An important question.

[Amber Williams]

might just prefer having happy porn...

redundant?  :p

Not if you've seen some of the stuff from Japan.

[Knight]

Oh, yeah, I selectively forgot about some of it.   

[Darkmoon]

I try to forget most of the stuff that comes out of Japan. That country is just plain fucked up.

[Knight]

I liked cool devices.  That was hawt.

[Amber Williams]

Remember, rape is just another way of saying hello in Japan.

[Destina Faroda]

Seth, from what I've seen, your hosting does seem to be more lenient, even though there is a prohibition against "violent/malicious/obscene content" in there.  I do like how they actually give the customer a chance to remove the material instead of leaving it up in the air.  I know people on-line who work for a Web hosting company, and from what I've heard, the customers usually don't even get that.

Still, I saw that picture of Alec and those tentacles, and I don't see how that promotes anything positive at all.  How is someone being bound and titilated against their will consistent with this character and positive?  If it's a joke, then I think the whole "good fun" requirement should be lifted.

Mab, I understand people have standards, often contradictory ones.  I think the Web site owner should have absolute control over what goes up on his or her site.  I also think there is a responsibilty that goes along with that control.  Allowing adult material on the site sends several signals to people.  Some people think may it's cheap or sleazy.  Others may feel its a sign that the creator if the comic is non-judgemental.  But given that the CVRPG itself is not an adult comic,  featuring adult fan-art sends the message that fans are encouraged to go beyond the boundaries imposed by the author.  By then later making this exclusive inserts a level of hierachy that is ultimately destructive.  Given that Darkmoon has said he'd allow just about anything on the site, and then turn around and insert restrictions, it strikes me odd at the very least, disturbing at the very worst.

I disagree, though, with the assessment that fun be the measuring stick of what is good.  More often than not, they are wrapped up on one, and people often communicate hurtful things to each other that they feel are funny.  Furthermore, visual art is already an inherently stratified medium.  No matter how hard I try, for instance, I will never be as good of an artist as say, Barry Kitson.  Why put another restriction on something I could draw before I even draw it?  If it's okay to express offensive and "mean" opnions and not to take something seriously, why can't that same lack of seriousness apply when looking at a picture, regardless of its intention?

And Darkmoon, sorry, but that second pic --especially to someone who would be easily offended-- is definitely pornographic in nature.  "Naked Princess" is tame and you MIGHT be able to get away with that excuse for that one.  But just as restrictive as you are about "fan art" you find offensive, someone may find the art that you have posted offensive as well.

[Knight]

Remember, rape is just another way of saying hello in Japan.

"Konichiwa!"  "GACK!"

Also:

"titilated against their will"

That phrase made me lol 

If jackson pollock is an artist, then this shit is well within definition.

[Destina Faroda]

"titilated against their will"

That phrase made me lol 

Is that implying that if a woman orgasms during rape, then it means she really wants to be raped and despite the lack of consent?

[Knight]

No I didn't mean that... but thanks for sharing your thoughts.   

[Darkmoon]

Seth, from what I've seen, your hosting does seem to be more lenient, even though there is a prohibition against "violent/malicious/obscene content" in there.  I do like how they actually give the customer a chance to remove the material instead of leaving it up in the air.  I know people on-line who work for a Web hosting company, and from what I've heard, the customers usually don't even get that.

Still, I saw that picture of Alec and those tentacles, and I don't see how that promotes anything positive at all.  How is someone being bound and titilated against their will consistent with this character and positive?  If it's a joke, then I think the whole "good fun" requirement should be lifted.

Mab, I understand people have standards, often contradictory ones.  I think the Web site owner should have absolute control over what goes up on his or her site.  I also think there is a responsibilty that goes along with that control.  Allowing adult material on the site sends several signals to people.  Some people think may it's cheap or sleazy.  Others may feel its a sign that the creator if the comic is non-judgemental.  But given that the CVRPG itself is not an adult comic,  featuring adult fan-art sends the message that fans are encouraged to go beyond the boundaries imposed by the author.  By then later making this exclusive inserts a level of hierachy that is ultimately destructive.  Given that Darkmoon has said he'd allow just about anything on the site, and then turn around and insert restrictions, it strikes me odd at the very least, disturbing at the very worst.

