [1] Given that Wanky probly got out of diapers a week ago this is a
: safe stgament.
Dude, that's a hella vile thought.
: Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia.
Prove it! Prove it!
(see?)
StukaFox
Xydexx Squeakypony
> Gee! You were -SO- proud of it! You'll do anything to avoid posting
> it now.
Strike One!
> Does anyone have this .sig archived? Karl seems to have lost his nerve.
Feel free to use the Power Search on DejaNews, Stuka.
It's at:
http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml
______________________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony: Nothing to Fear, Nothing to Hide
Paul R. Bennett
In article <371f5ec8$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, StukaFox <stuk...@shell9.ba.best.com> writes:
> Xydexx Squeakypony <xyd...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> : StukaFox wrote:
> :> Post your masturbating reindeer .sig again, Karl. Not trying
> :> to link your little kink with Furry, huh?
> : Nope, I'm not.
> it now.
Look y'all...
This has gone on and on. Is this really necessary, or even remotely furry? Is
it even appropriate? Please consider it from a human relations standpoint.
It does not reflect well on anyone.
How about giving it a rest. Or, if you absolutely must, please conduct the
discussion as adults.
Thanks
Paul
(grumpy)
Xydexx Squeakypony
> Look y'all...
> This has gone on and on. Is this really necessary, or even remotely furry?
Erf... nope. You're right. Sorry again.
______________________________________________________________________
Xydexx Squeakypony [ICQ: 7569393]
Farlo
<snipped>
Stukafox is now beneath my notice.
This oughta kill some of the flames.
Alan \TriGem\ Kennedy
William Haskell wrote:
> Is this too much to ask for? On a.f.f.? Apparently so.
*nods* I think that most are more worried about getting that last
bit of leeway into their posts rather then try to do something useful.
> Personally I've gotten to the point that I just skim over the headers,
> unless I see a familiar name or a *possibly* interesting subject - in
> the latter cases I'm often disappointed, though not always.
You too? Yah.. I have gotten used to the customary responses by
ALOT of furs and just skip alot of them. Even when a new thread
starts and there is like 30 follow ups in the same day, by 3 or so
furs, I genernally ignore it, no matter what as it will probably be
nothing more then a holier then though bitch session.
> It will be interesting to see what will dominate the headings in a.f.f.
> this time next year.
*laughs softly* Probably the same old boring things ;)
> > Thank you.
>
> You're welcome.
*nods*
Alan \TriGem\ Kennedy
>
> It's at:
> http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml
Got curios, and did a search for Xydexx, 6700 matches!
WOW.. it looks like your a popular person ;)
I did a search for myself and only came up with 3700, and ALOT
of them are canceled posts. Hmmm.. I wonder then.. did I have something to
hide? Or was it a ploy to make people think that. The world will never know
Muaaahhahahaahhahaha!! Also, it takes 3 licks to get to the center of a
toosie pop.
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
>David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) <dfor...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
>
>: Both you and Hangdog made accusations of what are crimes, hacking and
>: mailbombing. If you wish to do this then you are going to have to
>: back it up with proof.
>
>
> Sure -- what do you want for proof?
Headers and SMTP logs posted by your ISP would be a help.
[...]
> S'whaddawant? SMTP logs? What? Anything I post you can claim is
> a forgery (it's all just text, right)?
>
> That's why this "prove it! prove it!" is a lame -- you can NEVER
> prove it.
In outherwords "Farlo mailbombed me" is as provable as "Lurkers
support me in email". Given that it is an unverifable stament it has
no streanth in this arument and can safely be ignored.
>: So Stuka, Hangdog are you going to back up your clames, or are we to
>: consider them to be untruthfull?
>
>
> WE? Mouse in your pocket, David?
"We" meaning the genral populace.
>: [1] Given that Wanky probly got out of diapers a week ago this is a
>: safe stgament.
>
> Dude, that's a hella vile thought.
Can you think of any thoughts about Tim that are not vile?
>: Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia.
>
> Prove it! Prove it!
I could scan in copies of my medical records if you wish.
StukaFox
: Headers and SMTP logs posted by your ISP would be a help.
Yeah -- well so would a blow-job by Cindy Crawford, and you're
odds are equal of getting either.
: In outherwords "Farlo mailbombed me" is as provable as "Lurkers
: support me in email". Given that it is an unverifable stament it has
: no streanth in this arument and can safely be ignored.
Well, as I've seen no proof of ANYTHING ANYBODY'S ever said in this
group, we might as well shut the doors and go home, eh?
Serious -- what colour is the sky on the planet you live on?
:>
:> WE? Mouse in your pocket, David?
