FA+
Shop
Banned from Deviant Art (UPDATED 4/20/2024)
a year ago
As some of you are probably already aware, my main account on Deviant Art was deactivated on Thursday, April 18th, 2024. This was not by my choice. It was terminated by Deviant Art Staff.
Here's what happened.
UPDATE: Italicized text is just speculation of the possibility of one event playing into another, and given the second update bracket, is likely inconsequential. While the timing is certainly suspicious, "suspect" is not a synonym for "guilty."
On April 11th, I got into an argument with another user named iamtheladyoflight, a fundamentally untalented "artist" whose work all screams "mid-to-late thirties spinster with baby rabies" and whose existence I only mildly tolerated, over, of all things, her pro abortion beliefs. (Stew on that divine comedy irony for a minute.) I didn't have the foresight to save the whole argument before she hid it, which lasted only a total of six comments, but I was keen enough to screenshot the first half, linked:
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/56.....oad-successful
Afterwords, we blocked each other and went our separate ways... or so I thought.
On April 16th, I had four of my pictures -- Massive Maternal May, Persona Permaberry - Ann Takamaki, Carmine, the Indigo Blueberry, and Happy Birthday from Hilda -- removed by Deviant Art on the claims that they contained "sexualization of underage characters," despite the fact that I made an effort to both show and explain that all the characters within them were meant to be depicted as eighteen years old or older. But others were targeted as well, such as Not To See, But To Feel: Part 3 (I'll be honest, that one doesn't surprise me), but so was "Nice Blue Balls, Bro." deleted for "violation of sexual policy," despite the fact that there isn't even any nudity in that one.
I was only on the site as TheHungryLurker since Christmas of 2021, but I've been lurking Deviant Art since some of my watchers were still in diapers, so I know that the NKVDeviant Art staff don't typically remove something unless somebody reports it, and Lady herself once said to me "never underestimate what I can do with enough spite." I'll admit this is speculation on my part, but there is at least a suspect and motive.
Either way, after those first four pictures were deleted, I attempted to reupload them in a heavily edited state, where almost everything but their heads were obscured. This just resulted in more take downs, and a permanent ban.
I've filed an appeal, but for all I know that's just going to amount to piss in the wind. Even if my original account is reinstated, I'm going to direct people more towards and increasing my standing on my accounts outside of Deviant Art, such as this one. And if I do make a new DA account several months from now when the heat has died down, I'm going to do the same thing. For now, none of my current plans involve Deviant Art. Time will tell if my future plans don't involve it, either.
[sighs] Rimou was right.
UPDATE: A user claiming to be iamtheladyoflight has contacted me and stated that she had nothing to do with my pictures being reported, only that she blocked me after our argument and moved on and offered their condolences for the situation. I personally cannot independently confirm or disprove if this user is Lady, or if she is, that she is indeed telling the truth on the matter. Then again, I have also stated from the start that my speculation of her involvement is exactly that: speculation, and that I also cannot confirm or disprove her involvement. So don't go doing anything rash like mass report her profile without irrefutable evidence of her involvement. We must abide by the precept that people are innocent unless they can be immutably and objectively proven guilty.
I did something rash, and my Deviant Art account got deleted for it.
Here's what happened.
UPDATE: Italicized text is just speculation of the possibility of one event playing into another, and given the second update bracket, is likely inconsequential. While the timing is certainly suspicious, "suspect" is not a synonym for "guilty."
On April 11th, I got into an argument with another user named iamtheladyoflight, a fundamentally untalented "artist" whose work all screams "mid-to-late thirties spinster with baby rabies" and whose existence I only mildly tolerated, over, of all things, her pro abortion beliefs. (Stew on that divine comedy irony for a minute.) I didn't have the foresight to save the whole argument before she hid it, which lasted only a total of six comments, but I was keen enough to screenshot the first half, linked:
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/56.....oad-successful
Afterwords, we blocked each other and went our separate ways... or so I thought.
