Difference between revisions of "Talk:Comparison of furry art sites"
GreenReaper (Talk | contribs) (Artists RSS feeds, and maybe switching to features going vertically rather than horizontally.) |
Quotingmungo (Talk | contribs) (→Adjust headers?: new section) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
I understand we're low on space, but if necessary we could repeat with another table for secondary features - or perhaps switch to a vertical layout for features, with sites along the top. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 15:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC) | I understand we're low on space, but if necessary we could repeat with another table for secondary features - or perhaps switch to a vertical layout for features, with sites along the top. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 15:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Adjust headers? == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'd suggest adjusting the header of the "Ad" column; most people would consider "no ads" positive, FAIK, so having sites with ads get a green box in that column feels mildly counter-intuitive. --[[User:Quotingmungo|quoting_mungo]] 16:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 12:57, 14 September 2010
Most Wanted Information
Are there any other sites of major consequence? VCL, having nearly none of the features, doesn't seem to even qualify, but someone can add it if they want.
- VCL is an art site (pretty much nothing but) - it's worth including, even if it hasn't modernized itself to add new features. Artspots should be included. And maybe Artpiles. Elfwood? I don't know if furries use it anymore. Back in its day it was basically like Deviantart, but fantasy-only. There were definitely furries on it when it hit its stride, but it's been a long time since then. 24.77.166.82 16:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
What about ArtSpots? --Douglas Muth 20:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Content-based filtering?
Do these sites vary in their ability to filter artwork based on content? For example, would a fur be able to set his or her profile up to avoid snuff and vore? I'm unfamiliar with sites other than FA. Art submitted into FA is submitter-classified based on content and rating. Furs have an option in their profile to view or not view adult-rated art. (Adult furs have the option, at least.) However, they don't have the option to filter more specifically than that. FA permits warning thumbnails for edgy content, but leaves it to the submitter to generate these thumbnails and decide when to use them. BitterGrey 20:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, honestly, I've never been to any site that did that, 'to my knowlege'. I'll certainly look into it. Immelmann 21:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- One of Inkbunny's leading features is tag-based filtering as well as general ratings. You can even block certain tags when placed on work of a certain rating (and there are separate three-level scales for sex and violence). --GreenReaper(talk) 21:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- That's pretty cool. I'll make room for that.Immelmann 21:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Artists RSS feeds
Why not include those? ArtSpots supports them as well, at artistname.artspots.com/rss, they're just not advertised (which I think is an inadvertent bug in the new layout, I've reported it).
I understand we're low on space, but if necessary we could repeat with another table for secondary features - or perhaps switch to a vertical layout for features, with sites along the top. --GreenReaper(talk) 15:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Adjust headers?
I'd suggest adjusting the header of the "Ad" column; most people would consider "no ads" positive, FAIK, so having sites with ads get a green box in that column feels mildly counter-intuitive. --quoting_mungo 16:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)