a request to rethink. From the Rules

[DoctorKroll]

i read your entire post, and respectfully speaking, i still very much believe that 2-3 reminders a day is enough for people to still see and buy your ych's. by no means is FA forbidding your ability to advertise your work. i'm sorry about your situation, but whenever i see talk about artists in financial troubles, talking about how they can't make rent and can't find a job for mental reasons, i just wince. because while you're still capable of finding work through freelancing, there are those who lack the skill necessary to do that and don't have a method of income at all. you're making something out of a shitty situation while others don't have that opportunity. so whenever artists in these situations use this sort of story to sway objective conversation, it frustrates me. one of the most commonly said things about freelancing is that you should never do it as a full-time job unless you know your income may be unstable at times, and whether you're sure you can handle that, whether you supposedly can't find other jobs or not. as difficult as it can be to tell at times, FA is going to do what's best for all their users, not just troubled artists. my personal advice would be - don't do freelancing as your sole method of income unless you know you can make enough money from it to be stable. maybe it's not FA's responsibility to change your situation, but your's.

You go to a free art gallery and demand that they provide you with clean content without intrusive advertising, but you probably forgot that all the content you are viewing is made with good advertising. Check out the photos on Google, pay for a patron subscription, or order artwork from artists if you want clean content instead of crying about how annoying your ads are on the free website.
I could not help but enter into this discussion, because I see injustice and arrogance on your part. You do not have a single argument, except that you should not go for freelance, but do not name a single good reason why a little discomfort should prevail over people's lives.

 

[DoctorKroll]

Never denied lower activity. And I'll repeat: If putting food on the table requires you to use a web site's free services in order to make money, you're going to have a bad time. If you are genuinely serious, you either need to get a non-commisison-based job, or suck it up and purchase advertising and get something official going. You will. Not. Survive. On freelance pay. If you are relying solely on FurAffinity to not only be up and running, but to strictly require twice the advertising.

It sucks that you'll take a hit. But FA is not under any obligation to be your free advertising platform. Pay for it, or find venues to supplement your advertising and work.



See most of my above reply. If this is your literal livelihood, you have to get serious about it and not depend on a free service remaining free forever.

Reminders are "resented" because they clog the gallery up. You don't mind it, because you thrive on it (financially). Imagine, however, if you were searching for entertainment on YouTube, and 8 out of 10 of those videos were just advertisements. You'd probably be a little resentful of them, particularly if they repeated every 2 pages or so, advertising the exact same thing. Try to understand that it is not some resentment against *artists*, just *spam*.

Additionally, I repeat: This site does not live or die based on the amount of advertising it freely allows in galleries. Please stop trying to be some faux-advocate for the "purity of the art gallery."

---

Nothing justifies breaking this particular rule, outside "I do not want to change what I'm doing, make the same amount of money, and continue using FA as a free advertising venue the way that I have been."

I have been doing freelance programming for 5 years and only now can I make a living. you need a person with depression to master what has been developing over the years. reduce hypocrisy friend

 

[Lutro]

You go to a free art gallery and demand that they provide you with clean content without intrusive advertising, but you probably forgot that all the content you are viewing is made with good advertising. Check out the photos on Google, pay for a patron subscription, or order artwork from artists if you want clean content instead of crying about how annoying your ads are on the free website.
I could not help but enter into this discussion, because I see injustice and arrogance on your part. You do not have a single argument, except that you should not go for freelance, but do not name a single good reason why a little discomfort should prevail over people's lives.

That cuts both ways. You cannot wag your finger at one person going "you don't appreciate the site you use is free with limited advertising" (while listing a few other sites), while simultaneously not doing the same to the crowd that are going "I want to continue using this free service while making money, with no symbiotic gestures from me."

