Your ass can't be Artificially Inseminated you silly noodle.

waywardneutrino said:
Your ass can't be Artificially Inseminated you silly noodle.

Hahaha! That's a good one! 🤣

Nom. This is mine noaw

Hey there, liar. I saw you had a much more interesting description for this post on Fur Affinity, so let me respond here.

- Not only they claim stupidly I draw using AI, also they claim I write with AI.

You very specifically admitted to doing this on 2025-10-27, a minute after I asked. I included a link to a tweet of yours that read as follows:

Your reply when I brought this up: "I couldn't bear with many times some claimed my art was AI made and been ignoring such things to the point I couldn't help myself but feel frustrated by having my own art taken out, my apologies".

- They refuse to answer me what about my art specifically makes them believe my art is AI.

This is completely normal. If we tell a person that we can't accept their art because of suspicious coloring elements, then they'll change the coloring from that point onward. I can't just give you the correct answers.

- They blindly assumed I changed my old username everywhere from XSlimyZardX to CrimSnek because of this.

At no point did we ever accuse you of changing names to avoid AI accusations. In fact, all of your XSlimyZardX work predates AI image generation: it is fundamentally impossible for that persona to have AI art. What's really interesting about the existence of XSlimyZardX, though, is something I'll cover in the next point.

- They assume artstyle or ability doesn't make a difference within around 5 years. (What the hell)

It's the opposite, actually: we know what your art looked like under XSlimyZardX, and it is very interesting that nearly every observable quality of your art has changed since then. This would suggest a fundamental transformation in the workflow, a particularly severe one that isn't explained away by a change in art software.

- They deleted all my artwork without any notification to appeal, my art just vanished and the reason is I was accused of using AI.

The deletion is the notice. Without specific direction from higher staff I am not going to just DMail somebody every time I think there's something shifty. In plenty of cases, artists tracing AI are uploaded by third parties who would not be able to do anything meaningful with such a DMail.

- I appealed and they rejected every proof (even the progress of each one) and asked for recording myself in the process of drawing to prove it. (Which can't be possible due to drawing in my phone, I would have to use another phone to record my own hand drawing in my other phone.

Your proof was rejected because it did not contradict our previous conclusions about your AI-generated workflow: you have a handful of layers for lining, some flat coloring layers, in some cases a transparent overlay including AI-generated coloring, and no sketches whatsoever. The evidence you posted just was not enough to contradict the things I would've accused you of anyway. To quote something I said during the appeal:

- They downloaded copies of my art and their excuse was to use them as "example for good uses" to show examples of AI art frauds and sort of things. (Considering they have no idea it's actually AI or not) Which implications mean they are stealing my artwork and in time telling everyone my art is AI.

The syntax of this sentence is so mangled that I'm not even completely sure what you're accusing us of. Yes, I made a private backup of your galleries so that I wouldn't suddenly lose access to the evidence later.

The phrase "example for good uses" is something you made up, though. At no point did "good use" or "example" come up in your appeal. You would know this for a fact because you still have the ability to read your own appeal.

- Despite very irrelevant since I don't care if they like or dislike my art but they had the nerve to say my art is pretty bad. (I already said many times I just draw what I want, whenever I want and don't care if none likes them, doesn't stop me from keep drawing, but accusing me of using AI truly disacredits my efforts and time spent on them)

I did describe post #5835013, post #5493464, post #5495995, and post #5496001 as "bad" because I thought they were the strongest proof of your art's fraudulent nature. The exact quote from me was: "5 years of difference doesn't suddenly make somebody start lining and shading like they're using the Stable Diffusion dataset. It's actually kind of silly how much more blatant your latest upload is, though the frogg merchant series and the birthday post were already pretty bad on their own."

post #5946630 is essentially just a rawgen with filters and a manual outline on top. It contains basically every quirk that we would normally associate with a Stable Diffusion generation.

- They think the amount of layers I have on my art is ridiculous. (Bruh, depends of the drawing complexity I can reach between 45-80 layers, I like to keep my layers sorted by linearts, colors, shading/light, body parts, objects, etc. Oh, but of course, said janitor wouldn't understand how some art process can be)

No, this never happened. In fact, it's usually a good thing if an artist has several different layers; in previous cases such as Hospitallerinaboat, frauds insist that they only work on one layer, or that they merge and delete layers to save on filesize. In your case, you said you couldn't keep sketches, but you're perfectly fine keeping 45 other layers.