: "We" meaning the genral populace.
Last I checked, vox populus was not embodied by one David Formosa,
anymore than it is embodied by one Stuka Fox, or even one Bill
Clinton. Vox populus is exactly that -- vox POPULUS.
: Can you think of any thoughts about Tim that are not vile?
Well, he's fun to laugh at.
:>: Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia.
:>
:> Prove it! Prove it!
: I could scan in copies of my medical records if you wish.
How would I know they were YOUR medical records? A post by your doctor
with direct reference to your National Health (if that's what they have
down there in Aussieland) and signed copies of your specialists records
would help.
StukaFox
Timothy Fay
A while back I asked the BF-ers that we know what they are against
but what, exactly, are they _for_?
I never got a reply. And I doubt that you will get a reply to any
of your recent questions about the group.
-Tim
--
http://www.tc.umn.edu/nlhome/m279/fayxx001/
"Hey, ho -- let's go!" -Ramones
Hangdog
> Joe:
>
> A while back I asked the BF-ers that we know what they are against
> but what, exactly, are they _for_?
>
> I never got a reply. And I doubt that you will get a reply to any
> of your recent questions about the group.
*Sigh*. Tim, he got one from me. His response was to ask the
same questions over again, in a more obstreperous manner. It
was obvious that he was after an argument, not answers, so I
left it at that.
--Hangdog
Dark`Shard
Lemu...@hotmail.com wrote:
<big fun snip>
Shon, don't bother, those of us with something other than crap or air between
our ears know you're right. Reasoning with these BeeFers looks to be as
pointless as explaing structual engineering to a wall. If we ignore them maybe
they'll just curl up into a self-deluding daisy chain and blow away.
Forrest
Hangdog <peter....@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:372234D4...@pdq.net...
Speaking as a substantially disinterested bystander: having read his response
I fail to see how it could be interpreted that way.
Hangdog
Your pardon: there's a history behind this thread that can't be
found on AFF. A friend of Joe Rosales got flamed on
another forum by a bunch of people whom said friend
apparently thinks are Burned Furs, but are in fact not
(the flamers in question think Burned Furs are too moderate
and too circumspect in dealing with the fandom's problems).
So Joe's playing knight-errant, out to smite the evil dragon
who flamed his lady fair--only he's got the wrong dragon.
But it seems that doesn't much matter to a chain-smoter ;o)
--Hangdog
Suburban Straight Dragon
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
>David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) <dfor...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
>
>
>: Headers and SMTP logs posted by your ISP would be a help.
>
> Yeah -- well so would a blow-job by Cindy Crawford, and you're
> odds are equal of getting either.
Ok, but how else are you going to prove it?
>: In outherwords "Farlo mailbombed me" is as provable as "Lurkers
>: support me in email". Given that it is an unverifable stament it has
>: no streanth in this arument and can safely be ignored.
>
> Well, as I've seen no proof of ANYTHING ANYBODY'S ever said in this
> group, we might as well shut the doors and go home, eh?
No, people often make comments that are 3rd party verifiable. There
is a pictures of foxxes on http://www.yerf.com/ . Anyone could look
up this web page and see that there are such pictures (amoungs
outhers).
> Serious -- what colour is the sky on the planet you live on?
Pink with bright purple clouds.
[...]
>: "We" meaning the genral populace.
>
> Last I checked, vox populus was not embodied by one David Formosa,
> anymore than it is embodied by one Stuka Fox, or even one Bill
> Clinton. Vox populus is exactly that -- vox POPULUS.
Ok I will refrase the comment "If you don't produce everdence to back
up your stament why should people pay any attention to what you say."
[...]
>:> Prove it! Prove it!
>
>: I could scan in copies of my medical records if you wish.
>
>
> How would I know they were YOUR medical records?
Because thay have my name on it.
StukaFox
: Ok, but how else are you going to prove it?
I said it. Accept it or not. The truth is there, no matter what
you believe.
:>
:>
:> How would I know they were YOUR medical records?
: Because thay have my name on it.
Prove it's really your name.
StukaFox
"Call-ing Per-ry Ma-son a-gain"
-- Ozzy
J.M.L.
: David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) <dfor...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
: : Ok, but how else are you going to prove it?
: I said it. Accept it or not. The truth is there, no matter what
: you believe.
: :>
: :> How would I know they were YOUR medical records?
: : Because thay have my name on it.
:
: Prove it's really your name.
He doesn't have to prove a damn thing to us. He's the center of the
universe afterall. We of course, have to document each and every moment
of our lives to him just so he can consider that what we have to say just
might have some creedence.
