|
Post by captainkodak1 on Feb 19, 2008 20:40:43 GMT -5
I have written a letter to the moderators at DeviantArts. I asked for some clarification on the rules as some of us have questioned. ie: why do some pictures of cartoon characters "KP" get deleted and other drawn characters "not cartoon" do not. This also goes for the pictures of people or drawing of people along the same lines. I asked the questions along those lines and discussed the situation as seen from the different sides. As of today no one has replied. If no one replies within a week I will write again. "it was quite a long letter and I would imagine this is something that the moderator would have to work on before answering." I wrote this for my own information as well as everyone else. If and when I receive an answer I will post those answers here at RS.net. I hope this will help in the future.
The Captain
|
|
|
Post by Captain Serge Stiles on Feb 20, 2008 0:58:02 GMT -5
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact it's a tad bit of copyright infringment - taking characters you don't own and turning them into underage smut (I'm not calling Levelord's stuff that, that's just a dramatic touch, but you all know what I mean, I hope) and then original pictures of people choosing to show themselves, LOL. Or maybe they don't choose, then that would be a problem - for the police (or Chris Hansen).
|
|
|
Post by railroadnut70 on Feb 20, 2008 2:17:55 GMT -5
/facepalm Good lord people. Regardless of what you think of dA's policies, everybody agrees to them when they sign up. Levelord broke those rules, and then tried to make himself look like some kind of victim - it's his fault. Levelord's. Banning. Was. Justified. He can always go to another site. His ice cream pic wasn't breaking any rules. It was Kim and Shego, fully clothed, and sharing an ice cream cone. It makes sense that Levelord was upset about it getting deleted, and that's why he considered himself a victim. Sometimes DA deletes pics that aren't breaking any rule at all (such as the time they deleted my drawing of Kim pregnant and fully clothed in her normal clothes). It is those unjustified deletions that are upsetting. From what I have seen and read here, it apparently didn't matter if it was Kim in a bikini, KiGo, or anything else. This San Tropez fellow apparently didn't like what Levelord was posting, so this "Mr. Tropez decided to report policy violations to the DA staff. I'll tell you you something here; KP isn't the only cartoon franchise that has this sort of thing happening. I'm a Scooby-Doo fan, and I've seen the same kind of artwork posted on DA depicting Daphne and Velma in the same way and situations (along with the same kind of flames and deletions). I ran afoul of DA's policies about two years ago and had my gallery deleted. (I had a question on a screenshot manipulation concerning the appearance of a Coca-Cola sign in the background.) I launched a tirade at the moderators, which earned me a two week warning ban. The mod replied, "If you act like an a**hole, you'll be remembered not as a martyr but as an a**hole." (I haven't posted there since.) Levelord, I for one applaud your sacrifice. You'll be remembered as a martyr, not the other name. DA's enforcements policies reminds me of another organization many people love to hate---the NCAA. In fact, I'd like to share a story with you that will draw a parallel between DA and the NCAA. In 1990, after the University of Illinois' basketball team had made it to the Final Four, it recruited a talented Chicago high school basketball player by the name of Deon Thomas. Well Bruce Pearl, then the coach at Iowa (if memory serves me) publicly stated that the Illini's recruiting of Thomas was illegal, and he even made allegations that the Illini had given Thomas an SUV as an inducement for signing with Illinois. Of course, the NCAA investigated, and none of the allegations was proven, but here's the rub, the NCAA busted Illinois for "Lack of Institutional Control!" The Illini was banned from post-season play and lost scholarships as a result, and it probably led to the departure of then coach Lou Henson from Illinois. (Henson would go on to coach at New Mexico State.) To this day, there are those who state that if Bruce Pearl ever set foot in Champaign again, they would like to see him stripped naked, tarred and feathered and strung up from a light pole. I don't abdicate tar and feathering, but I can't help but be amazed to see the parallels between DA and the NCAA.
|
|
|
Post by NewSkool101 on Feb 20, 2008 6:14:40 GMT -5
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact it's a tad bit of copyright infringment - taking characters you don't own and turning them into underage smut (I'm not calling Levelord's stuff that, that's just a dramatic touch, but you all know what I mean, I hope) and then original pictures of people choosing to show themselves, LOL. Or maybe they don't choose, then that would be a problem - for the police (or Chris Hansen). This is what I've been saying all along! (course, I've also been saying that Disney is behind all the deletions, but this is close enough)
|
|
|
Post by captainkodak1 on Feb 20, 2008 10:16:41 GMT -5
Okay people I have received an answer from the moderators at DA to my letter.
One, the fact that there are other pictures that show more than the KP pictures. The mod stated that they work to delete these works but some may slip through. Sometimes these pictures are not seen as often so there are fewer complaints.