- Their staff manually disabled my ability to upload my art to their site.

Give me a single good reason why I wouldn't do this if I don't trust you or your 30 deleted posts, and you're secretly uploading stuff while your appeal was still ongoing.

As you have shown a willingness to go back on your own word, misrepresent the nature of your appeal, and put words in my mouth, you will receive a more complete writeup on your artist wiki so that people can refer to it later to understand the nature of your fraud.

Ugh, not this again LMAO.
First of all, you insinuated I changed my username due to such topics. Talk about lying lol.

Second: You talk about how suspicious it is of how much my artwork changed during that time, dude, I haven't even uploaded my whole artwork during all my practice, I barely uploaded like, what? 30% of it?

Third: You know that's the problem with no notification upon deleting someone's artwork, you're not 100% certain my artwork is AI assisted or amything, nah, let's just delete this dude's artwork because if I believe is AI assisted, it is AI assisted, is truly retard. It's like accusing you of... an example; hitting dogs and if I say it, it's because it's true and I require no appeal to it lmao.

And lastly, it's not even relevant but... just saying; dude, you deleted artwork I've done way longer before AI art trend was even a thing.

An now you have the nerve to put up a wiki of me, wooooow, that's impressive, maybe I should write a wiki about you, and change every context to make it sound more like a villain, haha just kidding, too bad I wouldn't reach that point anyways no matter the crap you say about me (hence why I censored your username).

To think just kindly sharing my art in E621 was a good idea, but you proved me quite wrong, simply answers me I might not regret commenting about how retarded this situation has become only because of such accusations, oh well, too bad, not like I can do anything anyways rather than just show how shameful E621 staff (not everyone, neither the site) can be, whatever; believe what you can I can't change someone's mind no matter how wrong (or right, depends on your view) is, I was just trying to appeal and defend my art no matter how since this witch-hunting is tremendously stupid.

crimsnek said:
Ugh, not this again LMAO.
First of all, you insinuated I changed my username due to such topics. Talk about lying lol.

"Insinuated" is a lie and you know it. In fact, my position on your previous username has always been that, since XSlimyZardX's art was not AI-assisted, I don't need to mention it by name unless you do. This is why I spoilered your name: I knew you were posting screenshots of the appeal, so I wished to give you the opportunity to keep that alias a secret even in screenshots.

I have been unfailingly honest about my knowledge of your prior art account and the fact that its output is nonsuspicious. The only reason I'm namedropping it now is because you decided to share the name publicly. You are the only one trying to pretend that there's any doubt around it.

I know for a fact you're still in the Discord server and you can still see your own appeal. Yet, you won't quote any of my statements because you know that the truth is not in your favor.

Second: You talk about how suspicious it is of how much my artwork changed during that time, dude, I haven't even uploaded my whole artwork during all my practice, I barely uploaded like, what? 30% of it?

Prove it, then. Provide a series of high-quality sketches and source files that demonstrate, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you actually can make stuff that looks like https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62839064/ and https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62235991/; demonstrate the individual coloring details instead of magically going from two-tone shading to full rendering. Prove that you can make things that coincidentally look like slop.

Third: You know that's the problem with no notification upon deleting someone's artwork, you're not 100% certain my artwork is AI assisted or amything, nah, let's just delete this dude's artwork because if I believe is AI assisted, it is AI assisted, is truly retard. It's like accusing you of... an example; hitting dogs and if I say it, it's because it's true and I require no appeal to it lmao.

I see images exactly like yours from AI-generated sources because there are literal millions of samples available. You're consistently going behind our backs to do weird stuff, and you're going back on verifiable Discord quotes (40 site staff can review the logs to confirm the discussion that took place, along with 4 Discord constables, and you make number #45.)

What conclusions are we supposed to draw except certainty that your behavior is dishonest and your output is suspicious?

And lastly, it's not even relevant but... just saying; dude, you deleted artwork I've done way longer before AI art trend was even a thing.

