|
Post by Commander Argus on Jun 30, 2006 18:47:40 GMT -5
And if you complain about people doing that, then you're being hypocritical by saying 'KIM'S 18 80!!!1!one' in a picture that depicts her suggestively & maturely. I don't think that's being hypocritical. I can see a world of difference between a teenaged cartoon character in a bathing suit that IRL she could wear to most beaches and a clearly po rnographic photo or painting.
|
|
|
Post by wallaceb on Jun 30, 2006 18:52:48 GMT -5
if she is wearing clothing, then it really is not porn, and if she is in a suggestive pose, well, what is wrong with that?, if she is in clothes, you can't see anything
|
|
|
Post by SonicElectronic on Jun 30, 2006 18:58:53 GMT -5
And if you complain about people doing that, then you're being hypocritical by saying 'KIM'S 18 80!!!1!one' in a picture that depicts her suggestively & maturely. I don't think that's being hypocritical. I can see a world of difference between a teenaged cartoon character in a bathing suit that IRL she could wear to most beaches and a clearly po rnographic photo or painting. I see where you're coming from and well yea, I agree. BUT the picture that you speak of was not deleted because 'she was in a bikini'. It was deleted because she was drawn suggestively with her rear end amplified ala fan-service. There is a difference between drawing a girl in a bikini on the beach, happy and then drawing her in a sexual (I can say that word here, right?) way wearing this bikini with her traits overly exaggerated and the focus of the picture especially if, by the series template, she's 'underage'. (Just like there's a difference between real women's volleyball and Dead or Alive Volleyball, haha eoe)
|
|
|
Post by Nightspade on Jun 30, 2006 19:02:22 GMT -5
if she is wearing clothing, then it really is not pictures, and if she is in a suggestive pose, well, what is wrong with that?, if she is in clothes, you can't see anything That depends. How tight/small are the clothes?
|
|
|
Post by nabusan on Jun 30, 2006 19:03:39 GMT -5
Are these clothes transparent? lol It's all covered by the rules ^^
|
|
|
Post by wallaceb on Jun 30, 2006 19:04:06 GMT -5
ok, i over looked that, that is an area where things can be taken to extreams
i guess this is something that cannot be settled. it depends on how the drawing is portraying the people in it, and how the people looking at the pic react to it
|
|
|
Post by captainkodak1 on Jun 30, 2006 19:20:51 GMT -5
SE, Yes, it is their site and maybe it is not war. But like you said it's their site. DA has so many rules that it is difficult if not impossible to know them all completely. I have been at DA for over a year and I have never seen those rules. I have even looked for them and never seen them. But ignorance of the rules is not an excuse. Interpretation of the rules is not a point. The only interpretation that counts is the mods. I would have hoped that they sent a warning first allowing the artist to remove the picture first. I guess it rips me that they do not seem to uniformly enforce the rules or they wait so long to enforce those rules. Most if not all of the pictures that were removed from Rich's site were posted over a year ago. But they can run their site like they want, we don't like it we can walk. I think we all and I include myself first and foremost need to take a deep breath and walk on. Thanks for the post Ivy and SE.
Do I plan to change the way I write. I don't know at this point. If they take down any of my fics. Well, I'll have to live with that. Although, I doubt any mature fics will be coming from me at anytime soon. I have done a three I believe. I think I have plenty to write without taking the mature route. As of right now I have at least 6 or 7 fictions planned none over a T rating. Most being below T.
Becoming a religion. I guess I am at fault at this sometimes. I can get a little passionate about the show at times. But like it has been said. It is just a show.
|
|
|
Post by SonicElectronic on Jun 30, 2006 19:34:25 GMT -5
SE, Yes, it is their site and maybe it is not war. But like you said it's their site. DA has so many rules that it is difficult if not impossible to know them all completely. I have been at DA for over a year and I have never seen those rules. I have even looked for them and never seen them. But ignorance of the rules is not an excuse. Interpretation of the rules is not a point. The only interpretation that counts is the mods. I would have hoped that they sent a warning first allowing the artist to remove the picture first. I guess it rips me that they do not seem to uniformly enforce the rules or they wait so long to enforce those rules. Most if not all of the pictures that were removed from Rich's site were posted over a year ago. But they can run their site like they want, we don't like it we can walk. I think we all and I include myself first and foremost need to take a deep breath and walk on. Thanks for the post Ivy and SE. Do I plan to change the way I write. I don't know at this point. If they take down any of my fics. Well, I'll have to live with that. Although, I doubt any mature fics will be coming from me at anytime soon. I have done a three I believe. I think I have plenty to write without taking the mature route. As of right now I have at least 6 or 7 fictions planned none over a T rating. Most being below T. Becoming a religion. I guess I am at fault at this sometimes. I can get a little passionate about the show at times. But like it has been said. It is just a show. Hey, that's okay! I think even the mods have to double-check their Rules, there are a lot. For the average dA'er it'd be redicilous to know them all. Although I do believe it should be made an attempt to at one point review the Rules that apply to you and your art direction. I'm sorry, but the sad thing is, they did send a warning. See, it IS your choice to read the Weekly Community Development Updates, but the thing is, if you don't read it and miss something, then unfortunately that becomes your fault :/ It was added as a reminder in the recent one that's on your right-hand side of Your Messages: news.deviantart.com/article/21106/" I need to also remind everyone that most, if not all of, the central characters in the more popular series (such as Cartoon Networks Teen Titans, Nickelodeons Danny Phantom and the vast majority of other series) are presented as children or teenagers who if they existed in real life would be minors below the age of 18.