Two. The age of the character is judged by the timeline of the entire show and not just the last season or episode. Also the designated target audience is a factor in judging the age of the character. Kim Possible was a minor almost throughout the entirety of the 4 seasons. There was no solid evidence that she was over 18 even in the final graduation show. ie: no birthday party showing her 18. Because of this age reasoning I go to Rule #12 of FAQ#249 which states.
12. Fictional underage characters taken from popular television series, movies, or other sources portrayed as an "adult" in order to utilize one of these prohibited themes will be subjected to close scrutiny by staff. Such claims will be considered void in any case where the staff deems that significant and telling changes of the original underage character design were not attempted or that such efforts were inadequate.
So if the KP character drawn looks anywhere close to the character as represented in the show, it will be considered to be in violation. The key words are "significant and telling changes".
I hope that this will help everyone understand the situation.
This is the Captain Right hand salute Roger and out
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 20, 2008 11:04:21 GMT -5
So Levelord's mistake was not drawing Kim's chest big enough...
<< >>
Just saying, lol.
|
|
|
Post by drakkenfan on Feb 20, 2008 14:05:14 GMT -5
So Levelord's mistake was not drawing Kim's chest big enough... << >> Just saying, lol. If that were true then my picture of Kim in the bunny suit with a noticably larger chest wouldn't have been deleted.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Serge Stiles on Feb 20, 2008 14:15:29 GMT -5
Chest size isn't an indication of age, Lol. I knew some girls in fourth grade with chests that were DD. Well I guess with a difference between age 5 and 25, but for being legal or not, it doesn't really help. And thanks Kodak, that's all that I thought myself.
|
|
|
Post by mrpotty on Feb 20, 2008 14:37:22 GMT -5
Okay people I have received an answer from the moderators at DA to my letter. One, the fact that there are other pictures that show more than the KP pictures. The mod stated that they work to delete these works but some may slip through. Sometimes these pictures are not seen as often so there are fewer complaints. Two. The age of the character is judged by the timeline of the entire show and not just the last season or episode. Also the designated target audience is a factor in judging the age of the character. Kim Possible was a minor almost throughout the entirety of the 4 seasons. There was no solid evidence that she was over 18 even in the final graduation show. ie: no birthday party showing her 18. Because of this age reasoning I go to Rule #12 of FAQ#249 which states. 12. Fictional underage characters taken from popular television series, movies, or other sources portrayed as an "adult" in order to utilize one of these prohibited themes will be subjected to close scrutiny by staff. Such claims will be considered void in any case where the staff deems that significant and telling changes of the original underage character design were not attempted or that such efforts were inadequate.So if the KP character drawn looks anywhere close to the character as represented in the show, it will be considered to be in violation. The key words are "significant and telling changes". I hope that this will help everyone understand the situation. This is the Captain Right hand salute Roger and out Sorry, but...duh! The real question was why it's pretty easy to get even harmless fanart removed, while photographies that don't just break the sites own rules, but also seem to break laws seem to stay there forever! So just because there are fewer complaints (fewer than what?) they don't even look at it?
|
|
|
Post by captainkodak1 on Feb 20, 2008 14:50:36 GMT -5
Mr. Potty,
I have no idea what they do or how they look at the other pictures. I have no idea what criteria they use except what I have read in the rules that I have posted here. I do know now what criteria they use for fanart. If those other pictures bother you, send in a policy violation. If the first couple of times don't work. Keep trying. There was one picture that I reported took four complaints before it went away. They will not go away on their own without policy violations being sent in.
|
|
|
Post by mrpotty on Feb 20, 2008 14:59:26 GMT -5
Like I've mentioned a few sites ago: That's what I and several other people did more than once, but the pictures haven't been removed until something like 1 1/2 years later by the member who put them up and NOT by the mods!
