• An addendum to Rule 3 regarding fan-translated works of things such as Web Novels has been made. Please see here for details.
  • We've issued a clarification on our policy on AI-generated work.
  • Our mod selection process has completed. Please welcome our new moderators.
  • Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com. Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
  • For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
  • Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
  • Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.
  • The rules regarding NSFW links have been updated. See here for details.

Search results for query: *

  1. flyingfrogs

    Concerning Numbers of Guests

    You would think but I have no joke seen sites with a tenth of QQ's userbase get as many or more AI scrapers. They really are just that aggressive. Sorry, missed the "not"
  2. flyingfrogs

    Concerning Numbers of Guests

    Tens of thousands of bots at any given time is the norm right now for any website on the planet. Smaller sites I use (think two- to three-digit userbases) have had to put Anubis up just to stay functional. But if Questionable Questing's servers can take it, then it's fine, I guess.
  3. flyingfrogs

    Regarding Rules 3/7, and turncoat authors who burned their work

    Dissimilate: No offense intended, but are you a lawyer? If you aren't, this is unlikely to be at all helpful.
  4. flyingfrogs

    Regarding Rules 3/7, and turncoat authors who burned their work

    I think saying in public how someone can find a deleted fic is questionable for the same reasons as reposting or directly linking it -- it eliminates the break between the author and fic that, for whatever personal or professional reason, they chose to make.
  5. flyingfrogs

    Regarding Rules 3/7, and turncoat authors who burned their work

    If there's a fic you really like and never want to lose, just download it and back it up. Presto, you have a permanent personal archive. I get that this would be annoying to do for every fic you like (although moving away from QQ, you should note that AO3 has a two-click download button that...
  6. flyingfrogs

    Regarding Rules 3/7, and turncoat authors who burned their work

    I'm not accusing you of failing to live up to your own standard; I just think your standard (a) would be found unreasonable by prospective writers and therefore abort more art than it saved, and (b) would lead to actual harm to actual people, which I care about more than being able to look at...
  7. flyingfrogs

    Regarding Rules 3/7, and turncoat authors who burned their work

    It sucks when authors delete their stuff and I wish they'd only do it when absolutely necessary, but I don't think it would be reasonable to forcibly prevent them. Some deleters might be worried about their smut being connected to other parts of their lives; is it really decent to facilitate...
  8. flyingfrogs

    —

    —
Back
Top