Additionally, I had assumed from previous comments that the Art Auction was going to be censored or have Adult Art segregated this year because of complaints raised last year, and I am entirely surprised at this announcement that Adult Art may be presented un-censored in the middle of a general attendance event.
As lev has already pointed out, the convention is not general attendance, it is over 18s only, however, as I've already pointed out, we are planning to censor it this year. The reason I won't guarantee it is that sometimes things go wrong. Last year, for instance, we were relying on somebody else's MacBook as the one we normally used had broken. This meant we weren't able to set things up until after the art show had closed and because of that ran out of time and couldn't censor it. It was never the plan to have it in uncensored. We should have warned people at the start of the auction but as were already late starting we forgot to announce it (posters would have been no good as the audience were already in their seats), it was a mistake but also a lesson learned. This year we've taken steps to overcome it by creating an auction database that doesn't rely on a mac being available to work and we also have more staff in the art show, which is why
I don't envisage it being a problem.I have never said that the art that's taken to bidders so they can look closer would be censored. You will be able to see this coming and if you don't want to see it you can look away.
If the person presenting it for the auction can't censor it in time for the auction, it should not go in the auction. It's that simple and how pretty much every other fandom convention does it.
The person who presents it isn't the person who censors it, we are. We take a photo and load it into a database and then censor it. The art is always uncensored in the Art Show, though segregated in to a separate area. It would be very unfair of us, and would probably elicit more complaints, if we were to bar art from the auction because we were having problems on our end.
It is alarming that the 'holistic' view is the only (or, even more amusingly) best way to raise money for charity is to peddle pornography to furries. Does the charity know this?
It strikes me as holding the diverse community in rather low regard. I have been to events with nary a nadger in sight..
I could probably have contextualised the idea of mixing the art up better. The idea is not that mixing pornography in will keep people in the room, rather that mixing the more popular art work in as we do keeps people longer, whereas if we segregated then the more popular stuff by better known artists would get sold and a large proportion of the audience would leave (something we have witnessed happening). The idea is both that we make more money for charity by retaining a larger audience, but also expose people to art (including general interest) by less well known artists that they may not have seen or heard of before.
Just to reiterate, though,
the plan is to censor the art that is displayed on the screen, as long as there are no unforeseen circumstances which prevent us from doing so.