Due to this fact we do not allow these characters to be depicted nude or in any sort of sexual situation whatsoever. This is outlined in FAQ249 ....." There is more of an explanation there if you wish to delve further. (my second url got funky, please refer to the first if you wish to click it.) Yea, dA can be a bit slow at enforcing rules, but I figure they ARE real people with REAL lives and can't be expected to sit at the computer 24/7. plus there's SO many deviations at deviantART, so many categories, that some probably fly by unless someone reports them. I'm pretty sure they have a mod for that job alone, not sure. They're still growing and expanding as a website as more members join and have expectations. Sometimes they have to play 'catch-up'. To be honest, I don't think it's that big of a deal. So what if they take some suggestive Kim Possible artwork off their site? At least for myself, that's not what I look for in KP artwork >_o; And as you said, it's just a show where the characters are, as a template, under 18 years and is aimed for an underage audience :/
|
|
|
Post by captainkodak1 on Jun 30, 2006 19:52:03 GMT -5
SE
"sheepish grin"
I just read that management thingee. Right there in big letters. I had not read it cause I had not had the time. After my little trip to the hospital I have been working hard to catch up.
Now that I have read it I sent a list to the help desk of some of my fics that may be borderline. If they want I'll take'em down. I didn't pay for my subscription, so I don't have such a vested interest in my site other than the time it took to write the stories. The subscription was given to me as a gift for winning a contest. I may not like it completely but I will play by their rules.
|
|
|
Post by Commander Argus on Jun 30, 2006 20:06:45 GMT -5
I would like to point out that passage from that article is actually not what the rules they were referencing say. Sorry, it's just not in there. That is not an interpretation of them either. If they wish to make that their rule, they that is their prerogative and they need to post it in there accordingly. Otherwise, they are simply making the rules up as they go without regard to what *paying* customers actually agreed to.
|
|
|
Post by Whisper from the Shadows on Jun 30, 2006 20:12:17 GMT -5
While I do tend to agree that underage pr0n is a bad thing (okay, so I really agree), the stuff that seems to be taken down 'appears' to fit the rules from the descriptions given here (I don't know if they were pics I saw before they were removed or not). And I agree w/ the Commander, if they're going to make those weekly updates law then it has become a 'make it up as we go' style of mod, which in my opinion is a *what the fish said when it ran into a wall* mistake.
|
|
|
Post by SonicElectronic on Jun 30, 2006 20:18:38 GMT -5
I would like to point out that passage from that article is actually not what the rules they were referencing say. Sorry, it's just not in there. That is not an interpretation of them either. If they wish to make that their rule, they that is their prerogative and they need to post it in there accordingly. Otherwise, they are simply making the rules up as they go without regard to what *paying* customers actually agreed to. you're really going to make me dig & strain my wrists further, aren't you e_e I shouldn't even be typing this. " Due to this fact we do not allow these characters to be depicted nude or in any sort of sexual situation whatsoever. This is outlined in FAQ249." --Weekly Community Update Click 'FAQ249' and you get: help.deviantart.com/249/ <- right there in their Help & FAQ " 1. Minors depicted without clothing, front view, back view, or side view, with genitalia and/or breasts visible or not.
2. Minors depicted in under garments or lingerie.
3. Minors depicted in an S&M or ‘Bondage’ situation.
4. Minors depicted in a sexual or 'alluring' pose (dressed or undressed).
5. Minors in the possession of ‘adult’ sexual toys.
6. No use of: transparent clothes, blurring of nude areas, or the use of “blots” or “Censored” wording or props to cover areas that are otherwise not clothed.
