Fandom/Kins Rules Update Feedback Box

Like the sheep I am. I’ll agree (+ 1) with Jayden and the majority to banning carbon copies, but keeping designs that are respectful. 

And disagree on the filter (-1) because, as lilywise stated, you can already block characters. 

At the end of the day, these are just designs, and I think we all got a bit hasty and overinvested in having our opinions heard. The harm is mostly with the literally species swap concepts, being sold and traded. Creating a dog with Shoto’s hair, like I said before, should be completely fine. We all take inspiration from the world around us. 

It’s when inspiration becomes blatant copying where the issue lies. 

-1 for a filter to just filter out all fandom characters; I think having a fandom credit for ip credentials (for legal reasons) is still a good idea though.

If I may make a suggestion whatever happens instead of an out right ban on a character, if rules are altered and characters then fall into the not appropriate for TH category new characters added after said change get banned but old characters are instead set to invsiible and are unable to be unset. Some characters have so much art it will take hours to move and credit everything, so by invisibleing grandfathered no longer comparable with TH rules characters it lets the owner move them at their own pace and time but keeps the community from being able to see them.

Also with the copyright thing and bringing up “you wouldn’t like someone taking your OC and changing the species” first some companies encourage fan art and people taking their own takes on their work. The difference though is if I made a fan character of Harry Potter as a dog most people would be able to point and say hey you got your idea from Jk Rowling or Warner Brothers, while say someone took my sona and turned her into a cat, people won’t point and say hey you got that idea from lunamoth19. Bigger names recognize people can spot characters based on their work and will attribute the idea behind the character to the original source while we regular people don’t experience that. I’m not saying make a dog who is exactly Harry Potter (sorry I don’t know a lot of Anime that’s the main example people are using). I’m just trying to say that some big names would be ok if you have a dog with glasses and a wand that goes to say the American school of which craft and had a great family life, while say take my sona turn it into a cat and make her a secret agent is not ok and the reasoning behind it. (And now that I’ve used Harry Potter so often I want to say that none of my magic characters are Fan Characters. Nothing against fan characters. I just love the fantasy genre)

One more thought. Firstly I still support species from fandoms being ok to have as characters, I.E. Pokémon, the recently invented creatures in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, dragon breeds from HTTYD. With this stated I want to point something out about gijinkas. So far in the examples stated a gijinkas generally seem to be Pokémon (a species and not specific characater) turned into a human. This keeps getting compared to Specific canon character as animal in every way shape and form including design, name, description, and back story. These arnt parallels, I know some people dislike this comparison because they don’t parallel each other. The inverse of a Pokémon as Gijinkas would be if I made a animal who attended Hogwarts but is not based on any particular canon character. So I feel what is trying to be said is that a fan character should not be identical in design, background, personality, name, and the like to a specific canon character no mater what form (feral, human, anthro, mythical) it may take. I just felt this seemed to need clarifying.

Seems kind of stupid to not allow fanart or existing character, but allow derivatives of them. 

I may not be very active on TH, and often mind my own business, but even I am tired of seeing the same things pass through.

+ 1 Banning canon characters. Canon ferals. Cosplaying characters. Etc. No “respectful representations”, just ban or hide them all. 

- 1 on the rest. 

ok, i took a break to go play games - feedback appreciated tho. didn't consider the possibility of a filter being used to harass others, so i do appreciate that being brought up.
still at a bit of a standstill with what to do with canon-inspired characters it looks like. like the idea of setting currently existing characters if they dont match the updated rules to private permanently, buuut... that would also create a huge workload for the admins.
this whole process just sounds exhausting. i'm exhausted.

it's beginning to sound like our best bet at this point is just to ban what everyone's agreed on banning and then just... continue to ignore everyone else with "inspired" ocs.
as long as this is clearly written with guidelines to what is and is not accepted i think that will help with future reports.

so unless anyone has any other ideas, i think we've pretty much hashed it out at this point.

-1 on filter.

i'll tack on another thing, though.
gijinkas should be allowed. there's a difference between "I humanized a Magearna and gave it a unique personality as well as backstory!" and "I made All Might into a dog and he still acts like All Might, and has the same backstory as All Might!"

Inspired OCs should be okay? As long as they're not straight up the design from a character and act like that character. Inspired aspects are completely fine!!! (i.e Todoroki's two tone hair, or anything among those lines.)

The last few pages have been fine. So far, anyway. 

Per request from some users for a private feedback channel, I've popped up a Google form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeaQVmEpF1r8vAqEoHomYa7u_2cMcpoXWKBfhVDjpPWaNQwJg/viewform

We'll be looking at the thread and the form responses together so don't feel obligated to fill it out if you've already posted in thread (unless you want to!). Thanks again to everyone for your patience and your contributions.