On April 16th, I had four of my pictures -- Massive Maternal May, Persona Permaberry - Ann Takamaki, Carmine, the Indigo Blueberry, and Happy Birthday from Hilda -- removed by Deviant Art on the claims that they contained "sexualization of underage characters," despite the fact that I made an effort to both show and explain that all the characters within them were meant to be depicted as eighteen years old or older. But others were targeted as well, such as Not To See, But To Feel: Part 3 (I'll be honest, that one doesn't surprise me), but so was "Nice Blue Balls, Bro." deleted for "violation of sexual policy," despite the fact that there isn't even any nudity in that one.
I was only on the site as TheHungryLurker since Christmas of 2021, but I've been lurking Deviant Art since some of my watchers were still in diapers, so I know that the NKVDeviant Art staff don't typically remove something unless somebody reports it, and Lady herself once said to me "never underestimate what I can do with enough spite." I'll admit this is speculation on my part, but there is at least a suspect and motive.
Either way, after those first four pictures were deleted, I attempted to reupload them in a heavily edited state, where almost everything but their heads were obscured. This just resulted in more take downs, and a permanent ban.
I've filed an appeal, but for all I know that's just going to amount to piss in the wind. Even if my original account is reinstated, I'm going to direct people more towards and increasing my standing on my accounts outside of Deviant Art, such as this one. And if I do make a new DA account several months from now when the heat has died down, I'm going to do the same thing. For now, none of my current plans involve Deviant Art. Time will tell if my future plans don't involve it, either.
[sighs] Rimou was right.
UPDATE: A user claiming to be iamtheladyoflight has contacted me and stated that she had nothing to do with my pictures being reported, only that she blocked me after our argument and moved on and offered their condolences for the situation. I personally cannot independently confirm or disprove if this user is Lady, or if she is, that she is indeed telling the truth on the matter. Then again, I have also stated from the start that my speculation of her involvement is exactly that: speculation, and that I also cannot confirm or disprove her involvement. So don't go doing anything rash like mass report her profile without irrefutable evidence of her involvement. We must abide by the precept that people are innocent unless they can be immutably and objectively proven guilty.
I did something rash, and my Deviant Art account got deleted for it.
DeviantArt us full of art thieves, AI Artists, pedophiles and hackers.
Its for your safety.
>"DA is full of AI Artists"
I beg your pardon, but there is no such thing as an "AI artist." AI generated images are not art, so the people who input the prompts are not artists. Calling someone an AI artist is like calling someone on a boat a "ship-assisted swimmer."
Again, I don't know if this argument actually resulted in my work being targeted for removal. It could be complete coincidence for all I know, but the timing of these two events is still very suspicious. "Suspicious" is not synonymous with "guilty," but it is nonetheless incredibly suspicious.
>"I'm pro abortion"
... Why? Don't you have a son?
Or, they could do like I do and not have sex with anyone whom both parties are not fully committed to each other and to bearing and raising children together.
If anything, the ghastly degree to which abortion is employed is sign of women's terminally irresponsible lack of self control, and using abortion as a "get out of parental responsibility free" card will just encourage even greater lack of self control.
What about rape ? Heavy health issues to come ? Pregnancy denial ? Why it must be more something about women being irresponsible ? Is there any relevant, serious and documented fact to prove your point ?
Do we only have to oppose abortion and lack of self control in a majority of cases ? If so, why ?
Also, it's well known in psychiatry that women on average are lower in the trait of conscientiousness, so...
I actually have seen statistics on this. It's been awhile, so forgive me for not recalling the source off the top of my head, but here in the United States, the number of abortions performed when the pregnancy is of mortal peril to the mother are extremely low; only in the hundreds. The number of abortions per year is in the hundreds of thousands. Last year I could find data on was 2020, with 930,160 abortions, which, for the record, is almost 200,000 more than the number of people estimated to have been executed during Stalin's Great Purge of 1937.
