Topic: who was the worst offender in e621 history

strahaspilot said:
I'm not telling people how to do their job or whatever, but I have to imagine there's technical solutions for this that wouldn't be so labor intensive for staff.

If there is one that doesn't have the pitfalls of hardware detection & isn't our pre-existing IP bans, I'd love to hear it. I mean, could make a highly sophisticated system to allow staff to trigger alerts for indicative behaviors in voting, forum/comment/blip/DMail usage, tagging, wiki/description edits, etc., & even an additional system that automatically links the accounts & issues the resulting ban... But I hope you can see why the time put into such a system would take a long time to pay off in increased productivity, & has a colossal opportunity cost we just can't pay right now. I'd like to do it eventually, but that's not happening anytime soon. Besides, it doesn't take all that long to handle; it's just tedious.

I think this ban reason is... interesting:
https://e621.net/bans?search%5Buser_name%5D=Taco69Kitty69

Also this:
https://e621.net/user_feedbacks/97205

Definitely two of the bans of all time.

regsmutt said:
Also this:
https://e621.net/user_feedbacks/97205

Definitely two of the bans of all time.

That guy has been spamming takedowns...

coffeeco said:
That guy has been spamming takedowns...

Worst part to me is that I cannot really tell if this is a dedicated troll pretending to have odd delusions about cartoon dogs, or someone in dire need of medical help.

ruppari said:
Worst part to me is that I cannot really tell if this is a dedicated troll pretending to have odd delusions about cartoon dogs, or someone in dire need of medical help.

Though I've no place to make conclusive judgements, I do fear the latter. That said, I tried to gently guide them towards help, and that was not received well; not much more can be done.

For a little bit of time, I think it was me. However, I think (read aw: oh god I hope, I've been trying very hard to improve) that this is no longer the case.

aacafah said:
Though I've no place to make conclusive judgements, I do fear the latter. That said, I tried to gently guide them towards help, and that was not received well; not much more can be done.

Yikes. That person, assuming they are not trolling, both needs support, and to learn how copyright law works.
Making vaguely different OCs (I assume that's what that was about? Did he make OCs, or just assume he owned the actual characters?) does not transfer IP rights to the creator. That's incredibly basic common sense.

i'm probably not even close to the "worst" but i will concede to being kind of a cunt. i've had this account for so many god damn years and for about half of those i had a horrific lack of any kind of etiquette. this is an informal apology to anyone and everyone i've ever slightly annoyed or perturbed on this website

fuzzy_kobold said:
Yikes. That person, assuming they are not trolling, both needs support, and to learn how copyright law works.
Making vaguely different OCs (I assume that's what that was about? Did he make OCs, or just assume he owned the actual characters?) does not transfer IP rights to the creator. That's incredibly basic common sense.

it sounds like he has two dogs with the same names as the characters from the show, and somehow was convinced that this specific artist's work was a depiction of his real life dogs and not the characters from the show

gemmatale said:
i'm probably not even close to the "worst" but i will concede to being kind of a cunt. i've had this account for so many god damn years and for about half of those i had a horrific lack of any kind of etiquette. this is an informal apology to anyone and everyone i've ever slightly annoyed or perturbed on this website

it sounds like he has two dogs with the same names as the characters from the show, and somehow was convinced that this specific artist's work was a depiction of his real life dogs and not the characters from the show

Even THAT is bizarre. Because then he's claiming art of two fictional characters are instead somehow based on his real life dogs.
By an artist that probably does not know him and has never met him.

Like, how nuts do you have to be to see art obviously of cartoon characters, and well-known cartoon characters at that, and say 'Hmm, yes! This complete stranger CLEARLY drew my RL dogs, but in a way that perfectly matches this cartoon!'

Heck, the first episode of 101 Dalmatian Street came out in March of 2019. So a puppy born around that time would be nearing 7 years old.
So one could bet money that he might have named his dogs after the characters in the show!

Either that, or he just randomly decided that fanart of the show was somehow, by pure chance, actually intentional art of his dogs. By a random artist who has never seen his dogs.

fuzzy_kobold said:
Even THAT is bizarre. Because then he's claiming art of two fictional characters are instead somehow based on his real life dogs.
By an artist that probably does not know him and has never met him.

Like, how nuts do you have to be to see art obviously of cartoon characters, and well-known cartoon characters at that, and say 'Hmm, yes! This complete stranger CLEARLY drew my RL dogs, but in a way that perfectly matches this cartoon!'