7. Gender that is questionable on an image with an exposed chest will be removed from the gallery at the discretion of the reviewing administrator
8. No Child Nudity: Images of children or characters resembling children (including teens, pre adolescent, child like fairies and other imaginary figures) resembling, or stongly resembling, under 18 years of age.
9. No depictions of fictional young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 displayed in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context.
10. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D modeled images and certain art styles (such as Anime), this will be at the discretion of the reviewing administrator.
11. Babies in diapers will be allowed. Toddlers fall under the restrictions stated above." It's right there in their polices, always has been. They were just stressing & reminding it in the recent Community Update, not inventing it on the spot. And the rule itself does make sense otherwise it can easily turn into pedophilia. Just because she's grown her assests doesn't mean she's legel and suddenly alright to draw her flashing them majoring in fan-service. It depends on age, not whether or not she's blossomed e_e It's getting a little disturbing here~
|
|
|
Post by SonicElectronic on Jun 30, 2006 20:26:17 GMT -5
SE "sheepish grin"I just read that management thingee. Right there in big letters. I had not read it cause I had not had the time. After my little trip to the hospital I have been working hard to catch up. Now that I have read it I sent a list to the help desk of some of my fics that may be borderline. If they want I'll take'em down. I didn't pay for my subscription, so I don't have such a vested interest in my site other than the time it took to write the stories. The subscription was given to me as a gift for winning a contest. I may not like it completely but I will play by their rules. hehe~ yea, these things can be missed :/ Too bad that's no excuse by dA standards. Sorry to hear about you being in the hospital though! I hope you get better soon~ That's awesome that you contacted them. I don't have any of 'that' kind of stuff or implied in my gallery although there are a few implications of makey-outy in some of my gag comics (which should be allowed). I just contacted Keia to ask her her opinion even though I see nothing violates in their polices. I hope you at least have your stories saved just in case. I think losing a story would be heart attack worthy ;
|
|
|
Post by Commander Argus on Jun 30, 2006 20:26:19 GMT -5
If you want me to be specific, I will. If I depict Kim Possible as a legal adult in a suggestive pose with the proper labeling, then that does not break those rules. The update unilaterally prohibits using these characters in this way at all, no matter what age they are depicted. That is what simply does not exist in the official, agreed to rules. The key word in the part you highlighted is *minors* Saying a character grew up and portraying them that way is not a minor.
If they wish to enforce the rule that way, it needs to be spelled out, and if people don't like that, they can leave, though they should be given refunds for their remaining subscriptions since that isn't what they acknowledged in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by SonicElectronic on Jun 30, 2006 20:36:19 GMT -5
If you want me to be specific, I will. If I depict Kim Possible as a legal adult in a suggestive pose with the proper labeling, then that does not break those rules. The update unilaterally prohibits using these characters in this way at all, no matter what age they are depicted. That is what simply does not exist in the official, agreed to rules. The key word in the part you highlighted is *minors* Saying a character grew up and portraying them that way is not a minor. If they wish to enforce the rule that way, it needs to be spelled out, and if people don't like that, they can leave, though they should be given refunds for their remaining subscriptions since that isn't what they acknowledged in the first place. Ah, I see what you're saying now, thanks~ H'm, I'm not sure about that. In a way, they are a little vague about them being portrated as older. I can ask Keia if you'd like so we can be certain. Because in the polices I also see: " 10. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D modeled images and certain art styles (such as Anime), this will be at the discretion of the reviewing administrator." In a way, I think it depends on the situation, what you say in the description and what's actually being portrayed in the picture. Because it could be nilled as portrayal as a loophole ('artistic nudes' wth e_e!) which is, in a way, understandable but sad at the same time. EX: Drawing her in a bikini with assests flowing as fan-service and going 'SHE'S 18 >B0!111!1' would be likely considered as a loophole for the sake of pr0n. Yea, I think I'll ask and get back to you on it, mmkay :3? edit: just imed her and she's off to see cars AGAIN xD We won't get a response for her for a little while but I'll letcha know when I do. dangit, why didn't she bring me ~? Distance is no excuse!
|
|
|
Post by Ezbok58a on Jun 30, 2006 22:51:01 GMT -5
What really needs to change here is DA opperating procedure, if things like that are left up to the mods to decide then there is something seriously wrong. We all have different opinions, mods shouldn't be any different. One could find you're work perfectly fine and may even tell you that, then another mod looks at it, finds it crosses the line and there goes your work.