Nope! Your earliest e621 post is from 2023, after the release of Stable Diffusion in August 2022, but your two earliest Fur Affinity posts are from 2022 (the actual upload date is December 2023, but in this one very specific case I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt since Stable Diffusion wasn't available until later in the year, and furry models would've been very difficult to use for tracing) and 2020. Those posts were never uploaded to e621, and even if they were they would not be within scope for AI-related deletions. This is the reason that some other artists get to have posts up in spite of proven AI usage.

If I was as evil as you seem to think I am, then I would've just deleted this post without a reply. Yet, observe that I am here replying to you and leaving the post untouched. If the scan quality was a little better I might've even approved it.

In fact, you can quote me on this: I consider the entirety of XSlimyZardX's artistic history, up to the last post in July 2018, to be human-made. Whether you can upload those is another story as twice now you have proven yourself unable to be trusted with the ability to upload.

An now you have the nerve to put up a wiki of me, wooooow, that's impressive, maybe I should write a wiki about you, and change every context to make it sound more like a villain, haha just kidding, too bad I wouldn't reach that point anyways no matter the crap you say about me (hence why I censored your username).

You willingly ended your appeal with no further action, so I made a writeup in the interest of transparency. Other artists have similar reports on their own wikis. There is nothing special about this case except how many times you've come back.

To think just kindly sharing my art in E621 was a good idea, but you proved me quite wrong, simply answers me I might not regret commenting about how retarded this situation has become only because of such accusations, oh well, too bad, not like I can do anything anyways rather than just show how shameful E621 staff (not everyone, neither the site) can be, whatever; believe what you can I can't change someone's mind no matter how wrong (or right, depends on your view) is, I was just trying to appeal and defend my art no matter how since this witch-hunting is tremendously stupid.

It's not a witch hunt, you're just constantly coming back to either cheat or lie. The only time I have ever gotten a completely truthful statement from you was the first time we've ever spoken, and it's all been downhill from there. If you want to continue making AI-assisted art, feel free! But we don't want it here, especially not without an honest attempt to provide good evidence.

lafcadio said:

Prove it, then. Provide a series of high-quality sketches and source files that demonstrate, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you actually can make stuff that looks like https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62839064/ and https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62235991/; demonstrate the individual coloring details instead of magically going from two-tone shading to full rendering. Prove that you can make things that coincidentally look like slop.

I see images exactly like yours from AI-generated sources because there are literal millions of samples available. You're consistently going behind our backs to do weird stuff, and you're going back on verifiable Discord quotes (40 site staff can review the logs to confirm the discussion that took place, along with 4 Discord constables, and you make number #45.)

What conclusions are we supposed to draw except certainty that your behavior is dishonest and your output is suspicious?

Nope! Your earliest e621 post is from 2023, after the release of Stable Diffusion in August 2022, but your two earliest Fur Affinity posts are from 2022 (the actual upload date is December 2023, but in this one very specific case I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt since Stable Diffusion wasn't available until later in the year, and furry models would've been very difficult to use for tracing) and 2020. Those posts were never uploaded to e621, and even if they were they would not be within scope for AI-related deletions. This is the reason that some other artists get to have posts up in spite of proven AI usage.

If I was as evil as you seem to think I am, then I would've just deleted this post without a reply. Yet, observe that I am here replying to you and leaving the post untouched. If the scan quality was a little better I might've even approved it.

You willingly ended your appeal with no further action, so I made a writeup in the interest of transparency. Other artists have similar reports on their own wikis. There is nothing special about this case except how many times you've come back.

It's not a witch hunt, you're just constantly coming back to either cheat or lie. The only time I have ever gotten a completely truthful statement from you was the first time we've ever spoken, and it's all been downhill from there. If you want to continue making AI-assisted art, feel free! But we don't want it here, especially not without an honest attempt to provide good evidence.