To preempt a few things:

• No, artists that post commissions are not "supporting said free/limited advertising" view. There are just as many, if not more, submissions that occur outside the realm of commisisons, YCHs, etc., and an art gallery site does not live or die on them.
• They can still advertise. Just not quite as much or as spammy as before. YouTube has ads to support itself. It'd be a lot more headache-inducing of, on a search result page of 10 videos, most were ads for things (not prerolls but full video ads).
• Freelance commissioner advertising is not the same as web site advertising. Your examples are apples-to-oranges, as commissioners advertising/reminding/YCHing/etc. are not the same thing as site-supporting advertising. Unless a commissioner is paying royalties to FA, this is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
• "But their lives depend on it!!!" Irrelevant. Not their web site. Not a service, contract, or any other obligation being violated. You are Appealing to Emotion or arguing for some mutual Social Contract concept that isn't at play here at all.
• As you accuse, you also do not present a single argument going the other direction, other than the aforementioned Appeal to Emotion (i.e. "why aren't you caring about their livelihoods!").

I have been doing freelance programming for 5 years and only now can I make a living. you need a person with depression to master what has been developing over the years. reduce hypocrisy friend

You do not rely on regularly posting to StackOverflow with non-question advertising, I bet. Nor would you appreciate reading them should you be making genuine searches for other content. I've done the freelance game. I do the freelance game. "I've grown dependent on this web site of which I have no official contract with therefore them changing things is bad because it affects me" is a non-starter of a conversation.

You also ignored basically my entire quoted post just so you could call me a hypocrite. A hypocrite to what, I still don't know.

Also also: Advertising stuff isn't dead. Only reduced. Still free to do it. You just have to not spam it quite as often.

 

[Rayd]

You go to a free art gallery and demand that they provide you with clean content without intrusive advertising, but you probably forgot that all the content you are viewing is made with good advertising. Check out the photos on Google, pay for a patron subscription, or order artwork from artists if you want clean content instead of crying about how annoying your ads are on the free website.
I could not help but enter into this discussion, because I see injustice and arrogance on your part. You do not have a single argument, except that you should not go for freelance, but do not name a single good reason why a little discomfort should prevail over people's lives.

it's not a sentimental argument, that's why. i already said several times that you can still advertise several times a day (including in the response i replied to that person) and that it's not as much of a problem as people are making it out to be. if you can't make profit with the changes, then maybe don't invest so much reliance on the platform and freelance in general. i never once said nor implied that minor annoyance is more important than someone's life. just because i suggest that it's not FA's responsibility to manage one's financial stability (cause it's not), doesn't mean i value the absence of annoyance over someone's life.

 

[DoctorKroll]

That cuts both ways. You cannot wag your finger at one person going "you don't appreciate the site you use is free with limited advertising" (while listing a few other sites), while simultaneously not doing the same to the crowd that are going "I want to continue using this free service while making money, with no symbiotic gestures from me."

To preempt a few things:

• No, artists that post commissions are not "supporting said free/limited advertising" view. There are just as many, if not more, submissions that occur outside the realm of commisisons, YCHs, etc., and an art gallery site does not live or die on them.
• They can still advertise. Just not quite as much or as spammy as before. YouTube has ads to support itself. It'd be a lot more headache-inducing of, on a search result page of 10 videos, most were ads for things (not prerolls but full video ads).
• Freelance commissioner advertising is not the same as web site advertising. Your examples are apples-to-oranges, as commissioners advertising/reminding/YCHing/etc. are not the same thing as site-supporting advertising. Unless a commissioner is paying royalties to FA, this is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
• "But their lives depend on it!!!" Irrelevant. Not their web site. Not a service, contract, or any other obligation being violated. You are Appealing to Emotion or arguing for some mutual Social Contract concept that isn't at play here at all.
• As you accuse, you also do not present a single argument going the other direction, other than the aforementioned Appeal to Emotion (i.e. "why aren't you caring about their livelihoods!").

You do not rely on regularly posting to StackOverflow with non-question advertising, I bet. Nor would you appreciate reading them should you be making genuine searches for other content. I've done the freelance game. I do the freelance game. "I've grown dependent on this web site of which I have no official contract with therefore them changing things is bad because it affects me" is a non-starter of a conversation.




You also ignored basically my entire quoted post just so you could call me a hypocrite. A hypocrite to what, I still don't know.

