• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Commission Review Section


Uncia brought up in a recent thread about using Fur Affinity's tools to inform users of bad user practices regarding commissioned art, weary that information such as that can be deemed destructive and inflammatory by the administration. This is a proposition of a forum section in Fur Affinity Forum's Art Shack that users can post their reviews of commissioned artists and commissioners. However, I am a little clueless as to how this can be successfully executed if it were to pass.

Reading articles in WikiFur tells tales of some artists who, while popular, are dogged by a history of delinquency with commissioned art. A user that I conversed with via AIM told me of some popular artists that he claimed have forgotten of commissions he's paid for. I've even playfully joshed with another user comparing her to the Soup Nazi, but still poor client service is something I am weary of.

I've read in journals and complaint threads about a user whose gotten on everyone's bad side for being a deadbeat in regards to payment for her commissions as well as general harrassment that earned her a ban and subsequent evasion bans. Some users write journals in a furious uproar after dealing with supposedly unreasonable clients.

A long time ago, I told a jaded deviantART subscriber that "caveat emptor" is a cold thing to say, yet it is the only thing one can say. Still, I would hope that there can be some sort of information service that preempts us from serial offenders.

A foreseeable problem in this issue is the whole element of "he said, she said". Stephen Colbert demonstrated his ability to manipulate "the truth", or rather Wikipedia's version of "the truth", through his popularity. How can good or bad commission experiences be reported adequately without inciting retaliation or rallying support for the popular party by default? I think this also brings up the question of user credibility.

Here is a hypothesized template of a topic thread by a commissioner:
Topic: Commissioned Artist (username)

User: {link to user's page}
Commissioned Artwork: {link to submission page}

In regards to my experience commissioning this artist, I would say the experience had been positive. He has been courteous, etc., etc. ...
Here is a hypothesized template of a topic thread by an artist:
Topic: Commissioner (username)

User: {link to user's page}
Commissioned Artwork: {link to submission page}

I had completed this commission and it has been six weeks and the user has still not paid for it. He has been rude, etc., etc. ...
Forum users can then type in the username they are considering commissioning or accepting a commission from and research his or her history. Also perhaps, users can suffix the topic title with "+" or "-" to indicate their general rating of the experience.

Again, I don't know if it is feasible and Fur Affinity users demonstrate on a daily basis how to abuse systems meant to be helpful. Feedback and personal ideas would help.

Thank you.


Probably still lives in a giant bucket
I like this idea, though I could see it turning into flames quickly if handled without tact. Keep in mind that there are separate places to report poor behavior on the part of both commissioners and artists (ie, Artist Beware on LiveJournal).

I would say a rating scale could be used as well, like a 1-10 on the service, speed, and quality just for the sake of being quantifiable. Plus the need for small details, like "received icon two days after payment was sent."

So, maybe something like this, working from yours:

Topic: Commissioned Artist (username)

User: {link to user's page}
Commissioned Artwork: {link to submission page}
Service: 10, was friendly and helpful.
Speed: 10, I got my commission well within the time frame I asked for.
Quality: 10, very finished and clean.
Revisions: Four slight changes in the sketch phase and a color correction.

Other comments:

I think that revisions might be included too because it shows that the artist is willing to do them on request, and also they are showing progress sketches rather than the finished piece only.