My kudos to this man. He makes the most out of rules 3 and 8 of the
(un)official Power Posting rules of Usenet. If he ever mastered the other
18, he would truely be a formiddable flamer. We are not worthy.
Sir, I salute you.
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
wrote:
>David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) <dfor...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
>
>
>: Ok, but how else are you going to prove it?
>
>
> I said it. Accept it or not.
So I'm to accpt this purly on your credability?
> The truth is there, no matter what you believe.
Of cause it is, I'm just trying to sort out wich "truth" to beleave
amounst the compeating ones.
>:> How would I know they were YOUR medical records?
>
>: Because thay have my name on it.
>
> Prove it's really your name.
So should I scan in my birth certificate as well? And how do you know
its my birth certificate, because I'm probly the only person in the
world called "David George Platypus Formosa"
Joe Rosales
> Your pardon: there's a history behind this thread that can't be
> found on AFF. A friend of Joe Rosales got flamed on another
> forum by a bunch of people whom said friend apparently thinks
> are Burned Furs, but are in fact not (the flamers in question
> think Burned Furs are too moderate and too circumspect in
> dealing with the fandom's problems).
>
> So Joe's playing knight-errant, out to smite the evil dragon
> who flamed his lady fair--only he's got the wrong dragon.
Obviously, I know about the incident of which you speak, and I consider
the "attackers" in that case about as much Burned Furs as you do. The
Burned Furs were not, as a group, responsible for it, and it is the
group of which I ask these questions. As for the timing of this thread,
it was started before the incident you mentioned even occured.
But more to the point, I can't think of anyone who needs or even wants
my defense. The very idea is ridiculous. At what point have I ever
defended anyone else in this forum? I think everyone will agree that
I'm far too egocentric to bother with such pointless gallantry.
The argument, if it can be called such, that I have with the Burned Fur
movement is that its goals and philosophy are so poorly defined and its
statements of purpose and direction so vague and aimless that it barely
seems to exist at all. It is currently defined by all of the things
that it is not: it is not for censorship, it is not against adult
material, it is not for exclusion, it is not for violence, it is not for
vandalism. It is not against other people in the fandom, it is not
against any particular kind of art, it is not for the promotion of any
particular kind of art or material either.
The only somewhat definitive statements that any Burned Fur has made in
any forum is that Burned Furs are against bestiality (a statement I
consider to be perfectly safe actionless moralizing, as I said earlier),
and for some undefined type of better quality material (which is rather
like being in favor of happy children).
In other words, the Burned Furs are at this time primarily defined by
things that do not exist, actions they do not perform, and agendas they
do not follow.
From my point of view, it seems impossible that the Burned Furs will
accomplish anything of substance with such a non-agenda. (Of course,
this makes the protest groups against them even more mystifying, but I
consider them to be completely lost within their own minds.) A movement
cannot be defined by what it is not. It can only be defined by its
actual goals and the actions it takes to reach them.
I find it very unfortunate that no one here is able to set forth either
of these matters in any definitive, real-world-applicable manner. I am
completely unsatisfied with the obscure statements that make up the
Mission Statement in particular, and the majority of the amorphus
affirmations that you and others have made here to support the Movement
in general. To me they indicate a completely shapeless reasoning
process, and a foundation of sand upon which it will be impossible to
build anything more than a house of cards.
What is the eventual goal of the Burned Furs? What day to day goals
should a Burned Fur set for himself? The latter question I asked in my
original post, and was a point you totally avoided answering -- I
suspect because you have no answer other than "what he thinks is best".
So far you have said that a Burned Fur should do what he was already
doing before he joined; and that he should speak out against things that
he finds unacceptable; and that he should define what is acceptable for
himself, apparently without any sort of rules or guidelines from the
Burned Fur movement as a whole. You describe a mere person, without any
defining factors that would make him a Burned Fur. To wit:
> It involves creating art, writing stories and editorials,
> volunteering at conventions--in short, all the things we would
> normally do seperately.
So I ask, why then do the Burned Furs exist? And why should anyone
join?
The fact that you consider this "obvious" evidence that I "was after an
argument, not answers" and not legitimate questions is simply
exasperating. If "Why do you exist?" and "What are you collectively
doing?" and "What exactly do you hope to accomplish?" are not legitimate
questions to ask the members and writers of the primary documents of the
Movement to answer straightforwardly and in specific detail, then the
Movement is surely doomed to hopeless and impotent inaction. If you are
unable or unwilling to give the specifics of expectations and
qualifications for potential members when asked, then you cannot expect
joiners to give any further impetus, direction, or definition to the
movement.