Also also: Advertising stuff isn't dead. Only reduced. Still free to do it. You just have to not spam it quite as often.

My arguments are selling opportunities that have not only declined, but have completely disappeared. on YouTube there is an opportunity to remove ads for money. here ad is removed by adblock
how can you deny a social contract if there is an interaction between the artist and the customer. A simple user of the site has the ability to view the galleries of his favorite artists, different categories of the site. The loss from the lack of PR methods is much higher than the gain.
Why are you comparing reminders with YouTube ads? there advertising is always in sight. Here you have a few seconds in 8 hours, which can be seen on the tape. the number of people on the site is growing, and the likelihood that they will be seen in the tab will look at everything below. how can you say that the situation will be better if people are already suffering from innovation. for whom will it be better?
you come across a fact, but when you move away from arguments, say that everyone with the new rules will be better. without offering alternatives and solving the problem, driving them away from the site.No, my friend. leave yourself from the site.

 

[Lutro]

My arguments are selling opportunities that have not only declined, but have completely disappeared.

They have not disappeared in any sense of the word. You can still freely advertise several times a day. What do you not understand about this?

on YouTube there is an opportunity to remove ads for money. here ad is removed by adblock

Adblock works here too. In fact, this place still lets you advertise through the gallery, a notable exception to ad-blocking as it's integrated into the content. And again: Apples to oranges. Freelance commission ads are not comparable to web-site ads, and this is the last time I'll repeat this.

how can you deny a social contract if there is an interaction between the artist and the customer. A simple user of the site has the ability to view the galleries of his favorite artists, different categories of the site. The loss from the lack of PR methods is much higher than the gain.

That's not an implied social contract. That's a literal one. "I draw thing you pay me $x."

Why are you comparing reminders with YouTube ads?

Because you keep bringing up the false comparison between site ads, and freelance ads in galleries. Plus, it's an apt comparison: If you search YouTube, your results aren't polluted with ads. In FA, ads (freelance) are. Not restricting them leads to the "majority" scenario described.

Here you have a few seconds in 8 hours, which can be seen on the tape. the number of people on the site is growing, and the likelihood that they will be seen in the tab will look at everything below. how can you say that the situation will be better if people are already suffering from innovation. for whom will it be better?

Buy that advertising and you will get it for more than a few seconds. You get what you pay for, and it's as simple as that.

you come across a fact, but when you move away from arguments, say that everyone with the new rules will be better

Kindly quote where I said "everyone with the new rules will be better."

without offering alternatives and solving the problem, driving them away from the site.No, my friend. leave yourself from the site.

• It's not my job to "find alternatives." Not my livelihood on the line. I don't run FA. That being said, I've already suggested one or two (one of which is "keep doing the same thing", the other being "buy ad space." Advertising works, despite the advent of ad-block). You ignoring them with instant "well those don't work" dismissals doesn't make them any less valid.
  
• They. Can. Still. Advertise. In. Galleries. I won't repeat myself again.
• They are not going to leave the site if it's their main source of income. That's a farcical statement not grounded in any sense of reality. You cannot argue "this is the only place we can make a living" and "they're just going to leave if they can't advertise *as much as before* (while still being able to advertise) for free" at the same time.
• I'm not going anywhere? I wasn't aware having a different take on some matter means I have to leave.

 

[DoctorKroll]

They have not disappeared in any sense of the word. You can still freely advertise several times a day. What do you not understand about this?

do you carefully ignore the fact that a few seconds in 8 hours is ineffective?

 

[Rayd]

do you carefully ignore the fact that a few seconds in 8 hours is ineffective?

watchers scroll through their notifications. people specifically search for ych's.

i don't see how a ych being on the front page for a few seconds 10 times a day as opposed to 2 or 3 is any more effective, especially when more often than not the most traffic you're going to get is through people searching for ych's. as a matter of fact, you'll be easier to find when people search for them considering there will be way less reminders than there used to be, so your reminders won't be swamped by 50 others from people spamming them.