As for rape, I hesitate to say that should be a go-to option. Abortion has severely detrimental effects on a woman's emotional and mental state that nobody likes to acknowledge, so to stack that on top of the trauma of one of the worst and most evil things one person can do to another could be psyche-fracturing. There are other options, like the child could be given up for adoption to a couple that can't have children. Sometimes, the mother raising the child can be the exact thing she needs to recover from the trauma. I once read one woman commenting on how she had been raped and impregnated, and after weighing all her options, decided to raise the child anyway, ans she said she considers deciding to not get an abortion was the best decision she had ever made in her life, because otherwise, she wouldn't have "my beautiful, 27-year-old daughter." She healed by taking the consequences of the worst thing that ever happened to her and made them the best. Truly, the best revenge is living well.
Even then, the number of abortions reported as being the product of rape are also a small, single digit percentage of the total number of abortions performed per year; within the single-digit thousands if I recall correctly, making that come to, at the absolute most, <2% of all abortions in the USA.
Also, setting the precedent that abortion is only okay when it's the result of rape will result in a skyrocketing number of cases of women falsely accusing the men who impregnated them of rape. My source: the entire fucking Me Too witch hunts.
But most prescient, one evil does not correct another. Why should an innocent child die for the sins of a wicked person?
If you're going to throw that "what about-ism" at me, do you concede that abortion is only permissible when the pregnancy is the result of rape or when it is endangering the life of the mother?
Why should abortion on demand for people who refuse to use their ability to create life responsibly be opposed?... Do there even need to be more reasons than "murdering unborn babies because those people want to hedonistically fuck without consequence is pure evil"?
What kind of psychatry tell that women are lower in conscientiousness ? That sounds so terribbly wrong and outdated.
Statistics won’t talk about rapes that hasn’t been reported to police, and I read with no surprise it’s estimated toward 80% of rapes in Texas, as an example. Nor we don’t talk about countries and cultures blaming raped women (so the rapes don’t even get a chance to be recognized as ones).
Abortion for mortal peril prenancy is a minimum.
Letting a innocent woman die against her will to give birth to an innocent motherless baby is nothing cute.
In the US, doctors almost always go for cesearean section for births, even when risks are almost inexistant. May be there’s a health care organization problem about abortion too, like the cesarean crazyiness ? That’s clearly a may be, I must admit.
I’m sure Stalin’s purge wasn’t about aborting women fetuses in hospitals. Though that could give some ideas to any wanna be Hitler who wants control over births … I mean non-births. Both can works, you know.
For rape, abortion is surely an option, we hope it’d never be one in anytime in anyway.
Women happy with their babies are not making raped women who do cleary not want the baby more happy. Those are two quite different cases with so much nuances possible in between and cannot be treated the same way.
You’ll always find a good witch to hunt in some Me Too hashtags too. This is not getting to any serious point. I don’t think your in front of an army of female liars.
Is that all about sins of wicked persons and pure evil so ? I saw it coming from afar.
So, when this child to come got so much red flags over him, over his mother that would insure them a living hell, I’m not sure that systematicaly considering a fetus an innocent child and blaming the mother for any ‘sins’ would be of any concrete help.
In almost all you wrote, I feel that to you women are the problem. Too bad for them that they are the one that give birth.
I've heard it cited multiple times by multiple studies looking into psychological differences between both gendersa and multiple psychologists, including Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, one of the world's most peer reviewed and cited psychologists in the world. These same tests also found women on average tend to be higher in agreeableness and empathy. Both sexes have traits that, on average, one is better/worse at than another. This was common knowledge for thousands upon thousands of years, and only "terrible wrong and outdated" if you prescribe by some "pRoGrEsSivIsT" (which is actually just nu communism) dogma that men and women are exactly the same.
Throwing statistics and percentages at me? The guy who scales girls turned into blueberries over thirty feet tall down to the thousandth of an inch? Oh-ho ho, now that ball is in The Hungry Lurker's court!
I'll be using the United States as the metric for this example. I am aware these numbers and percentages will be different from France, but I will report them for the sake of posterity, semantics, and because you brought up Texas.