Heck, the first episode of 101 Dalmatian Street came out in March of 2019. So a puppy born around that time would be nearing 7 years old.
So one could bet money that he might have named his dogs after the characters in the show!

Either that, or he just randomly decided that fanart of the show was somehow, by pure chance, actually intentional art of his dogs. By a random artist who has never seen his dogs.

I think they might think that the dogs _in_ 101DS are based on their real life dogs, honestly. although if that's the case I don't know why they have an issue with those two pieces of fanart specifically, though...

dba_afish said:
I think they might think that the dogs _in_ 101DS are based on their real life dogs, honestly. although if that's the case I don't know why they have an issue with those two pieces of fanart specifically, though...

So he thinks people from Disney, a multi-billion-dollar company, somehow saw him and his dogs somewhere one day and said 'We shall make them characters in our new cartoon! Without telling the owner! We will steal the likeness of these two random dogs from a random person and not pay royalties, instead of just making up two characters of our own!'?

Still a new flavor of crazy.

fuzzy_kobold said:
So he thinks people from Disney, a multi-billion-dollar company, somehow saw him and his dogs somewhere one day and said 'We shall make them characters in our new cartoon! Without telling the owner! We will steal the likeness of these two random dogs from a random person and not pay royalties, instead of just making up two characters of our own!'?

Still a new flavor of crazy.

the honest truth is that some people are nuts and there's nothing you can do about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

A dishonorable mention to Nin10dope, recently banned for the way they use language in forums. Only other heccer on this site who uploaded the stuff I upload, alone now. Apparently they also requested their character be removed from e6 so now their account is also faceless.

while i'm in this thread i'd figure i'd ask a question i've had for a while since it's relevant.

i see a lot of accounts get banned for being under 18, and while that's perfectly reasonable, i'm curious how the staff figures out that a user is underage. not that i'm encouraging it, but it seems it would be as easy as not telling anyone how old you are, and while there are a few stragglers that comment "i'm 13 lol" and then get banned, most of them don't have any glaring signs of being a minor.

staff or former staff, would you be willing to shed some light on how you figure out a user is a minor? i don't need specific case details but just a general "usually blah blah happens", i'm quite curious

gemmatale said:
while i'm in this thread i'd figure i'd ask a question i've had for a while since it's relevant.

i see a lot of accounts get banned for being under 18, and while that's perfectly reasonable, i'm curious how the staff figures out that a user is underage. not that i'm encouraging it, but it seems it would be as easy as not telling anyone how old you are, and while there are a few stragglers that comment "i'm 13 lol" and then get banned, most of them don't have any glaring signs of being a minor.

staff or former staff, would you be willing to shed some light on how you figure out a user is a minor? i don't need specific case details but just a general "usually blah blah happens", i'm quite curious

I'm guessing it's a mix of:
1) real age stated on another site under the same unique username
2) user stupidly mentions their age in a comment (I'm pretty sure Mods hide the comment in these cases)
3) age mentioned in a DM that gets reported
4) Mods making assumptions about immature and problematic users that they were going to ban anyways

peskeon said:
A dishonorable mention to Nin10dope, recently banned for the way they use language in forums. Only other heccer on this site who uploaded the stuff I upload, alone now. Apparently they also requested their character be removed from e6 so now their account is also faceless.

Somehow I'm in the same situation as you. XD

crocogator said:
I'm guessing it's a mix of:
1) real age stated on another site under the same unique username
2) user stupidly mentions their age in a comment (I'm pretty sure Mods hide the comment in these cases)
3) age mentioned in a DM that gets reported
4) Mods making assumptions about immature and problematic users that they were going to ban anyways

I've seen a lot of underage bans as well. On top of so many getting hit with a ban invasion

colinthelucario said:
I've seen a lot of underage bans as well. On top of so many getting hit with a ban invasion

I feel kinda bad for the people who have a short ban or something that could conceivably be appealed and then they blow it by ban evading.

colinthelucario said:
I've seen a lot of underage bans as well. On top of so many getting hit with a ban invasion

Those could be related too: ban-evaders who are underage.

Also, I'm seeing a lot of "banned at discretion of staff" nowadays, which feels like "they broke unwritten rules that we don't want to say" (or, at least, the Mods don't want to state the gray areas of enforcing inappropriate comments and extreme/illegal activities). I'm not the biggest fan of that being a super common ban reason nowadays.

crocogator said:
Those could be related too: ban-evaders who are underage.

