Anti-furry Griefers

\o/ yay!! chocolate kisses ^.^

o.o........
...yea.... o.o chocolate...

If your not willing to support your point, mayhaps your point does not belong here.

I, too, would be interested in finding out what 99% of what we do is.

Building? Making AVs? Customizing AVs? Dancing? Making AOs and animations?
RPing on Star Wars sims? Hanging out and chatting? Throwing parties and events?
Shopping? Making vehicles?

What is it that we do 99% that you hate?
Is it the nookie? Is it the dirty, dirty shtupping? You hate us for having a kink?
You hate us 'cuz some of us get off on the thought of being and looking like a fictional character?

Do tell. I'm dying to hear.

Then I'm dying to hear how your Avatar looks EXACTLY like you and behaves exactly like you and how you're not emboldened by the anonymity offered. How you haven't tweaked your look or your behaviour to be a little more appealing.
And I'm dying to hear what you do that's so different than what we do.
Tell us. Tell us what this 99% that we do that's different from what you do.

Please.

You can take it to IM or PM if you are dying to know, cause it is a private discussion.

Tren, for future reference: Be more careful of wording--don't be saying you don't like 99% of what people within a certain category do. If someone said that about a particular race of people (black, white, asian, etc..), you can be assured that it would cause an uproar. I see no reason why it should be any different when referring to Furries.

If you want people to get off your back, how about an apology for your poorly chosen wording.

No, because it was in reply to someone saying my personal reasonings for joining an anti-furry group were poor, so I went a little bit further. Some people/furries decided to take my opinion from a reply that wasn't even directed to them and turn into an attack on their very being, which is kinda funny being that is one of the reasons why I dislike furries.

Brilliant.

You defend your making the statement, but won't back it up.

Well done.

Isn't there a word for people who spout divisive, inflammatory rubbish and then refuse to back it up?

I'm sure there is.. I just can't think of it at the moment...

I think at this point you are just reading what you want to hear. Seriously, take it to IM/PM.

Then...



So you're the only one who can have a private conversation here? You post on a public forum and then complain that people commented on a public post?

Apparantly, 99% of what furries do is intrude on conversations.

I thought it was the dog willies you didn't like.
Show's what I know.

Hmm, let's see.

On a "blah blah" message board, somewhere in the figment of an imagination:

Person 1: "I wear shirts that say 'White supremacy rocks!' because I want to go to r&b dance clubs and not get propositioned by anyone black."

Person 2: "So you hate black people?"

Person 1: "No, I just hate 99% of what they do."

Way to take things out of context. Look, read back to the reply where the whole 99% thing came from. Read it carefully. If you still feel that it had anything to do with you, then you are a reason why I hate furries. You take something someone said, twist it out into some e-drama for you feed on, then use painfully stupid sarcasm that doesn't even apply to anything anyone is talking about just so you can feel like you got the last word.

Take it to IM because this has nothing to do with this thread and it has become a private discussion between two people.

I'm a card-carrying member of the NAAFP and I protest this descrimination!

Seriously, why is this thread still alive.

Tren, as I have said to you on another thread regarding the same topic, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. You are also entitled to the right to express it, within the context of whatever rules support the forums.

However, can you understand how condemning furs because you disagree with 99% of their behaviour may be interpreted - rightly or wrongly - as prejudice?

Especially so when you refuse to explain or justify your original statement?

I can understand how some could draw the conclusion that your original statement could be considered to be ignorant and inflammatory.

I reiterate, you have the right to express your opinion (even though they arguably breach the SL TOS definition of discrimination). However, can I suggest with the utmost respect that you might be taken more seriously if you have the courage to back your convictions?

The thing is, I wasn't stating my opinion at all. I was giving a guy who told me that "Furries molesting you is not a good enough reason to join an anti-furry group" a bit more to go on. The more being that furries are the bane of my existence. You know why I don't explain why I dislike furries in detail on public forums anymore?

Me: "I dislike furries because of these reasons."

Furry: "Not all furries do that. *some sarcastic remark that doesn't even work with what they are saying*"

Me: "Well, maybe not every single furry does, but the huge majority does, even you."

Furry: "lol you don't understand furries you mudane. *link to furwiki or some other furry database that only proves my point further*"

Me: "You just linked me to a site that explains in detail the different aspects of furries that I hate. Here, I'll link you to some more *bidfur.com, random furry live journals, furry 'artist', ect*"

Furry: "You just don't understand us. You probably just watched that MTV show or CSI. I don't care, I find mudanes laughable. *some annoying /me gestures*"

And so on. I'm not going to argue something with people that have no logic or reasoning skills, or even take the time to even attempt to understand why I'm saying the words that I am saying.

Pot. Kettle... Black?

So you're writing horribly paraphrased scripts of previous threads now? It sure would be rude for me to fail to contribute to your efforts. Heres todays thread:

Act 1) You make wild accusations regarding a group.

