This is a response to BBS remarks about voting behavior. I'll likeky delete or replace it later, after further thought.

I don't care if people score low because they're pickier at what they bother to look at than other people are or if someone regularly scores low. (That's me, anyhow.)

The random weirdo voting a zero or one because there aren't naked boobs isn't really problem. (Not me.)

Nor do I have any reason to think there's a conspiracy on this site (and I have to regularly to deal with one elsewhere because the conspirators interfere with essential services).

My point is I've observed push-and-pull activity on Newgrounds between likely-standalone members. I'm unaware of an organized group or moderators that are deliberately hostile like movements are elsewhere.

What happens is some members seek out works to downvote, and they seem to give the lowest scores to the highest-quality pieces. Others seek the same works to upvote. Where we ignore the attacks, the votes are lower, and this has resulted in a decrease in gay art on the site. Whenever I point this out, scores go higher.

I spend too much time here to watch this....

As for terminology— giving a zero because the art is gay and not because of actual quality, is homophobic when viewing homosexual or homoromatic art is literally scaring the voter. Because phobic means being unrationally scared.

I guess I am quick to assume that's what happening from having to deal with homophobia almost every fucking day. It's the easiest explanation.

What I didn't previously consider is that many Newgrounders prefer generic and low-effort art because of how it feels. That's fine, ultimately; a ten-minute doodle of imagined genitals in stereotypical colors to get the audience worked up is art, too. A big-balled bird that looks like Bible marginalia was moved to MS Paint is entertaining.

Choosing a zero or one to something that might have taken 20 hours to paint or that was meant for someone other than who's voting only because it didn't raise some flesh is surprising because there's enough talk about art quality and artist effort here to make those seem favored. And this isn't actually a porn site. The Mature and Adult rating are applied to several that that aren't sexy. Erotica, unable to hit everyone's buttons, is often created for more purposes than to erouse. I don't know about anyone else, but I can get off on crummy images and then be intellectually distracted by the artistry in sex scenes. If ratings were based only the ability to arouse— that explains quite a bit about this site that's contradictory.