Also, I'm seeing a lot of "banned at discretion of staff" nowadays, which feels like "they broke unwritten rules that we don't want to say" (or, at least, the Mods don't want to state the gray areas of enforcing inappropriate comments and extreme/illegal activities). I'm not the biggest fan of that being a super common ban reason nowadays.

That reason is only used when giving the reason would do more harm than good, it's typically reserved for the worst of the worst, usually either borderline illegal or outright illegal
It isn't going to be used for anything related to inappropriate comments
I'm obviously not going to give examples and explain the actual reason behind them, but safe to say that none of the discretion bans I saw were for mundane behavior, and really they usually aren't for behavior on the site at all

donovan_dmc said:
That reason is only used when giving the reason would do more harm than good, it's typically reserved for the worst of the worst, usually either borderline illegal or outright illegal
It isn't going to be used for anything related to inappropriate comments
I'm obviously not going to give examples and explain the actual reason behind them, but safe to say that none of the discretion bans I saw were for mundane behavior, and really they usually aren't for behavior on the site at all

Thanks for the clarification!

regsmutt said:
I feel kinda bad for the people who have a short ban or something that could conceivably be appealed and then they blow it by ban evading.

People who couldn't sit in time out for a week or something, they just make another account.

There was someone who was banned over several DNP violations, but they keep coming back with new accounts to pull the same stunt

donovan_dmc said:
Not really? Ip bans only go so far, and hardware bans are either not possible or get into creepy levels of data collection

Yeah IP Bans are unreliable at best.
Ahem, or so I've heard...

snpthecat said:
As for my favourite nominee for the title, I would propose @divineweevil. Permabanned twice and they're still standing. e621's equivalent of herobrine

I GOTTA know how they're doing that.

gemmatale said:
while i'm in this thread i'd figure i'd ask a question i've had for a while since it's relevant.

i see a lot of accounts get banned for being under 18, and while that's perfectly reasonable, i'm curious how the staff figures out that a user is underage. not that i'm encouraging it, but it seems it would be as easy as not telling anyone how old you are, and while there are a few stragglers that comment "i'm 13 lol" and then get banned, most of them don't have any glaring signs of being a minor.

staff or former staff, would you be willing to shed some light on how you figure out a user is a minor? i don't need specific case details but just a general "usually blah blah happens", i'm quite curious

I also still what to know this process, if anyone is willing to elucidate?
In fact, I want to know it intimately. Something about it seems...fishy.

crocogator said:

Also, I'm seeing a lot of "banned at discretion of staff" nowadays, which feels like "they broke unwritten rules that we don't want to say" (or, at least, the Mods don't want to state the gray areas of enforcing inappropriate comments and extreme/illegal activities). I'm not the biggest fan of that being a super common ban reason nowadays.

I actually have a bit of insight into this - but I won't share due to the reasons Donovan mentioned before. I can however assure you that they're for good reason. I've seen it myself.

As for its commonality, we can theorize all day - but that's probably best saved for its own thread.

paradox_enjoyer said:
I actually have a bit of insight into this - but I won't share due to the reasons Donovan mentioned before. I can however assure you that they're for good reason. I've seen it myself.

As for its commonality, we can theorize all day - but that's probably best saved for its own thread.

Fair enough. The recent "thing that the Mods don't want us discussing further" shines some light on it. I still have some questions in the back of my head, but... it's now clear a lot of those bans HAD to have their reasons redacted.

gemmatale said:
while i'm in this thread i'd figure i'd ask a question i've had for a while since it's relevant.

i see a lot of accounts get banned for being under 18, and while that's perfectly reasonable, i'm curious how the staff figures out that a user is underage. not that i'm encouraging it, but it seems it would be as easy as not telling anyone how old you are, and while there are a few stragglers that comment "i'm 13 lol" and then get banned, most of them don't have any glaring signs of being a minor.

staff or former staff, would you be willing to shed some light on how you figure out a user is a minor? i don't need specific case details but just a general "usually blah blah happens", i'm quite curious

paradox_enjoyer said:
I also still what to know this process, if anyone is willing to elucidate?
In fact, I want to know it intimately. Something about it seems...fishy.

You would be astonished about how upfront and open teens can be. Sometimes, I think they're even proud of being "mature" teens on an adult-oriented website.