Prove it? If I remember correctly I already shown part of the process through discord already, specifically this one.
Sketch: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P7wl6sgZ5uqJrRxdE1Aq3Ae6MI9C5Vdk/view?usp=drivesdk
Finished Lineart: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xc0echLelhzRMvjt-Glv-ZJYIuBNvB5s/view?usp=drivesdk
Color: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eh0mJhwCPuX2yNitlMER6hWQRIhMR4fp/view?usp=drivesdk

But correct me if I'm wrong about that, I think I remember you said it proves nothing since any AI can replicate the process, so why even ask me for the process if you're not gonna even believe it anyways 😐

Leaving the post untouched? Well, that's actually the reason why I decided to upload this drawn traditionally, it would have been incredibly ridiculous to claim I used AI to draw traditionally with my own very hands again and delete it without any hesitation too, it would be the only way I could upload something here in E621, not like I had any trouble drawing like that anyways but still....🙄

Like I commented sometimes, at this point; I have no trouble with my art getting deleted at all, but having my username and art displayed with a warning of using AI is what upset me. If it wasn't for the accusation against me and disacredditing my work for supposedly using AI, I would have not rant about it and simply move on like "oh, I guess I can't upload stuff here, too bad :P" but nooo, too bad that wasn't the case. 🤣

crimsnek said:
Prove it? If I remember correctly I already shown part of the process through discord already, specifically this one.
Sketch: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P7wl6sgZ5uqJrRxdE1Aq3Ae6MI9C5Vdk/view?usp=drivesdk
Finished Lineart: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xc0echLelhzRMvjt-Glv-ZJYIuBNvB5s/view?usp=drivesdk
Color: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eh0mJhwCPuX2yNitlMER6hWQRIhMR4fp/view?usp=drivesdk

But correct me if I'm wrong about that, I think I remember you said it proves nothing since any AI can replicate the process, so why even ask me for the process if you're not gonna even believe it anyways 😐

Leaving the post untouched? Well, that's actually the reason why I decided to upload this drawn traditionally, it would have been incredibly ridiculous to claim I used AI to draw traditionally with my own very hands again and delete it without any hesitation too, it would be the only way I could upload something here in E621, not like I had any trouble drawing like that anyways but still....🙄

Like I commented sometimes, at this point; I have no trouble with my art getting deleted at all, but having my username and art displayed with a warning of using AI is what upset me. If it wasn't for the accusation against me and disacredditing my work for supposedly using AI, I would have not rant about it and simply move on like "oh, I guess I can't upload stuff here, too bad :P" but nooo, too bad that wasn't the case. 🤣

Yet again, you cannot help but misrepresent a message that you are perfectly capable of looking up and finding the exact wording for. In fact, the message you are trying to interpret is one I have already quoted in comment #9523668. You are, intentionally or otherwise, warping the events to try and suit a narrative.

AI tracers can falsify a process because they are perfectly capable of going back and tracing art they've already made, and they can give a very selective look at the layer setup. The latter is what you are doing here.

You didn't show off the more suspicious coloring details in https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62235991/, https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62839064/, or https://www.furaffinity.net/view/62949159/ individually because you can't. The only things you can isolate are the traced background, the flat colors, and the eyes, as those are the only parts you actually bothered to paint over.

Even when you did try to show off your four lineart layers and flat colors for "B-Day gift to MuffyDinamo", you missed several spots: there were strands of hair that only existed once you enabled the full coloring. Additionally, when you add the final coloring details, there is suddenly a lot of highly random noise on the walls that were previously perfectly uniform colors.

Your final coloring layer that makes all this possible? It's your AI-generated image of a dragon woman sitting on a bed and holding a slice of birthday cake.

The sketches for these posts never existed. All the more involved coloring details on "B-Day gift to MuffyDinamo" are taken from a generative image, and the same goes for the "A deal"/"Midnight Visit" image pair.

But you are not a stranger to keeping sketches around, as evidenced by sketches being visible in https://www.furaffinity.net/view/54897081/ and https://www.furaffinity.net/view/54896936/, and it only becomes difficult for you when you want to make something that looks like a Stable Diffusion output.

I do not believe there is any point in taking further appeals from you. Have a wretched Christmas.

lafcadio said:
I do not believe there is any point in taking further appeals from you. Have a wretched Christmas.

Like I already said, believe what you want, but...
I appreciate the finality. It’s just a bit curious why you’re still putting in the effort to respond if your mind is already so firmly made up. Why not just delegate the task to another janitor then? I thought there was many others. It would certainly save you the stress and let you actually relax for once. Just a thought. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Anyways; thank you very much for the clarity. I’ll certainly do my best to enjoy the holidays with my loved ones and friends, and I truly hope your Christmas is every bit as pleasant as your disposition and professionalism. 👍