Not knowing him isn't a major con, just weird. But it depends what circles people move in.
As for the definition, definition 1 is the standard definition of furry which is a bad definition. The furry fandom is not just about anthropomorphism. In fact a large part is about zoomorphism, attributing animal traits to humans. Creating a fursona is not anthropomorphism; it is taking animal attributes and applying them to a person. I pointed this out years ago that a proper definition for furry must take into account that it is a combination of human and animal traits. Definition 3 has that so I don't know why they wouldn't have taken it further.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
Not knowing him isn't a major con, just weird. But it depends what circles people move in.
As for the definition, definition 1 is the standard definition of furry which is a bad definition. The furry fandom is not just about anthropomorphism. In fact a large part is about zoomorphism, attributing animal traits to humans. Creating a fursona is not anthropomorphism; it is taking animal attributes and applying them to a person. I pointed this out years ago that a proper definition for furry must take into account that it is a combination of human and animal traits. Definition 3 has that so I don't know why they wouldn't have taken it further.
See here for more details: https://www.flayrah.com/3541/opinion-redefining-furry
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~