I'm no Mod, so obviously I'm not going to leak any details. In this case, I'm talking from what I've observed rather than talking for the staff.

clawstripe said:
You would be astonished about how upfront and open teens can be. Sometimes, I think they're even proud of being "mature" teens on an adult-oriented website.

I'm no Mod, so obviously I'm not going to leak any details. In this case, I'm talking from what I've observed rather than talking for the staff.

I'd be less surprised than you think. No doubt this accounts for some.

What you might be surprised by is how clever and secretive some teens can be. Not just on this site, mind, but in general - if they really want something, they're going to get it, at least for a little while. I've seen people be banned for being under 18 with no indication that they were supposedly so - I suppose I just worry about methodology. Are our mods actively and randomly searching for similar profiles on other sites? That's kind of creepy, if effective.

paradox_enjoyer said:
What you might be surprised by is how clever and secretive some teens can be. Not just on this site, mind, but in general - if they really want something, they're going to get it, at least for a little while.

Would you believe that I'm not surprised? I was a teen once myself, after all. I interacted with other teens, even after I became an adult. I haven't forgotten what it's like to be one.

I've seen people be banned for being under 18 with no indication that they were supposedly so - I suppose I just worry about methodology. Are our mods actively and randomly searching for similar profiles on other sites? That's kind of creepy, if effective.

That makes the Mods sound more sinister than they actually are.

clawstripe said:
Would you believe that I'm not surprised? I was a teen once myself, after all. I interacted with other teens, even after I became an adult. I haven't forgotten what it's like to be one.

A lot of people forget. We're just teens that grew up - and none of us are stupid, are we?

That makes the Mods sound more sinister than they actually are.

It sounds creepy because it is - which is why I'd love to know more about the process. I'd like to be assured they aren't doing that - and if they are, well. Not a good look, is it? Until I have confirmation, though, I won't be pointing fingers, just sharing thoughts.

paradox_enjoyer said:
and none of us are stupid, are we?

Idk, I'm pretty stupid

lust_demon_laz said:
Idk, I'm pretty stupid

Me too.

paradox_enjoyer said:
A lot of people forget. We're just teens that grew up - and none of us are stupid, are we?

It sounds creepy because it is - which is why I'd love to know more about the process. I'd like to be assured they aren't doing that - and if they are, well. Not a good look, is it? Until I have confirmation, though, I won't be pointing fingers, just sharing thoughts.

I would assume users anonymously reported them. I've seen underage bans usually from their username or what they've posted in their 'about me'

colinthelucario said:
I would assume users anonymously reported them. I've seen underage bans usually from their username or what they've posted in their 'about me'

Aye, that could do it.

I see so many banned alternates of SN214549. They keep coming back with new accounts when they were originally banned for so many DNP violations

paradox_enjoyer said:
Aye, that could do it.

You would be surprised how many times I had to report someone because I saw them posting their roblox fanart here that looked like it was drawn by a max 16 year old, and then I either did one google search or clicked one link they posted on their e6 profile, and first thing I see is their social media bio where they openly state that their age is several years in the wrong side of 18 to be posting on e6. (I actually don't know if it has happened that many times, but it has happened too many times).

But the point is that significant amount of them are not really hiding their tracks at all (some probably do not even realize that the age limit is actually enforced here rather than being just a "yes I'm totes 18" tick box), so often catching the kids trying to sneak in is not that difficult.

ruppari said:
You would be surprised how many times I had to report someone because I saw them posting their roblox fanart here that looked like it was drawn by a max 16 year old, and then I either did one google search or clicked one link they posted on their e6 profile, and first thing I see is their social media bio where they openly state that their age is several years in the wrong side of 18 to be posting on e6. (I actually don't know if it has happened that many times, but it has happened too many times).

But the point is that significant amount of them are not really hiding their tracks at all (some probably do not even realize that the age limit is actually enforced here rather than being just a "yes I'm totes 18" tick box), so often catching the kids trying to sneak in is not that difficult.

The kids that make it here and survive to 18 either didn't do enough to attract attention to themselves, so no investigation into them happens (I fall into this category), or they're actually good enough at hiding it so there's no suspicion

paradox_enjoyer said:
Are our mods actively and randomly searching for similar profiles on other sites? That's kind of creepy, if effective.

paradox_enjoyer said:
It sounds creepy because it is - which is why I'd love to know more about the process. I'd like to be assured they aren't doing that - and if they are, well. Not a good look, is it? Until I have confirmation, though, I won't be pointing fingers, just sharing thoughts.

