Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Wall of text

Just dumping this convo with this apparently irrational moderator onto this blog, because the file size is too big for photobucket. Just don't burn your eyes reading it.

For those of you who have trouble with reading the one above, here's the direct address:




Jochen said...


Actually I can't read anything because after clicking on the preview and opening the whole bunch of screenshots they're still too small sized. But never mind, I'm not really curious about the content, 'cos we all know, what happened at last.

And because of the volume of your answers it seems to me you wrote all your anger from your soul, hm? Well, forget those DA morons, you're now way over it...


levelord said...

I've added the actual address for it, hopefully you might be able to see it more clearly.

Boyce Williams said...

Read the text at the site. This Daniel character is some piece of work.

Twinsnake said...

Meanwhile, tons of other artists are posting even raunchier stuff on DA with even younger characters.

Seamusdubh said...

From what you have there I kinda get your same impression that the mod, while actually having a dialog with you, was not actually trying to help in your understanding of the rules and just kept reiterating the reading of the policies.

I, in my opinion, think the real issue is what defines children's cartoons. For too many here in the US, where I believe the company if not most of the mods are based out of, believe any form of animation, unless actually stated as such, in considered children's programming. Unfortunately thats not the case for the rest of the world. That understanding is slowly becoming more prevalent here in the US as more and more cartoons are being made to span generational gaps. KP being one of them. I've seen many a fans of this show and other throughout dA and the real world that range greatly in age. Most of which would be what some considered well out side to age range of the show.

I find it funny a show that is advertised and marketed to preteens, was actually more watched and appreciated by teenagers and young adults.

Also, like you said, I believe a lot of your problems come from the recent rash of 'myspace' trollers that have popped up over the last year at dA. All too many Good community sites are being overrun with immature (not just age) punks, that the net let alone the world could do without, who think that they can trash anything just because can.

Your works posted on dA are by far less inappropriate and more tastefully done than a lot of other things posted there.
If people didn't like your art you would not have had a large fan following, well over Half a Million page views, nor would there been the backlash from your banning.

As for the perception of artwork I leave you with two things.

1) As proven from psychological studies, people see what they want to depending on their frame of mind.

And an excerpt from one of my favorite disclaimers.

2) Not intended for people who don't make the difference between fantasy and real life.

BillyWitchDoctor said...

It's really not hard to understand at all; a psychologically-maladjusted twit has been given POWAR, and now abuses it to compensate for all the humiliation he has suffered at the hands of the Big Bad World. Man, that's what makes the world go 'round.

Tucsoncoyote said...

Well after reading this I do have a few comments to make so if this becomes a bit of a long rant, blame me for it..

First off, The moderator while trying to strike up a conversation, did really nothing to ease the issue at hand. All I see from this is a moderator who did nothing more than just "Read you the riot act". and didn't even give you decent reasons as to why.

Second, I am in agreement here with, Twinsnake, Seamusdubh, and even billywitchdoctor. Seems that DA has a 'double standard' here, and it stems from the fact that all of the people who go in there and trash artists, are in fact nothing more than immature twits. They can't tell the difference between reality and cartoon characters. and yet Da does live this double standard by bashing cartoon art like they are humans and that nude humans in suggestive photographic poses are in fact cartoons.

Then you have to fact in the "Taste" factor. I'm going to be honest here. Your work is very tasteful and in fact would be more than likely found in say some magazine like Playboy, or even GQ. Yet go over to dA and you see stuff that you would find in the pages of magazines the like of Hustler and even Swank, Oui and Chic. I think that when you look at this, while you do KP Characters in 'very tasteful' and provacative poses', without showing anything the likes of say, full frontal nudity, you do make art look positive.

But then comes in the third factor, and this relates to the twits..In a lot of ways, people can't descern the differences between real people and Cartoon characters. and granted that dA doesn't want the reall bad stuff on their pages. But to say that a cartoon that depicts a 15-18 year old girl and her boyfriend? It's not right for them to say Kim Possible is underage.. To be honest, She's no longer 15, she's 18, street legal, and and adult.. what she does after Graduation is really all up to her and her boyfirend/sidekick Ron. But to be banned for putting Kim and Sam Manson (of Danny Phantom) into poses? That's not tacky...in fact to be honest yet again, having sam wearing a towel and a bra is tasteful.. having her "Show off the goods" (like in a hustler photoshoot) is bad..at least in dA's eyes.

