Regarding DNP rules

@ZizzyDizzyMC  
I’ll wait and see then.
 
I just wanted transparency and explanation though, to know if you have our best interests in mind and if this site is going to have a good foundation or not. Because I am quite frankly incredibly sick and tired of being shunted off of sites over asinine changes and forced into bad alternatives purely on the basis of “It’s the only viable option right now”.
 
I never wanted to leave tumblr to begin with, I didn’t want Derpibooru to eat itself, I hate twitter and want to fuck off from there. I just want a stable place to post my shit without the site itself trying to fuck me over.
 
@Anonymous #0D90  
All of them, because having control taken away from your own artwork affects everyone, regardless of their reasons.  
That’s the point. You catch me arguing because I am concerned that you guys might be too blinded by the idea of dabbing on some woke cringelord mouthpiece and maximum turbo jew artists to see what it actually means for everyone else, and that you are grossly over exaggerating what a problem the original DNP system was.
 
@Anonymous #31D4  
“If you don’t want your art archived on a site that until recently let you decide if you wanted to or not then you should quit art”, really zinged him there my dude, flawless.
 
Or the site can just, go back to how it was before, and he can continue drawing whatever he wants elsewhere if he is upset about his content being here, which is ultimately what he will end up doing by filing a DMCA and accomplish the same thing anyway. Artist choice.
 
@Anonymous #82A9  
It’s telling that you say this, despite this having been a clause in my commissions sheet for well over 5-6 years now and me having argued in favor of ownership and fair trade for actual eons now.
 

 
I’m sorry that the notion of “whats yours is yours, whats mine is mine” comes off as so offensive and regrettable to you.
 
@Anonymous #D764  
It really says something when anon does historical revisionism not even 2 days or so after the site changed it’s policies from “We are literally straight up Derpibooru but with freedom of content, our appeal is that we are exactly the same but wont censor” to “We are kinda like Rainbooru now but with a nicer UI and pretend to be slightly nicer about how we accept content even though our end game is exactly the same”.
 
Can’t imagine why anyone would potentially find issue with such an out of nowhere change.
 
 
@CurtainedWizard  

@Anonymous #7EA5

Or do you mean these embeds are treated just like regular uploads, only instead of the image itself you click a text link to go to the art?

Precisely, if the artist has a preferred upstream canonical source, we present that for the user to click through. It seems perfectly reasonable to me. The art is still locatable by it’s tags, it’s existence acknowledged, until such time the artist is comfortable having it here. It that day is to never come, so be it.

Ask yourself: Would it be reasonable that artists demand Facebook or Discord to not present those embed cards for links? I don’t think that would get very far.

Are you implying that the art itself wouldn’t be hosted on the site per se, but rather be a dummy upload with a direct link to the source itself? Because that’d be a really good idea to get around artists not explicitly wanting their content on the site, directing people by link to art source isn’t the same as hosting the art itself after all.

Are you implying that the art itself wouldn’t be hosted on the site per se, but rather be a dummy upload with a direct link to the source itself? Because that’d be a really good idea to get around artists not explicitly wanting their content on the site, directing people by link to art source isn’t the same as hosting the art itself after all.

How would this be handled for non-public paid content though? What happens if the original post is gone?

 
Correct, a placeholder page could be fashioned, just as social media sites embed for external links. A random example of this concept, grabbed from a general web image search:
 

 
If it’s so non-public there is no metadata, why would an entry exist for in the first place? If it’s public enough that there is metadata, a link to the origin would still be perfectly feasible. If the artwork is straight up gone, a helpful guide on where one might seek sources of last resort could be provided.

also keep in mind a lot of artists on the DNP list (myself included) likely just want to keep their artist tag tidy

@Replica
It was already stated DNPs shall allow the artist to specify longer terms.

It’s telling that you say this, despite this having been a clause in my commissions sheet for well over 5-6 years now and me having argued in favor of ownership and fair trade for actual eons now.

Sorry, but what do you mean exactly?

Are you implying that the art itself wouldn’t be hosted on the site per se, but rather be a dummy upload with a direct link to the source itself? Because that’d be a really good idea to get around artists not explicitly wanting their content on the site, directing people by link to art source isn’t the same as hosting the art itself after all.

How would this be handled for non-public paid content though? What happens if the original post is gone?

if i recall correctly, deleting an image isn’t even permanent. even if people are requesting takedowns for stupid reasons, they can still reverse it at any point if they so wish