The staff team is not actively cyberstalking the site's users, no, socials are only looked at to prove or disprove suspicion, and in general even light suspicion in some areas can be enough for an underage ban, so cyberstalking really isn't even needed
I know of all of the underage bans I did, the majority did not involve seeking out social media sites
The only time I'd look at social medias is if they were linked in the profile and I didn't already have a strong suspicion, or if it was linked in a ticket

...I kind of wonder where LePepper is now? I mean, it's been 12-ish years, right?

Like, do you think they are still LARPING as some Digimon Military, out to 'protect' fictional critters?
Or do you think they look back on what they did here and experience massive cringe?

I did a Feedback search for every time 'LePepper' is mentioned in the ban reason, and there's 3 pages of alts. And that's not counting any where the name was spelled differently, either to be silly or because of typos.

Wild.

fuzzy_kobold said:
...I kind of wonder where LePepper is now? I mean, it's been 12-ish years, right?

Like, do you think they are still LARPING as some Digimon Military, out to 'protect' fictional critters?
Or do you think they look back on what they did here and experience massive cringe?

I did a Feedback search for every time 'LePepper' is mentioned in the ban reason, and there's 3 pages of alts. And that's not counting any where the name was spelled differently, either to be silly or because of typos.

Wild.

Hopefully LePepper can look back and massively cringe now ^{(even if it was hilarious at times)}... Or he's still stuck in the Digital war and his army is still trying to protect Guilmon and other digimon, who knows...

Hector is now banned due to getting in trouble for repeated bad tagging (failure to mark posts as Explicit) on another account like a decade ago, then ban evading rather than appealing the ban, so we're probably never going to see LePepper or Hector again. Hector got someone else to post his art here on his behalf.

donovan_dmc said:
The kids that make it here and survive to 18 either didn't do enough to attract attention to themselves, so no investigation into them happens (I fall into this category), or they're actually good enough at hiding it so there's no suspicion

I am guilty of this as well, though I did the exact opposite of all that because I was a complete idiot with issues and a severely undercooked frontal lobe to put it lightly. I made it to legal age without getting booted off the site likely only because the moderation was a bit... different back then.

Which is probably exactly why it's easier for me to spot teens walking down the same path now that I think of it.

I am my own worst offender, if that counts. Back with all the comments I made on this site, incessant whining, hell, I still cringe when I came across a comment I made on an old account with the username I went by.

I have since matured.

in my opinion it was Cane751, dude had a transphobic meltdown and got the boot because of that

donovan_dmc said:
The staff team is not actively cyberstalking the site's users [...]

Thank you for the statement on the matter, this eases my tensions somewhat.

Just saw a guy that made me think of this. So many records:

https://e621.net/users/365097

paradox_enjoyer said:
Just saw a guy that made me think of this. So many records:

https://e621.net/users/365097

Wow. Though I'm one to throw stones; I have four. x.x

I've browsed older records, because seeing people say silly things help me keep my equilibrium; I don't want to ultimately end up like that. And I miss when users could actually see the linked comments.

I get why the comments are hidden; It cuts down on returning/later drama, and it keeps trolls from thinking 'I will be immortalized for saying this'. But reading them is amusing. c.c

coffeeco said:
That guy has been spamming takedowns...

Look who reappeared yesterday! The dude is STILL going at it!
https://e621.net/users/2582780
The mods have my sympathy; I assume he's still ranting, and we users just can't see it.

Edit: Forgot the link. c.c

fuzzy_kobold said:
Look who reappeared yesterday! The dude is STILL going at it!
https://e621.net/users/2582780
The mods have my sympathy; I assume he's still ranting, and we users just can't see it.

Good lort that guy is insane

paradox_enjoyer said:
Good lort that guy is insane

That's not the scariest part, sir.
https://e621.net/takedowns/29075

coffeeco said:
That's not the scariest part, sir.
https://e621.net/takedowns/29075

post #6234993

[Insert Benny's "What in the Goddamn"]

coffeeco said:
That's not the scariest part, sir.
https://e621.net/takedowns/29075

ay carumba

coffeeco said:
That's not the scariest part, sir.
https://e621.net/takedowns/29075

Oh my god. He claims he 'settled the matter with Disney and they said they were sorry'.
Oh yes, the billion dollar company TOTALLY took the call of one rando person claiming their IP was based off of his dogs, ADMITTED that their characters were based off of his dogs, and apologized. Totally.