 

[Deleted member 115426]

I think most of the people here on the side of this is a good change aren't artists or aren't actually making a living doing art. How many times do the artists need to say that this is affecting them before you stop repeating "hurr durr no it doesn't"

 

[Rayd]

I think most of the people here on the side of this is a good change aren't artists or aren't actually making a living doing art. How many times do the artists need to say that this is affecting them before you stop repeating "hurr durr no it doesn't"

i'm just saying it how it is. it's not FA's responsibility to change on the behalf of some people's financial instability. it's not their problem and nor does it need to be literally everybody's. it was their choice to freelance, and their choice to use FA to do so. it doesn't matter if they aren't artists because it's not about being an artist, it's about responsibility. if your success is so hindered by the change, maybe don't freelance as a full-time job? i repeat, an individual's financial stability is their own responsibility, and if this affects them so much, maybe they need to adapt or find other work altogether instead of telling an entire website to change to accommodate them. it's life.

regardless, the way i see it, the system still works. i've yet to see a legitimate reason how you'd lose a devastating amount of traffic from only being able to post 3 reminders a day instead of 30

 

[Lutro]

I think most of the people here on the side of this is a good change aren't artists or aren't actually making a living doing art. How many times do the artists need to say that this is affecting them before you stop repeating "hurr durr no it doesn't"

Hi, I'm an artist. Grouping everyone who doesn't mind the change into "oh the obviously don't know or care" is silly, and inaccurate. Nobody's denying that it doesn't affect them. Just the extent. Halving advertising daily is not supreme destruction. They can still advertise. Several times a day.

It's called nuance. You being reductionist trying to condemn anyone not against the change into some simplistic "they don't care, they're denying everything" isn't helping anything.

 

[Lutro]

do you carefully ignore the fact that a few seconds in 8 hours is ineffective?

If you truly only get "a few seconds" per post, then being able to post twice as much per day just doesn't matter. Also you've ignored my whole post three times now. You can soapbox on your blog but here it's a discussion.

 

[Toasty9399]

Reminder spam and ych ads are annoying.

 

[Deleted member 115426]

i'm just saying it how it is. it's not FA's responsibility to change on the behalf of some people's financial instability. it's not their problem and nor does it need to be literally everybody's. it was their choice to freelance, and their choice to use FA to do so. it doesn't matter if they aren't artists because it's not about being an artist, it's about responsibility. if your success is so hindered by the change, maybe don't freelance as a full-time job? i repeat, an individual's financial stability is their own responsibility, and if this affects them so much, maybe they need to adapt or find other work altogether instead of telling an entire website to change to accommodate them. it's life.

regardless, the way i see it, the system still works. i've yet to see a legitimate reason how you'd lose a devastating amount of traffic from only being able to post 3 reminders a day instead of 30

I would think how many times people have said it has affected them would get it through to you.

Hi, I'm an artist. Grouping everyone who doesn't mind the change into "oh the obviously don't know or care" is silly, and inaccurate. Nobody's denying that it doesn't affect them. Just the extent. Halving advertising daily is not supreme destruction. They can still advertise. Several times a day.

It's called nuance. You being reductionist trying to condemn anyone not against the change into some simplistic "they don't care, they're denying everything" isn't helping anything.

The nuance you're missing is that artists are getting hurt. Maybe you aren't, but many are.

 

[DoctorKroll]

Adblock works here too. In fact, this place still lets you advertise through the gallery, a notable exception to ad-blocking as it's integrated into the content. And again: Apples to oranges. Freelance commission ads are not comparable to web-site ads, and this is the last time I'll repeat this.

on YouTube, most of the ads are integrated into the content. The interaction of the artist and the buyer is a free market, which is regulated by the parties to the transaction. Before the innovations, everything was going well, even people who violated the rules did not cause as much discomfort as now, when you can be seen for a few seconds, and they are all day. this cannot be regulated, because most users of violators are those who are not afraid to lose their account, and the administration against them seems to take sanctions too long.