The bottom line in all of this? You're work shouldn't have been yanked off of dA,and for a couple of good reasons..

1. It's of characters that are cartoons, they're not real folks here even though the twits and immature punks think they are, and more importantly,

2. It's the way the idea is portrayed. The last few pictures here have been rather tasteful and in fact leaving some room to the imaginative mind (be it naughty or nice), is really left up to the viewer of the material. To some of the more immature punks and twits out there, they see Cartoon Characters are real people, that the cartoons and chariactures have feelings, and that certain characters would never stoop to doing this. (Yet they forget.. they're CARTOONS... they were created and they can be uncreated (Just with a simple eraser..

But in closing I say this, You're doing a fine job for making art tasteful.. Don't ever forget that..After all having Ron seeing Kim wearing some sexy Lingerie would be more his style than say, showing Angelica Pickles in the buff..

Or as I say, You keep doinig what you're doing.. You're a good artist, and no one should tell you otherwise.. As for dA? well I have fought back in my own unique twisted way.. (you should read my blog over at 'Missile Silo 2'... it's off the wall funny yet informative..

After all we artists do have to stick together you know... ;)


Christopher said...

I'm having issues understanding the reasoning behind anything the Mod you spoke with said. He just keeps saying you're looking for loopholes and will keep breaking the rules when you have obviously made your intent clear.

Now onto the technical side of things... By US law (where I assume DA is based out of) drawn characters are technically "ageless". Yeah, wrap your mind around that one. But assuming they fell under the same "age restrictions" for art as real people, Kim more than qualifies (she graduated earlier this year, so I'm guessing she's at least 18 possibly 19).

And, like seamusbudh said, this show crossed generation gaps like crazy. I'm a 22 year old male, that watches it whenever I get a chance because the characters are great, the animation is superb, and the storylines aren't lacking in substance. I know for a fact there are 50+ year old people that loved this show. Am I saying that makes "pr0n" of it okay? By far no, I'm saying nothing of the sort. But you were putting up stuff that was far from pr0n. It was seductive, sensual, etc... but classy and tasteful.

And, sometime (if you feel like being a pain) ask them when a close up of a woman's private areas became "art". Last I knew that was the definition of pr0n, and yet it quite frequently makes the front page.

Anywho, wherever you post your work, I will watch.

Whisper from the Shadows

EvilLathander said...

civile disobedience?

Are we living in George Orwell's book about Big Brother???

Also, it seems to me that this guy is your average american, scared of anything female that shows skin and looks younger then 35

Andy said...

The mod obviously came into the conversation with a preconceived notions about you plan and simple. They are trying to get you to say "I 100% understand and take full responsibility so that if there is even the slightest hiccup you can REban me in an instance and then site this as to the reason why". To be honest, it is a bunch of crap.

When you started havin these troubles I sent ya a note on DA saying I thought they we mistakin in assuming that kp was underage and thus the problem but I would like to amend that statement and say, they are simply imposing a double standard on what is construed as art and what is erotica. As Christopher said, "when a close up of a woman's private areas became "art". Now, I do believe that particular subjuct can be depicted in an artistic manner BUT if that can be art (and art that the very much allow at DA) then how can your work not be be excluded? I have seen things that troubled me a great deal more at DA than your work or even the extreem close ups of a womens privites.

I supose I could have summed this all up with this closing thought,
The mods clear could use a "crainalrectumotimy" (Means they need to pull their heads out of thier asses).

Best of luck man where ever you post your work I would gladly come to check it out. You and some others from DA and inspired me to pick up my pencil and start drawing again. If nothing else you have accomplished that.

Cat said...

I have been watching you for quite some time on DA(*LadyCath) and am a big fan of your work. This whole mess just rubs me the wrong way...that guy is an ass and wouldn't know a glamor shot if I stapled it to his forehead.