The Burned Fur members themselves have complained that the Movement is
unjustly maligned and misunderstood. Is it possible that the nebulous
nature of the group itself and the chimeric wording of its documents
that it creates are themselves responsible for this? And is it further
possible that the poor wording of the documents is, as Orwell attests,
primarily indicitive of lazy and directionless thought during their
creation?
I will readily admit that I do not like those who do not know what they
believe or why. The questions I ask of the Burned Fur members are those
which I already know my own answers to. I know what daily goals I
believe creators and fans in this genre should set for themselves, and I
know what I would like the end products of those goals to be. Is it
unfair to ask these same questions of another group when it begins to
recruit members to its "side", and uses a public forum to advance its
cause and agenda (ill-defined as they are)?
I asked these questions in a public forum because I felt that others
might benefit from a better understanding of the Burned Fur Movement's
policies and purpose, as I myself would. I have read through the
entirety of the Burned Fur newsgroup postings, visited the pages of many
of the members, and minutely dissected both the Manifesto and the
Mission Statement, and have found no statements about Burned Furs in any
of them that have more than the most tenuous existence in the real
world. What I have learned instead is that the group has no real
policies or purpose, other than the liking of good things and disliking
of bad, and that no two individuals have the idea or instructions to row
in the same direction at the same time in order to collectively get
anywhere.
There is no reason for any of you to protest or attack the Burned Fur
Movement. There is equally no reason to expect any collective
production from the Movement, or any substantial change in the fandom
due to their existence.
Furthermore, there is no reason for me to continue this thread, hijacked
as it has been into several other tiresome series of
"yes-you-did-no-I-didn't" snipes that pass for enlightened discussion
around here. For those of you currently engaged in such ersatz debate,
feel free to give it a rest. I will continue my own discussions
elsewhere.
-- Joe
Visit my website full of stuff at http://www.FurNation.com/Animus. Hey,
it's on the internet, so at least it's free!
StukaFox
: So should I scan in my birth certificate as well? And how do you know
: its my birth certificate, because I'm probly the only person in the
: world called "David George Platypus Formosa"
Prove that's really you. The only reason you say your name is
David is because your parents told you it was, therefor, even
your name is heresay.
StukaFox
Perry Mason and the case of the pointless discussion
StukaFox
: Stukapukafoxie is just annoyed that he had an argument with an
: autoresponder. I found him ... amusing.
Translation: "I shot my mouth off on Politics, called for flame war,
got my ass torched on the Usenet, took it to email, got my ass
torched there, took it to alt.usenet.kooks, found a hopeful ally,
only to have him lose his net access, then started with autoresponder
lames when I discovered I was in MILES over my head."
Revisionist history, indeed.
StukaFox
Realizing the killfile needs work again
Hangdog
If you want to ask questions, just ask them: don't embed them in
hundred-line diatribes where they'll look like rhetorical devices
not intended to garner real answers.
Of course, if that's what they really are, don't expect answers.
--Hangdog
Forrest
Joe Rosales :
> The only somewhat definitive statements that any Burned Fur has made in
> any forum is that Burned Furs are against bestiality (a statement I
> consider to be perfectly safe actionless moralizing, as I said earlier),
> and for some undefined type of better quality material (which is rather
> like being in favor of happy children).
I thought I was fairly specific on affp, but that group is overlooked; since I
haven't gotten any unanswerable criticism on it yet I direct anyone interested
to:
http://members.xoom.com/squirreltech
> I find it very unfortunate that no one here is able to set forth either
> of these matters in any definitive, real-world-applicable manner. I am
> completely unsatisfied with the obscure statements that make up the
> Mission Statement in particular, and the majority of the amorphus
> affirmations that you and others have made here to support the Movement
> in general.
I think you will find Manifesto II at the address above more specific; it does
cover why we exist, what we'll do (this section needs more than 3 points, I
await suggestions), and what we hope to accomplish.
> There is no reason for any of you to protest or attack the Burned Fur
> Movement.
I certainly agree with this.
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
>David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) <dfor...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
>
>
>: So should I scan in my birth certificate as well? And how do you know
>: its my birth certificate, because I'm probly the only person in the
>: world called "David George Platypus Formosa"
>
>
> Prove that's really you. The only reason you say your name is
> David is because your parents told you it was, therefor, even
> your name is heresay.
Not realy. Names are very perculare that way, your name is whate ever you
are known by. Since everyone knows that I am David so therefor I am
David. In this case its not hear say.
In addtion my perents as my represenatives singed a document (one
simmler to the document I singed later) saying that my name is what my
name is.
However you do bring up an interesting point, how do people prove
there idenaty. Of cause this converation is most likely more
apporprate to sci.crypt