So the last year that I could find both reported number of rapes and abortions in the United States was 2018. According to the Uniform Crime Report (data collected from all local and state law enforcement institutions), in 2018, there were 139,380 reported rapes. Now, assuming every single one of these was a rape that could result in pregnancy, so only instances of men raping women and the less often but not statistically insignificant cases of women raping men and disregarding all instances of homosexual rape, and that every single one was legitimate, disregarding the United States Armed Forces research which found that up to HALF of all reported rapes are fraudulent (I don't have the exact data on hand, but if you would like to see it, I can get in touch with someone who is very familiar with it), and that your speculative number that rapes is under-reported by 80%, we'll take 139,380, multiply it by five, that gives us 696,900 estimated rapes in 2018.
Now, women's fertility windows come to about 60 days out of the 365.23 days of the year, so for ease and generosity, we'll round that out to 1/6. So, we'll take 696,900, divide it by 6, and that gives us 116,150 estimated rapes in 2018 that could have resulted in pregnancy, For the sake of argument, let's assume that 100% of these did result in a viable pregnancy, and 100% of them were aborted. This is obviously an absurdly calculated number, and If I was to turn in that number in a college statistics course for an assignment on the topic, I'd get at best a D and a "see me after class," but I'm being as generous to your statement as I statistically can. Assuming that there were 116,150 abortions in 2018 that were the result of rape, that STILL only comes up to 18.75% of the 619,591 abortions that were reported to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in 2018, and that number could possibly be higher, as the Guttermach Institute estimates there were closer to ~900,000 abortions in the USA in 2018.
So even operating with this "we have to let abortion be on-demand because women get raped" fallacy, even in the most fanciful of circumstances, with statistically impossible numbers, less than 1/5th of all abortions performed due to rape.
Sources:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u......pages/rape.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69.....s/ss6907a1.htm
Pretty much the only instance were abortion is permissible is when the pregnancy is a threat to the life of the mother, but that's only part of what I asked. What I asked was is if you think that is the only time when it is acceptable.
I was wondering how long it would be before Godwin's Law was invoked and someone brought up the German wolf with the funny mustache. Though, not-so-fun facts, the hack science of eugenics that Hitler built his belief that he needed to exterminate all the genetically impure from Germany was also a belief held by Margret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, which has made abortion it's fucking franchise in the same way McDonald's franchise is cheap, terrible food that normies get addicted to. Sanger was a eugenicist, and established Planned Parenthood in part because she wanted to exterminate black Americans, which is something they operate on to this very day by setting up their murder mills near or in black communities. In far left states like New York, black babies are more likely to be aborted than born, so in America at least, supporting abortion on demand is second-hand, tacet endorsement of genociding blacks. (This should go without saying, but I think that's terrible.) Hell, the National Socialist German Worker's Party got the idea for gas chambers from far left American "pRoGrEsSiVeS" (Just a rebranded for "Marxist") who Sanger was ideologically aligned with.
By the way, in the United States alone, the total number of recorded abortions since 1960 exceeds to total number of casualties in World War II.
I never said that just because one women turned her life around through her love for her bastard-by-rape daughter, but I am saying I would recommend that before recommending killing the child, for the aforementioned reasons of the additional psychologically deleterious effects abortion has on a woman. I read a recount of a former psychiatrist's secretary who would file and dispose their paperwork, which involved having to peer-review all the client's case files; every single female client of the psychiatrist except for one had at least one abortion in their past, and the one exception was a 12-year-old girl. I've seen people throw around the statistic that 1/3rd of all women in the USA will get an abortion (as it that's supposed to be an endorsement), and not connect the dots right next to each other that 1/3rd of all the women in the USA are taking some form of psychiatric medication, like anti-depressants.
For as many actual predators as Me Too brought to light, there were many, many more who nearly or did have their lives ruined on nothing but a baseless accusation alone. The second greatest mistake men can make in regards to giving women their power is the assumption that they have no capacity or intent to abuse that power. (The greatest mistake is giving them that power in the first place.)