That's not an implied social contract. That's a literal one. "I draw thing you pay me $x."

it's called market relations my friend
All this looks like unreasonable and inept attempts to control the artist market, as well as the fact that you cannot accept the fact that 90% of the content is made by the UCH and commission. Where do you think they come from? For the most part, this is the content that came from the reminders. and why do you put the vagaries of the public above the lives of artists who built on this earnings.

Because you keep bringing up the false comparison between site ads, and freelance ads in galleries. Plus, it's an apt comparison: If you search YouTube, your results aren't polluted with ads. In FA, ads (freelance) are. Not restricting them leads to the "majority" scenario described.

but the active members of the art gallery who produce the content suffer. You apparently did not study YouTube very carefully. if we talk about advertising embedded in content, then there it is ubiquitous. less popular users or beginners order video ads from already popular users. this, by the way, is also an example of market relations, which are regulated by their participants themselves. if you apply the novelties of the FA rules on YouTube, imagine what difficulties new users would have experienced, from whom in fact the only PR opportunity was taken away. everywhere such measures have a devastating effect.

Buy that advertising and you will get it for more than a few seconds. You get what you pay for, and it's as simple as that.

with new rules, reminders usually lose their meaning. Easier to place small finished drawings. I observed such attempts when viewing, which already indicates that flooding cannot be avoided. just people with a reputation and audience will be afraid to remind themselves again, while small accounts will continue to circumvent the rules, as they did before the innovation

• It's not my job to "find alternatives." Not my livelihood on the line. I don't run FA. That being said, I've already suggested one or two (one of which is "keep doing the same thing", the other being "buy ad space." Advertising works, despite the advent of ad-block). You ignoring them with instant "well those don't work" dismissals doesn't make them any less valid.

• They. Can. Still. Advertise. In. Galleries. I won't repeat myself again.

• They are not going to leave the site if it's their main source of income. That's a farcical statement not grounded in any sense of reality. You cannot argue "this is the only place we can make a living" and "they're just going to leave if they can't advertise *as much as before* (while still being able to advertise) for free" at the same time.

• I'm not going anywhere? I wasn't aware having a different take on some matter means I have to leave.

empty allegations without reason that the advertisement is working and the ad block does not interfere in any way have no reason. You say that this does not bother anyone, but the very existence of this discussion on the forum contradicts your words. you are directly told by people who are faced with the problem of advertising, who bought paid advertising and who have already managed to feel the horror of the update. but you keep saying that the problem does not exist
only in one thing are you right, the administration does not care about the damage to the artists, because for me it is not obvious what is the meaning of the new rules and what is their profitability. I can repeat the approximate consequences of this. artists who filled the site with content will leave the resource, there will remain people who do not do this seriously, do not spend a lot of resources on this. that is, high-quality drawings will be a huge rarity for the site.
only flood accounts will be happy

 

[Rayd]

I would think how many times people have said it has affected them would get it through to you.

you would think with how many times people have said it has affected them that they would supply a valid unemotional reason how.

 

[DoctorKroll]

on the part of the administration, it was impudent to introduce new rules without consulting artists and turn off the possibility of commenting. we are simply confronted with the fact that we must accept a miserable existence

 

[Deleted member 115426]

you would think with how many times people have said it has affected them that they would supply a valid unemotional reason how.

So finacial reasons aren't valid?

 

[Rayd]

you would think with how many times people have said it has affected them that they would supply a valid unemotional reason how.

furthermore, with all the emotional posts about how this affects them, i've yet to see any of them give FA an objective reason why they should revert the changes aside from people wanting FA to accommodate their financial instability

 

[Raever]