They need more structure and more of a foundation than what they currently have.
|
|
|
Post by liokaiser on Jun 30, 2006 22:51:32 GMT -5
The #1 thing that makes me made about thsi whole thing is this. I look sometimes for random pose ideas and when I get to any almost kinky stuff I this picture of a young girl ( say 7 maybe) in supper tight bondage. That stays up and has been up for I dunno how long and that's considered art. Actually its this right here. www.deviantart.com/deviation/19820287/ Hey I know I do some works (heck did one just recently) but THAT is something that should be taken down not CLEAN arts that I've seen being removed. I think they need an update on the show too, she's gonna be a senior from what I hear, that says (well from my work place anyway) She'll be of legal age in the upcoming season. Ugh, whole thing ticks me off.
|
|
|
Post by dracko19 on Jun 30, 2006 23:14:55 GMT -5
FYI: I got a complaint about this thread. According to our rules, 'Flaming' of other forums or KP related sites is NOT permitted here. However, this thread is a bit different. I don't see people yelling that "DA SUCKS!" or similar. I see that we have a spirited debate about their rules and interpetation/implimentation.
Some of the posts in this thread have come very close to crossing the line and going into the "flame" category. Let this post be a reminder to all of you that you must not start flaming DA or any KP site. Each site has their own rules and if they choose to enforce their rules, you are not obligated to stay at their site. There are many other art hosting sites that would be glad to host your pictures (G, PG, PG-13 or worse). DA is kind of cool since it has a "community" network and you can interact with friends on it. It is a shame you can't post everything you create and obviously they are getting biased against the teen cartoon shows. Nevertheless, its their decision and you don't have to like it.
Please keep future posts in this thread respectful to DeviantArt and any other KP forum/site. Thank you. I will lock this thread if I see the discussion going south.
|
|
|
Post by SonicElectronic on Jun 30, 2006 23:21:19 GMT -5
The #1 thing that makes me made about thsi whole thing is this. I look sometimes for random pose ideas and when I get to any almost kinky stuff I this picture of a young girl ( say 7 maybe) in supper tight bondage. That stays up and has been up for I dunno how long and that's considered art. Actually its this right here. www.deviantart.com/deviation/19820287/ Hey I know I do some works (heck did one just recently) but THAT is something that should be taken down not CLEAN arts that I've seen being removed. I think they need an update on the show too, she's gonna be a senior from what I hear, that says (well from my work place anyway) She'll be of legal age in the upcoming season. Ugh, whole thing ticks me off. Then REPORT it. Seriously, you would be doing them a favour rather than just complaining about it. They need people like us to report these things. Don't be afraid~ the mods don't see EVERYTHING. Don't you think that if something like that that breaks quite a few of their polices would be taken down if they knew about it? They are real people, they are not always at their computers and with ALL the deviations that come in, how can you not think them overflowed? Just go to the main page and refresh the recent deviations, it'll be different ones each time- look at the counter too. It is not 'up to each mod', they have a guideline they have to follow or they can lose their jobs on dA. What they're saying is if something in an art style (ex: anime) that is hard to tell the age (say they are not familiar with the fandom or if it's fan characters) then the mod looking at the image has to give in their best judgement call- not based on their opinion. It's clear if something crosses the line, everyone can see that with the polices they have- it's the age of the character that they have to do their best on once they have established the act the character is doing or being portrayed as is an 'overage act'. deviantART has a very strong structure & foundation. They are taking actions against things like these, it's why we're talking about it because they are doing something about it. If people just read & followed the polices in the first place, there wouldn't be this discussion. note: it's keia's bday to-day so she won't be home til late she said on mr t. won't get an answer until then~
|
|
|
Post by Commander Argus on Jul 1, 2006 5:17:36 GMT -5
FYI: I got a complaint about this thread. According to our rules, 'Flaming' of other forums or KP related sites is NOT permitted here. However, this thread is a bit different. I don't see people yelling that "DA SUCKS!" or similar. I see that we have a spirited debate about their rules and interpetation/implimentation. . Dracko, you just did what, in essense, we're saying DA should do. You got a complaint, but instead of just locking down the thread or deleting it, you too the time to read it and realize we're doing precisely what a forum is made to do in the first place. From where I'm standing, DA is not. One complaint and POOF, a work is gone, even if it does not actually violate their rules as they are written. One thing that strikes me about this whole issue. I am very conservative, yet a lot (not all) of the stuff I've seen taken off doesn't bother me one bit. It would be one thing to see the characters, drawn as they are portrayed on TV (ie, underage) engaged in sex acts. It's another thing where an artist goes to the trouble of aging the character (I'm not talking about just saying something in the description or giving them 'big assets' I mean making them look honestly older - a very subtle and difficult thing to do when the main character in question is supposed to be pretty and cute) I've seen lots of very sexy (without being overly sexual) stuff where Kim Possible looks very distinctly adult.
|
|