|
|
|
Post by enigmawing on Feb 20, 2008 15:39:11 GMT -5
I'm afraid I'm a little late in replying to all of this, but I do feel I have a few valid points to make. I've also been a victim of the whole deletion thing going on at various times over at dA, including some of my KP fanart. And the reason I say "victim" is because I apparently violated some rules back in the day that were not yet in writing. Things may have changed since then but they do remain inconsistent with the enforcement their rules and I do have issues with that fact. I'd say I've had maybe 20-30 pics deleted in total since I've been there, with at least two of those cases done without any notice whatsoever (they typically send you a vague note telling you of your violation as the pic is being deleted). Yet why do some of my other pics remain. . . ? My first round of deletions just about killed me. With the possible exception of one pic where I admittedly screwed up on, I had tried very hard to understand the rules and did my best to make sure I followed them. To receive spambot-like replies over why the precious artwork you poured your heart and soul into creating has been deleted is very hard to take. And when I asked for a specific reason behind the deletions? I was told I was drawing "characters from a children's show in an inappropriate manner, which was not allowed there." The second round of deletions didn't hurt so bad, even though I was still disappointed. And the ones after that? I think I've lost track, to be honest. Random pics that have been deleted from my account include KP sitting on her bed (fully clothed and holding a pink paper bag in her hand) and an old drawing I inked and colored of the Little Mermaid that had no sexuality to it whatsoever (unless you think that seashell top is a little too revealing). Curiously, I restored both of those pics to my gallery at dA later on without any further issues; I would have loved to get specific explanations on why those two pieces were removed in the first place especially since they never bothered the first time around. I'm still half-waiting for them to delete my latest KP pic, which I chose to censor myself before posting (but not before pointing out that she has now officially graduated high school according to the actual show). Maybe Levelord reached a similar state of mind that I have? I've reached the point that if they delete more pics or especially my account I'm just gonna say screw it and concentrate on my own site like I should have been doing all along. Not sure if I'd attack them outright but I completely understand the frustration he must be feeling. Being a woman, I occasionally wonder if people think I demean myself and my gender through my artwork, but in the end it doesn't really matter. I'm not out to offend anyone, and I've personally found it empowering and especially healing after having to deal with a troubled past. I've even been told that my nudes are rather "classy," whatever that might mean to you guys here. Artwork is something different to everyone, whether you're creating it or enjoying it we all see pieces of ourselves, which is probably why such passionate responses come about when something like this happens. I've thoroughly enjoyed his work, comments, and sense of humor, plus he's been nothing but nice to me. Although I've spoken to him elsewhere I'm disappointed that I can no longer interact with him at that particular community. I severely doubt that he ever intended to offend anyone with his more sexually-charged pieces but I guess it's bound to happen. Anyway, I wish him well and hope he'll continue to share his art with us through other means.
|
|
|
Post by captainkodak1 on Feb 20, 2008 16:04:20 GMT -5
enigmawing,
I was hoping to hear from you. I agree. The spambot notices of deletions leave somewhat to be desired. I have gotten enough of them myself. I know you have been hit several times with deletions and for the life of me I don't know why. I don't remember all of your work, but what I do remember didn't seem out of place to me.
I asked about the graduation from high school thing and was basically told they didn't really take that into account as the rest of the show showed her as a minor. Draw your own conclusions on that rule.
Let's hope that this can all settle down soon. I hope the answers I got to my letter help everyone.
I hope everyone is okay and I hope the best for all of you.
This is the Captain Right hand salute Roger and out
|
|
SFToon
Yellow Trout
Posts: 143
|
Post by SFToon on Feb 20, 2008 16:44:24 GMT -5
Just a note to let you know that I've taken down the majority of my KP fanart off my DA site since this latest incident. Doubtful at this time whether I would even consider doing any more on the subject. Best regards, SFToon
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 20, 2008 17:16:54 GMT -5
Wow, I wish I was in your elementary school, lol. Exactly. Lewd drawings of underage girls are deleted, but actual photographs of underage girls are perfectly fine. Funny, I thought the supreme court ruled the exact opposite way. First of all, SFToon, you're a god. And second, is there any other site where we can find your work?
|
|
|
Post by Nulla on Feb 20, 2008 19:04:48 GMT -5
First of all, SFToon, you're a god. And second, is there any other site where we can find your work? ^^ ditto to that! are you goin to mirror at least some of ur work liek levelord? ;D
|
|
|
Post by drakkenfan on Feb 20, 2008 19:14:03 GMT -5
Has anyone heard from Levelord since the banning? His blog site hasn't been updated in awhile. I hope he hasn't given up on his art.
|
|
SFToon
Yellow Trout
Posts: 143
|
Post by SFToon on Feb 20, 2008 20:50:38 GMT -5
Wow, I wish I was in your elementary school, lol. Exactly. Lewd drawings of underage girls are deleted, but actual photographs of underage girls are perfectly fine. Funny, I thought the supreme court ruled the exact opposite way. First of all, SFToon, you're a god. And second, is there any other site where we can find your work? Hi, I have a blog site now, sftoonstudios.blogspot.com
|
|
|
Post by Ashley Benlove on Feb 20, 2008 21:30:58 GMT -5
Has anyone heard from Levelord since the banning? His blog site hasn't been updated in awhile. I hope he hasn't given up on his art. He's on MSN every day or so. I talked to him a few days back.
|
|
|
Post by Mickey on Feb 20, 2008 21:46:23 GMT -5
Considering the definition of deviant, I find this whole thing oddly amusing.
|
|