If that were the case, that dude would be sitting on one HELL of a payday from Disney for using his dogs without his permission or being paid, and have 'I don't care' amounts of money headed his way.

fuzzy_kobold said:
[A lot of stuff]

I think he may have genuinely lost his fucking mind.
Or he's a really committed troll.

paradox_enjoyer said:
I think he may have genuinely lost his fucking mind.
Or he's a really committed troll.

He has made another account and was properly banned again

colinthelucario said:
He has made another account and was properly banned again

In the time it too to get from Fuzzy's post to now???
Holy fucking shit.

snpthecat said:
As for my favourite nominee for the title, I would propose @divineweevil. Permabanned twice and they're still standing. e621's equivalent of herobrine

I still want to know how tf this happens.

paradox_enjoyer said:
I still want to know how tf this happens.

They seem to have made post changes after the first ban.
My guess is that they got unbanned once, but mods forgot to remove the record. (Or kept it intentionally so they could check the past record?) Then they got banned again.

paradox_enjoyer said:
In the time it too to get from Fuzzy's post to now???
Holy fucking shit.

Oh I just realized that you already posted what I was talking about. I know he was banned last month for this BS.

Btw, yes I like lurching on the 'ban' list on this site because I like seeing how unhinged some users get

They are up to 3 confirmed accounts; apparently they didn't listen when I told them they didn't need to ban-evade to spam their unhinged takedowns.

I never read the takedown he made until now. Holy fuck....

Makes me wonder who had (or has...) the most ban-evading alts.

...oh, btw, just in case it needs to be said; although those emails in the takedowns seem to be burner accounts, if I find out anyone used them to harass this guy, I'll personally punt you from the site. Just because they're an inconsiderate ban-evader who's spamming the site & harassing this artist doesn't mean turnabout is fair play.

Not that I think I need to worry about that, but I'd rather make it clear now than have to crack some skulls later.

aacafah said:
[blah blah blah mod stuff]

Would never think about endorsing such a thing. You don't need to bare your metaphorical teeth. Then again, as much as it pains me, I can only speak for myself. Internet is full of idiots.

Edit; I was going to inquire how you'd pinpoint such a thing. Seems difficult to me - then i remembered if someone is stupid enough to do that then they probably are stupid enough to not use their own burner email.

Still, how would you find out? I doubt they'd care to complain about harassment when they're already insane enough to be doing their current (and presumably future) activities.

fuzzy_kobold said:
Oh my god. He claims he 'settled the matter with Disney and they said they were sorry'.
Oh yes, the billion dollar company TOTALLY took the call of one rando person claiming their IP was based off of his dogs, ADMITTED that their characters were based off of his dogs, and apologized. Totally.

Idk, I can definitely see someone like that getting a canned "We're sorry you feel that way" response from Disney. They likely have experience with dealing with crazies like this.

regsmutt said:
Idk, I can definitely see someone like that getting a canned "We're sorry you feel that way" response from Disney. They likely have experience with dealing with crazies like this.

I mean, I assumed they got a generic 'Thank you for being a fan' auto-reply and then lied their their teeth.

But maybe they did get a generic 'We are sorry you feel that way' or 'We are sorry, but we can't speak on this matter' and twisted it all out of context to tell themselves that they 'won' against Disney. Because that narrative would validate their claim (to themselves) that they somehow own Dylan and Dolly from 101 Dalmatian Street, and thus give them more reason to keep going after e621.

His narrative becomes 'Disney sided with me, so the mods will HAVE to do as I demand!'
Which is the point of him saying that, regardless if he is lying or twisted a canned reply out of context. But your idea does match up with their view on 101DS fanart from 6 years prior to them joining somehow being art about their dogs.

Fun fact I noticed while I was idly browsing the drama anew:
Mr. Dylan/Dolly joined e621 to complain about two specific images of Dylan and Dolly.
The Dylan image in question was posted on 12/11/2019.
Mr. Dylan/Dolly joined on....12/11/2025.
Literally 6 years to the day since one of the images he was complaining about was posted here on e621.

Completely random coincidence, but hilarious in hindsight!

fuzzy_kobold said:

Fun fact I noticed while I was idly browsing the drama anew:
Mr. Dylan/Dolly joined e621 to complain about two specific images of Dylan and Dolly.
The Dylan image in question was posted on 12/11/2019.
Mr. Dylan/Dolly joined on....12/11/2025.
Literally 6 years to the day since one of the images he was complaining about was posted here on e621.

