Only edgelord is you with such a haughty post lol. 'I play the game since beta' cool did you actually have a skin shop. Do you actually know what it's like to have dozens of people with money waiting on an accent that could be denied for two pixels, to have them cancel their orders because staff is taking to long?
A skin passed that had exposed embryos on it. Are you going to tell me that's less 'edgy' over two pink pixels done for a wound dripping?
NAYRT, but I have run a skin shop (and I have had skins sent back for revision before) and:
1) the embryo skin was an old skin that has been grandfathered in and would probably not be accepted these days, so it's not a good comparison
2) dripping blood coming from visible wounds has been pretty consistently rejected for several years now, and any experienced UMA artist, especially one who hangs out in a Discord with a bunch of other experienced UMA artists, would know that such a thing is pushing their luck.
Could it stand to be said more clearly in the official written rules? Absolutely. Do artists constantly test known limits to see what they can get away with? Absolutely.
I have seen artists gloat about getting silhouette-breaking accents past the mods (and then complain when the ascents are edited after the fact to be in line with the clearly stated site rules). There was the whole thing with thinly-veiled fetish designs. One of those "how dare they reject this" examples showed a dragon carrying around cross sections of bloody flesh cut from its own body!
You can't deny that at least some people do push boundaries to be edgy, and at the end of the day FR Staff gets to decide what they want to allow in their own site.
When I was looking over the skins they showed as proof, were they not only skins from the AAA group?
I’m all for clear policy rules but it this reeks of a group who are only bothered by the policies because they’re pushing boundaries over and over rather than for the community.
Not all skins were from the AAA group, but the majority were from there because they wanted permission from the accent artists to use skins as examples.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: Skin makers go on strike
(Anonymous) 2022-04-06 06:10 pm (UTC)(link)A skin passed that had exposed embryos on it. Are you going to tell me that's less 'edgy' over two pink pixels done for a wound dripping?
Re: Skin makers go on strike
(Anonymous) 2022-04-06 06:44 pm (UTC)(link)1) the embryo skin was an old skin that has been grandfathered in and would probably not be accepted these days, so it's not a good comparison
2) dripping blood coming from visible wounds has been pretty consistently rejected for several years now, and any experienced UMA artist, especially one who hangs out in a Discord with a bunch of other experienced UMA artists, would know that such a thing is pushing their luck.
Could it stand to be said more clearly in the official written rules? Absolutely. Do artists constantly test known limits to see what they can get away with? Absolutely.
I have seen artists gloat about getting silhouette-breaking accents past the mods (and then complain when the ascents are edited after the fact to be in line with the clearly stated site rules). There was the whole thing with thinly-veiled fetish designs. One of those "how dare they reject this" examples showed a dragon carrying around cross sections of bloody flesh cut from its own body!
You can't deny that at least some people do push boundaries to be edgy, and at the end of the day FR Staff gets to decide what they want to allow in their own site.
Re: Skin makers go on strike
(Anonymous) 2022-04-06 07:49 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Skin makers go on strike
(Anonymous) 2022-04-07 02:54 pm (UTC)(link)I’m all for clear policy rules but it this reeks of a group who are only bothered by the policies because they’re pushing boundaries over and over rather than for the community.
Re: Skin makers go on strike
(Anonymous) 2022-04-07 04:12 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Skin makers go on strike
(Anonymous) 2022-04-07 04:17 pm (UTC)(link)