The new rules wouldn't be so bad if the website didn't have "spam" as it's main way of promotion to begin with. There should be more categories and things, or news areas, or something for the artists to post as many things as they want without cluttering the actual genuine art submissions. I'm so 50/50 due to my own distaste for seeing walls of reminders and spam every five minutes prior to the new rules (I follow a lot of awesome artists). So, I'm slightly happy that I don't have to see them, but it would be nice for two categories (ex. "Artist Announcements" and "Artist Submissions") to exist. That way more seller based stuff such as reminders, YCH announcements, and other more business oriented things can be spammed all to heck (preferably with an optional ignore button for those who aren't planning on buying art and don't wanna be enticed to feed a starving artist) --- without ruining the beauty of the art page. It's bad enough (no offense artists) that we have to see banners, I'd rather not get more art advertisements shoved down my throat if I can help it. Yet, at the end of the day, I'm a commissioner - so going into a set category to scroll through the recent offers of my favorite artists when I DO have money to burn would be wonderful as doing it one by one, or worse possibly missing something based on chance alone, is just the most annoying thing ever.

Tldr; The rules wouldn't be bad if FA had better organization to begin with. Sorry artists, you aren't entitled to spamming our eyes with your BS 24/7, but I do acknowledge that the rules suck for sales, and I am sorry for that - and wish there was better organization to prevent that.

 

[Rayd]

So finacial reasons aren't valid?

it's not FA's problem, nor their fault, nor their responsibility, as i've said countless times.

 

[Raever]

furthermore, with all the emotional posts about how this affects them, i've yet to see any of them give FA an objective reason why they should revert the changes aside from people wanting FA to accommodate their financial instability

This as well, though I only agree mildly. It is not only not feesible to put all your eggs in one basket (especially if that basket is FA --- a historically unstable platform), it's incredibly irresponsible for an adult to choose to depend on others "possibly" wanting to spend money on art. It's one thing to be a reputable artist and deciding that a stable platform would be a profitable opportunity for you. However, most artists make survivable funds once or twice and think, "Ah yes this is what I'll do as my only income!" instead of testing the waters with a day job for a year or two to make sure it's doable. This is absolutely not FA's fault nor should FA (or commissioners?) be blamed for it. No one is responsible for your stability but you. That said, what I said above still stands - as a platform for artists, FA needs better organization. Which in my opinion is even more of a reason not to put all your eggs in one basket, especially now... :/

 

[Rayd]

The new rules wouldn't be so bad if the website didn't have "spam" as it's main way of promotion to begin with. There should be more categories and things, or news areas, or something for the artists to post as many things as they want without cluttering the actual genuine art submissions. I'm so 50/50 due to my own distaste for seeing walls of reminders and spam every five minutes prior to the new rules (I follow a lot of awesome artists). So, I'm slightly happy that I don't have to see them, but it would be nice for two categories (ex. "Artist Announcements" and "Artist Submissions") to exist. That way more seller based stuff such as reminders, YCH announcements, and other more business oriented things can be spammed all to heck (preferably with an optional ignore button for those who aren't planning on buying art and don't wanna be enticed to feed a starving artist) --- without ruining the beauty of the art page. It's bad enough (no offense artists) that we have to see banners, I'd rather not get more art advertisements shoved down my throat if I can help it. Yet, at the end of the day, I'm a commissioner - so going into a set category to scroll through the recent offers of my favorite artists when I DO have money to burn would be wonderful as doing it one by one, or worse possibly missing something based on chance alone, is just the most annoying thing ever.

Tldr; The rules wouldn't be bad if FA had better organization to begin with. Sorry artists, you aren't entitled to spamming our eyes with your BS 24/7, but I do acknowledge that the rules suck for sales, and I am sorry for that - and wish there was better organization to prevent that.

i think the general consensus is that if FA had better devs to implement convenient, organized and intuitive features instead of new, constricting rules, it would be a better alternative, but alas.

 

[Deleted member 115426]

So basically screw artists on an art website. Nice.

 

[DoctorKroll]

you would think with how many times people have said it has affected them that they would supply a valid unemotional reason how.

If you are not satisfied with the reason for dissatisfaction, this does not mean that this reason should not be taken into account.
why don't you take into account the fact that annoying users in reminders are also an emotional reason and a sentimental argument. this is not the end of life, unlike artists who feel the real consequences of this. From the fact that you write that the problem does not exist, the problem does not disappear, and the consequences from it, too. I believe that the problem should be resolved by the administration.