>"I don't think your [sic] in front of an army of Female liars."
I'm not (at the moment), but Bill Cosby sure was. Every single one of the 53 women who accused him of sexual assault were found to be liars. That, on top of the Pennsylvania state prosecutors violating his right to not self-incriminate which is supposed to be guaranteed inviolable by the Fifth Amendment in The Bill of Rights in The Constitution of The United States, is one of the many reasons Cosby's sentence was overturned. If Cosby wasn't in a "I just want to live the rest of my life in peace" mindset, he has legal standing to press charges of slander, false accusation, and perjury against every single one of his false accusers.
I should have worded that better. What I should have said was "why should an innocent child die for the wickedness of a rapist," because I was also trying to account for instances of when women rape men, which happens just barely less than 1/3rd as often as instances of when men rape women, but that is not a statistically insignificant number.
Are women not human beings who also have the gift of agency, who have the capacity to know right from wrong, and therefore should be held to the standard to act upon that? I personally believe that they are, and that treating them with the soft bigotry of low expectations will only create weak, corrupted people who are incentivized to act upon their vices. (That last part isn't a personal belief though, that's just what thousands upon thousands of years of human history have immutably proven to be the case.)
To bad for them indeed that women are the ones designated to give birth, because some of them don't deserve it, but acting like abortion is solely a women's issue because they are the child bearers is another logical fallacy, because women do not asexually reproduce. I'll concede that abortion should entirely be a women's issue if you can show me a single one that has.
Go on, I'll wait.
[cough]
This matters because whenever the debate of abortion comes up, I frequently find myself recollecting a qoute from famed ancient Roman citizen, orator, populist, lawyer, senator, gentleman, scholar, and alpha-Chad, Marcus Tulious Cicero: "What a society does to it's children, those children will do unto society." By bones chill with dread thinking of what grim, bloody fate awaits our societies for championing women slaughtering their unborn children because they literally couldn't be fucked to stay chaste?
But in all seriousness, this is such a bogus situation. being bitter with a political quarrel is one thing, but going as far to terminate someone's platform over differing ideals is a whole other level of unadulterated pettiness. Just another example of internet jackasses taking something meant to be simple fun like sexual fetishes, waaay to seriously. God I hate it when people feel the need to insert touchy serious subjects into kink content & expect not to receive any flack in the slightest...
I'm just thankful we're still in touch over on discord to still have conversations, on top of you having most of your gallery still online on other sites of course. Always good to have a fail-safes as the saying goes!
I am touched you hold me and my art with such high esteem. Technical shortcomings aside, Nessa, the Happiest Blueberry in Galar has actually become one of my most sentimentally cherished works, just for how intimate and loving their relationship in the picture and story is, and your reaction to seeing it for the first time one of my most treasured reactions from a viewer.
To be fair, and I said as much in the journal, I have no idea if Lady is the one who reported my work. Though the timing of these two coinciding events is extremely suspicious, being suspect is not synonymous with being guilty. She has since contacted me and sworn that she did not report my work, and I can neither confirm nor disprove the validity of her claims. We must take the standpoint that people are innocent unless they can be proven guilty, otherwise we're hardly better than the NKVDeviant Art Staff, who purge without warning or consideration for context or nuance. Or BLM.
All my accounts are to increase visibility, but also as contingency plans should something like this have occurred; hope for the best, prepare for the worst, so they say. I was prepared, yes; I even expected that for all the sites I was likely to get banned from, Deviant Art was by far the most likely; I remember what they did to Johnny Swell's The Bizarre Adventures of Berry Girl and Kim Possible fan art back in the day... but, well... I just never thought it would go down like this.
Still, I've been lurking since before some of my watchers were fucking conceived. It's going to take a lot more than one ban from a failing website to get rid of The Hungry Lurker!
I don't know if this argument actually had anything to do with my content being reported, but what matters is that someone reported it, and it got taken down.
