ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Literature Text
Dear Deviantart Staff,
I would like to say that I am very disappointed with the recent changes to the subscription system. I did not pay around $40 to be a premium member - I paid around $40 for a 12-month subscription to be a subscriber. While I can handle this change in my status as a member, one thing I cannot tolerate is the changes to the mature content viewing.
I wished to show a friend who does not have 'premium status' a recent deviation only to have him tell me that he needed to be a subscriber to view this simply because it has a little nudity in it and was therefore marked as mature.
Why should we pay money to view art that may or may not have a bit of nudity in it? This is ridiculous. At some point, every member may want or need a deviation that may have some nudity in it. A nude refference for a pose, perhaps. Or a nude photo for a photomanip. A slightly mature (for whatever reason) picture by their favourite artist.Why should these people, who have had access to these things for free since DeviantART became a website, pay you money for that? I am most upset that a vast amount of my watchers can now not view my drawing because they aren't 'premium members'.
To put this in the least profane way possible, it is a dick move. You are alienating an extreme range of your public for the sake of making a little cash. And so, I ask you this. Has Deviantart descended into the sinkhole of corporate money grubbing that so many poor, hopeless souls have fallen into, or are we still a community for artists, by artists?
I'm seriously beginning to question that.
Sincerely,
Lindsay A. Pridham, *chihiro-donno
I would like to say that I am very disappointed with the recent changes to the subscription system. I did not pay around $40 to be a premium member - I paid around $40 for a 12-month subscription to be a subscriber. While I can handle this change in my status as a member, one thing I cannot tolerate is the changes to the mature content viewing.
I wished to show a friend who does not have 'premium status' a recent deviation only to have him tell me that he needed to be a subscriber to view this simply because it has a little nudity in it and was therefore marked as mature.
Why should we pay money to view art that may or may not have a bit of nudity in it? This is ridiculous. At some point, every member may want or need a deviation that may have some nudity in it. A nude refference for a pose, perhaps. Or a nude photo for a photomanip. A slightly mature (for whatever reason) picture by their favourite artist.Why should these people, who have had access to these things for free since DeviantART became a website, pay you money for that? I am most upset that a vast amount of my watchers can now not view my drawing because they aren't 'premium members'.
To put this in the least profane way possible, it is a dick move. You are alienating an extreme range of your public for the sake of making a little cash. And so, I ask you this. Has Deviantart descended into the sinkhole of corporate money grubbing that so many poor, hopeless souls have fallen into, or are we still a community for artists, by artists?
I'm seriously beginning to question that.
Sincerely,
Lindsay A. Pridham, *chihiro-donno
Suggested Collections
![[ stamp | lmao, i'm so edgy. ]](https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/68e0b1b8-b69f-4693-bba0-2bf29e988df5/d9rogxn-c36dfdab-a99e-4ba6-9074-56a32a276cec.png/v1/crop/w_92,h_56,x_11,y_0,scl_1/__stamp___lmao__i_m_so_edgy____by_saaros_d9rogxn-92s.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9NTYiLCJwYXRoIjoiXC9mXC82OGUwYjFiOC1iNjlmLTQ2OTMtYmJhMC0yYmYyOWU5ODhkZjVcL2Q5cm9neG4tYzM2ZGZkYWItYTk5ZS00YmE2LTkwNzQtNTZhMzJhMjc2Y2VjLnBuZyIsIndpZHRoIjoiPD05OSJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.QkrHaZcd2KPGU5QhztQISAaQfk5nxLIOBRIg_83xSGc)
Change things back, dA. This will only hurt you in the long run...
Feel free to comment with your own little letters to dA. Maybe we can change this back. One ripple can become a wave.
Feel free to comment with your own little letters to dA. Maybe we can change this back. One ripple can become a wave.
© 2009 - 2024 Chihiro-donno
Comments12
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Well hold on now. There is a reason why DA has enacted this, and it's a little deeper than "cooperate greed". Though I don't necessarily agree with this whole thing either, you have to understand where DA is coming from.
As a profiting cooperation, DA is pressured to police their content to prevent minors from viewing "inappropriate content". Previously, anyone with a DA account regardless of the age setting, could view mature content one way or the other. The actual reason behind requiring premium access is not to make money, as the sum profited from people actually activating premium membership specifically to view mature content would be pitiful. That is wholly unnecessary, since these days even 10 year olds know you can just make an alternate "over 18" account. It's a simple solution to bypass the mature filtering, and no one is going to pay for something they can bypass with a simple solution.
The actual reason behind the requirement for premium access, is so that DA can pretty much verify that even though the account is set under 18, someone over 18 was involved, because a credit card was involved. Though it's not explicit, by entering a payment into the equation, DA can basically defend themselves by saying: "Well this account is owned by someone under 18, but a family member or someone over 18 must have been involved in upgrading their account, and so that constitutes an agreement between us and the user that the minor has been approved for mature access by an adult".
Now obviously that's not a given. Anyone can punch in a credit card number, it's not difficult for someone under 18 to do. But it strengthens DA's defenses when someone tries to sue them from "corrupting" their child with terrifying nudity.
In a way that is sort of cooperate greed anyway. DA selfishly covering it's bases and screwing over a large percentage of it's users. But DA also has to owe up to cooperate responsibility, and it's not exactly as cut and dry a thing as it might seem. It's virtually impossible to police censorship these days, and so all these E-businesses are grasping at straws to try and prevent the preteens from outsmarting their frankly useless authentication systems.
TL;DR: Just make an alternate over 18 account and no one has to pay a cent.
As a profiting cooperation, DA is pressured to police their content to prevent minors from viewing "inappropriate content". Previously, anyone with a DA account regardless of the age setting, could view mature content one way or the other. The actual reason behind requiring premium access is not to make money, as the sum profited from people actually activating premium membership specifically to view mature content would be pitiful. That is wholly unnecessary, since these days even 10 year olds know you can just make an alternate "over 18" account. It's a simple solution to bypass the mature filtering, and no one is going to pay for something they can bypass with a simple solution.
The actual reason behind the requirement for premium access, is so that DA can pretty much verify that even though the account is set under 18, someone over 18 was involved, because a credit card was involved. Though it's not explicit, by entering a payment into the equation, DA can basically defend themselves by saying: "Well this account is owned by someone under 18, but a family member or someone over 18 must have been involved in upgrading their account, and so that constitutes an agreement between us and the user that the minor has been approved for mature access by an adult".
Now obviously that's not a given. Anyone can punch in a credit card number, it's not difficult for someone under 18 to do. But it strengthens DA's defenses when someone tries to sue them from "corrupting" their child with terrifying nudity.
In a way that is sort of cooperate greed anyway. DA selfishly covering it's bases and screwing over a large percentage of it's users. But DA also has to owe up to cooperate responsibility, and it's not exactly as cut and dry a thing as it might seem. It's virtually impossible to police censorship these days, and so all these E-businesses are grasping at straws to try and prevent the preteens from outsmarting their frankly useless authentication systems.
TL;DR: Just make an alternate over 18 account and no one has to pay a cent.