Completely random coincidence, but hilarious in hindsight!

So while this guy's complaint is obviously not legitimate, I don't think the delay really means anything. People file takedowns after being up on here for years all the time. As far as we know this fool could've been chasing reuploads of these images on pinterest for years before finding them here.

regsmutt said:
So while this guy's complaint is obviously not legitimate, I don't think the delay really means anything. People file takedowns after being up on here for years all the time. As far as we know this fool could've been chasing reuploads of these images on pinterest for years before finding them here.

Oh, I was not implying that it meant anything. I just think it's a hilarious coincidence that he signed up on the 6 year anniversary of one of the images he hates being uploaded.

fuzzy_kobold said:
Oh, I was not implying that it meant anything. I just think it's a hilarious coincidence that he signed up on the 6 year anniversary of one of the images he hates being uploaded.

I think this individual is the most unhinged user I've seen yet

colinthelucario said:
I think this individual is the most unhinged user I've seen yet

I'm inclined to agree, which is really saying something, because I've seen a lot of unused images.

Question for the mods just out of curiosity, I have an alt account here, I don't really use it, I just have it for a joke, but if I got temporarily banned in my main account (this one), would using the alt account be of any trouble? Not that I intend to lmao, just was reading the comments about bans and this question came to mind

dirtkat said:
Question for the mods just out of curiosity, I have an alt account here, I don't really use it, I just have it for a joke, but if I got temporarily banned in my main account (this one), would using the alt account be of any trouble? Not that I intend to lmao, just was reading the comments about bans and this question came to mind

Yeah. Having multiple accounts is fine, but if you use one while the other is temp banned, both accounts will get permabanned.

crocogator said:
Yeah. Having multiple accounts is fine, but if you use one while the other is temp banned, both accounts will get permabanned.

I actually have a really, really old account here that I lost access to, way back when. Wonder what I can do about that?

Edit: Ok not that old. But it's been some years.

Lol even though I know with 98% percent certainty I have never made an account other than this one, there's still that nagging thought of "oh fuck, what if I actually do have one and I'll end up doing something worthy of a ban and get permabanned because of that!"... It's like how you can vividly remember locking the front door after you leave but can't stop thinking "what if I actually didn't though"

weakling said:
Lol even though I know with 98% percent certainty I have never made an account other than this one, there's still that nagging thought of "oh fuck, what if I actually do have one and I'll end up doing something worthy of a ban and get permabanned because of that!"... It's like how you can vividly remember locking the front door after you leave but can't stop thinking "what if I actually didn't though"

Stoop 😭 that's me all the time but with the workplace's door

coffeeco said:
That's not the scariest part, sir.
https://e621.net/takedowns/29075

So based on this and another takedown request, he claims those two artworks in particular belong to him and were stolen by the artist, and they feature his real dogs that he named after the Disney characters. He also takes issue with the art being a bit suggestive, so why would the art belong to him in the first place? I'm trying to make sense of these ramblings. Maybe he commissioned the art and didn't like what the artist drew, and thinks he has copyright ownership of the commissioned pieces.
I'm really curious to see the proof he claims to have and explanations, has anyone contacted this guy?

iseekstowin said:
So based on this and another takedown request, he claims those two artworks in particular belong to him and were stolen by the artist, and they feature his real dogs that he named after the Disney characters. He also takes issue with the art being a bit suggestive, so why would the art belong to him in the first place? I'm trying to make sense of these ramblings. Maybe he commissioned the art and didn't like what the artist drew, and thinks he has copyright ownership of the commissioned pieces.
I'm really curious to see the proof he claims to have and explanations, has anyone contacted this guy?

I'd hope not.

aacafah said:
...oh, btw, just in case it needs to be said; although those emails in the takedowns seem to be burner accounts, if I find out anyone used them to harass this guy, I'll personally punt you from the site. Just because they're an inconsiderate ban-evader who's spamming the site & harassing this artist doesn't mean turnabout is fair play.

Not that I think I need to worry about that, but I'd rather make it clear now than have to crack some skulls later.

...although a simple & respectful message would be fine. Still, let's not poke the bear.

It's not like it really matters anyways. We do accept takedowns on request of the character owner, but that's not a legal requirement, that's just our decision to have a permissive policy, so them threatening that we'll get smacked by legal really doesn't mean much.