Too bad DA is just like that, it really isnt a good place anymore
It's gotten increasingly bad ever since Deviant Art was sold to Wix and Angelo became the sole remaining founder. Eclipse mode and the attmpt to turn Deviant Art into a one-stop site trying to be Twitter, Discord, and Patreon at the same time were all vainglorious vanity projects that make the pretentious, artistic auto-fellatio of redesigning the logo to that Z-twig in 2014 look tame by comparison. Clearly none of those prospects have panned out, and I suspect that DA pushing core memberships and subscription services so hard, and gotten entirely in bed with AI image generation, is because they're in serious debt and are desperate to bolster their cash flow, by any means necessary, even the mass high-tech plagiarization of their user bases art. I also suspect this is why they've been coming down harder on NSFW artists, even those with over a decade of time on the site and whose work was far more tame than mine, like Shydude; I think Wix is trying to make the site look more appealing to potential buyers, but they don't want to blanket ban mature content like Tumblr tried to do, so are instead purging NSFW artists incrementally, NKVD style.
I was certainly their for the people and their content, not the site itself. Perhaps getting banned was for the better, but having so much work that so many people loved, and not being able to say goodbye to so many of them is what hurts the most.
>"Also ‘never underestimate what I can do with enough spite?’ That’s a blatant fucking lie and I’ll fight you on that. "
Strange hill to decide to die on, but okay.
I confess, I must make a correction; you didn't say "never underestimate what I can do with enough spite..." your EXACT words, copy-pasted directly from our conversation on your picture Hanamusa: Closing up Shop were: "Never underestimate what I can do with spite lol"
I even screen captured that part, just in case you try to delete that conversation, too:
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/56.....oad-successful
Does this prove you're guilty of doing what I speculated? No. No, it does not... but putting your foot in your mouth that hard would make Kurt Russel test your blood sample with a heated copper wire.
DA's been less than useless in adressing this no matter how many times I've brought it up to them, but I'm still gonna try sticking up for myself there.
It was just deletion of posts at first. They deleted my whole account because I attempted to reupload the removed pictures in a heavily edited state.
I've stated before that I strongly suspect Deviant Art is in serious financial trouble after pissing away so much money on the superfluous and vainglorious Eclipse redesign and trying to make the site also function as Twitter, Discord, and Patreon (that faulty Chat feature was in beta for how long?) Pushing mostly pointless core memberships (which just offer features and functions that other websites offer for free), subscription accounts, and the fucking antichrist of art, AI image generation so hard are all indicative of a company desperate to refill its coffers, while purging of NSFW artists is their attempt to try and make the site look more appealing to potential buyers.
Despite it accounting for a full two-thirds of all the online presence I had, I get the sense that Deviant Art is going the way of Tumblr, and getting banned can be seen as getting kicked off the HMS Titanic before it left port.
It's hard for me to recommend strongly enough that you start posting all your art from DA to here, and any other art hosting galleries that you might have, especially if you don't have as thorough archives of your own work like I do.
All things considered, I'm glad to see you here, too.
And yes, the fact that DevAInt Artard has gone full cuck-dimp for it is sowing the seeds of it's own downfall. It's because they can charge people for prompts, and DA is a desperate whore for cash right now. It wouldn't surprise me if the ended up going bankrupt in a few years.
But yeah, whoever it may be, I'm one of the lucky few whom hasn't posted blueberry inflation stuff in 5 years, and most likely wasn't because of DA, but rather it was to prevent those I'm working with in my film studio to not find out about my personal DA accounts that's titled by the same name as the company itself.
You named your DA account after the place where you work? That's a... we'll call it a "bold strategy."
I'm pretty sure you can rename your DA account at least once if you're a free user, or maybe it's only given to paying users (or maybe it lets you change multiple times, I don't know). I do know it is possible, though. Might be worth looking into.