Act 2) You fail to support said accusations with anything beyond 'personal opinion.'

Act 3) A response throws question upon the credibility of said accusations.

Act 4) You turn indignant and attempt to back out, calling it a private conversation

Act 5) A response points out that it obviously isn't a private matter, as it was introduced on the forum, by yourself, in Act 1.

Act 6) You remain indignant and attack the intelligence of members of the group under question.

Act 7) You then use this supposed lack of intelligence by equating it to lack of worthyness of your attentions. This lack of worthyness is used as an excuse for you no longer needing to come up with a convincing argument in the firstplace.

Act I respond and look like an ass in the process.

I recall you using a script like this a previous thread, too, however, act 4 and 5 were sadly absent. I can see you have since improved upon your forum argument prowess.

Kudos. This script is a winner. I'll keep this for refrence the next time I need to win an argument of any forums.

So what you're saying is that you don't like furries for the same reason why testosterone-wielding ultra-macho-acting gun-toting Bush-loving straight men have a problem with effeminate gay men.

So far, it seems that you don't like Furries because they're deviants from societal norms, and no piece of logic or information about people who don't follow societal norms will help you understand because you have a strict belief in following societal norms, which is fine--that's your choice--but just as gay people will find negative comments towards them because they don't follow societal norms to be offensive, furries will find it offensive when you say things like "people that have no logic or reasoning skills". They have plenty of reasoning skills, they just don't believe in following a strict guideline for societal norms like you do.

I would hope that it's clear now that neither side, neither yours or the furries, will get the other side to understand--it's like yelling at a brick wall. Furries aren't going to suddenly think, "Oh I must repent for my sinful ways" and you're not going to suddenly think, "Hey, I think they've got something good going here". It's an impasse that will never be breached.

Well to be fair, necrophiles aren't exactly a social norm either, yet we don't really have any issues on criticizing them.

I hate people like this.
You close everything off in your little head.
Then you show your ignorance by going to a public forum then complain about how "evil/bad" they are.
Not all of use are otherkin, furvert, fursuiter or yiffy.
In your mind we are all the same to you and that is just a bunch of bull.
There is no way I can explain this to you, as you are unwilling to learn a little bit about the furry community. You have already made up your mind, and I have already made up my mind about you and I will not repeat them on the forum as that would be just plain retarded.. and I am done with this thread

Amen

By the logic that persons on the forums give to hate furries/gorean/human/(insert any catagory of people here) they will hate any group that they themselves are not a part of.

I am not calling suh perons "haters" or of being a "hate group". What I mean is that the "majority" of whatever group that does "bad things" that people don't like is not actually the majority. A**holes of any group (and ALL groups have them) are the most vocal and most visual to anyone outside said group.

In SL, I have met good furries and bad furries. I have met good humans and bad humans. I have met bad Live Helpers who are banned/muted now. There is no one place free of idiots.

Should those who dislike furries change their outlook? No.

Should they go thier own way and do things with those they do liek and leave furries to thier own in a world as large and diverse as SL? Yes.

Griefers are griefers. Fur/skin/scales/cruncy-caramel-coating/etc. If furries began griefing known human clubs, I'd say to ban those individuals and/or groups. While furry communities do ban together more, and do send out warnings of griefers, they have not, to my knowledge, discriminated on whom they are banning. They do not state if the person is fur/human/other, only that they and/or thier group is a griefer.

I wish more people gave such warning/notices on the forums. Most don't for fear of LL and RezMods locking a thread and issueing warnings for "naming names". I personally think this stance of LL is bull. Unfounded accusations should result in perma-ban of teh accuser, while names of proven griefers/thieves/rackatters should be posted for all to see.

I wish both sides luck (well, no luck to any griefer) and bid you a happy day.

~Jessy

I think Automatically assuming its griefing is a bit persuming.. I have a perfect explaination for this!

So the people are exploring SL and Stumble on a lil house they really like.. Whilst looking around, poop accidently falls from one of thier bums.. there attempts to clean it up fail miserable as they just make it worse by spreading it about more than just a tidy pile..
then.. one of them walks into the bedroom and its so amazing that his head falls off.. and blood sprays everywhere...

Griefer? I think not (^.^)

Ya know, I find it funny how the one doing the most trash talking about furries looks like he's employed by a group in wich from what I've seen is 2/3 furry wich includes senior staff. Not to mension I've seen alot of shops and builds on their islands wich are almost completely rented out by furries too. Maybe a quick call to GinkoTec about his intolerance while flashing around that GinkoTec tag on the forums will end this for him by removing him from the element he seems to hate the most. After all, its not good for business to have an employee/associate who's actively intolerant twoards staff, customers, and potential customers. Seeing people like Tren involved with Ginko makes me glad me and my friends no longer do business with that group and probly never will again.

Certainly making ME recondiser my business with them :/