Yeah, originally my film company was going to occur on January 1st, 2020, but it never happened, and plus the epidemic/COVID issues came around, delaying it to 2025. Thankfully my Weasyl account I was able to change the name to something else, but as for my DA account, well, I wouldn't be able to change it sadly (and I completely forgot to do it on my DA account when someone gave me Core/Premium to change my name to something else, it happens or I never bother to check), thus I won't mention to others that I had one at one point...But thankfully I've taken down all of the stories, with one being a link that doesn't exist anymore because my college email got disabled, thus I haven't found another place to upload it yet, but only time will tell. But it's to make it easy to find my usernames and accounts for those who follow my work, but every account I've made always has a different username (so it's not the same one as I use on FA as I do on Youtube). So don't worry, all I need to do is not mention that it exists. It will be found, but not many may know what it's all about and such. And if found, I'll tell them that it's personal works, not made or safe for family friendly work and such.
I believe nowadays you have to pay for a subscription on DA in order to change my name (which I completely forgot to do, but the next time someone gives me Core/Premium as a thank you to me from the comments I've made towards them, I'll definitely change it to something else).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4tby3znOy8
More and more, I come to realize getting banned was a blessing in disguise.
Though, again, if you were worried about posting explicit content to DA, you can always upload it here. There are times when it feels like the rules here are even more lax than they are on 4Chan.
I'm pretty sure the first name change on DA is free, but you'll have to check to verify. I can't check myself, for reasons that should be obvious. :/
Yeah, OwenConcorde also got banned from DA years ago. It's just that for me I've stayed under the radar for many years now considering the drama I've seen online (and my own time for drama and thankfully the reporting was broken and DA most likely didn't have any issues with me regarding my stuff. Don't know why I never got banned but oh well).
Yeah, I've thought about it, but Weasyl is also a good option as well. FA though I've been hit with a warning from an Articuno user smack talking about them blocking me from commenting on their page, so much like DA, I've resorted to just commenting or keeping my head down for the time being.
Well, I doubt I'll ever change my name but it's something I forgot. But I'll have to see what name I'll come up with and go from there (Weasyl thankfully can be done for free every 30 days, without a subscription thankfully. But I've also made a backup account on DA with the name "Cody M." incase if something happened to my main DA account).
Have you been having problems posting art here or elsewhere?
If you ever use DA again, I'd recommend you do the same.
(if only I could heed my own advice...)
For as contemptuous as DA's barely restrained disdain of adult and expansion fetish art are, and as fickle, inconsistent, and outright hypocritical as their policies and enforcement on content are, DA is still by orders of magnitude the largest website strictly dedicated to hosting art in the world, and having zero presence on DA is to the detriment of your own outreach; you're only hurting yourself by not being there. Even someone like R-Mk, a very both talented and efficient artist whose entire schtick is custom tailored to appeal to the meta of FA, and despite not posting anything more explicit than nudity to DA, still has a walloping 20K less followers on FA as he does on DA... and both of the audiences he has on both of those sites combined are fucking DWARFED by the size of his audience on Twitter, despite having been on there for five less years than both FA and DA.
I will, however, not be uploading or reuploading any of my art to DA if the content is too likely to get deleted because I pissed off some unfuckable 40-year-old autistic sperg coomer on 4Chan who went on a malignant, petty report blitzkrieg... again. My clandestine intent is to try and usher more people off DA... but on Twitter (once I get around to actually posting there), I'm not even going to hide that is my intent. I'm not going to upload a full picture of anything, not even the just questionable, nudity-free stuff; just teaser thumbnails of my art with links to the galleries I actually want people to engage with it on. Even if Twitter wasn't a festuring cesspit repeat with pronoun politics commies that browsing is like casually strolling through The Wrap with no Gellar Fields, my anathema against its single-file endless feed format is irreconcilable. Twitter treats art like it's nothing but a disposable commodity, so I'm going to treat Twitter as nothing more than a billboard to advertise my other galleries, and interact with artists who I otherwise respect, save for the fact that they post to that shithole site exclusively.