I disagree, though, with the assessment that fun be the measuring stick of what is good.  More often than not, they are wrapped up on one, and people often communicate hurtful things to each other that they feel are funny.  Furthermore, visual art is already an inherently stratified medium.  No matter how hard I try, for instance, I will never be as good of an artist as say, Barry Kitson.  Why put another restriction on something I could draw before I even draw it?  If it's okay to express offensive and "mean" opnions and not to take something seriously, why can't that same lack of seriousness apply when looking at a picture, regardless of its intention?

And Darkmoon, sorry, but that second pic --especially to someone who would be easily offended-- is definitely pornographic in nature.  "Naked Princess" is tame and you MIGHT be able to get away with that excuse for that one.  But just as restrictive as you are about "fan art" you find offensive, someone may find the art that you have posted offensive as well.

I didn't say it offended me. I just said I didn't think it should be in the CVRPG fanart section.

I gave my reasons for it. You don't like my reasoning, I get that. Doesn't mean I'm changing my mind on the matter.

And I like the fact we keep using the word "titillate". That's a fucking awesome word.

[Knight]

It's rather titilating   

[Darkmoon]

I'm titillated at the titillating use of the word titillation.

Oh, and for the record, if anyone ever complained, I'd just move the art to ICVD and link to it from there. ICVD's host has no porn issues at all.

[Knight]

I had this wildly amusing image when I saw that of a serious courtroom trial with the judges and lawyers trying to use the phrase "titillated against his/her will" while trying not to crack up.

[Darkmoon]

You can't have titillation without tits.

Mmmm... tits...

[Knight]

titty titillation is triple the tittle fun

[Darkmoon]

Wow, that's a tongue twister.

Actually, I hear that's a fun trick for the ladies, if you know how to do it.

[Knight]

What, the little tongue swirly thing around the nippage?

[Destina Faroda]

I didn't say it offended me. I just said I didn't think it should be in the CVRPG fanart section.

I gave my reasons for it. You don't like my reasoning, I get that. Doesn't mean I'm changing my mind on the matter.

Just because you aren't changing your mind means I'm going to shut up anout the issue.  I'll only shut up if you don't reply, or pull another power play (i.e. locking thread).  But nice try on the not so subtle "Fuck you" there.

I don't see how you get to "I have no shame at all." and "So long as you are game, I'm sure I can come up with fucked up shit for you to draw. " to "If I say that art drawn for it should have a certin intent to it, that's my perogative."  That's just a leap in thinking I not only disagree with, I don't understand, especially since you've never offered that as a counter to criticism before.  Those are two completely contradictory worldviews.  Why pull rank as a defense on this issue?

[Amber Williams]

Why put another restriction on something I could draw before I even draw it?  If it's okay to express offensive and "mean" opnions and not to take something seriously, why can't that same lack of seriousness apply when looking at a picture, regardless of its intention?

I'm not putting a restriction on something you could draw.  As I said, I feel anyone should be free to draw whatever they want.  That is ones right.  However, I feel it is also that person's duty to not abuse said right.  Worst case scenario would be like mailing to your neighbor a drawing of someone raping their 6 year old daughter.  As an artist, there is a freedom to be able to draw it...but one should also know that their actions will ultimately be negative and cause hurt to another person.   And in the case I just described, it then conflicts with the neighbors rights (and to an extent the daughters if one wants to get nitpicky)

I do agree that some people going to the site might get confused since they likely will not know or understand the joke between the pictures being done. But that ultimately falls to Darkmoon to decide how to present it.

[Knight]

Yeah, if there wasn't a final opinion say in something, we'd kind of still be arguing about the best way to build the wheel.

[Darkmoon]

If the time comes that there's enough material for a separate archive of this stuff, trust me, I'll be putting them in their own separate archive. It just hasn't happened yet.

And I wasn't saying fuck you. If I wanted to say fuck you, I'd just say fuck you.

WHat I'm saying is that there's a grey area that some of this stuff falls into. The grey area, far as I'm concerned, is all defined by intent. It's going to be based on my idea of what the intent of the art was, and whether I think it should go up. If I say "draw this" and someone does, then yes, I think it's fine to put up. If someone draws it without my up front blessing, then I have the right to say yea or nay to the art.

Hell, I've not posted fan art in the past because I didn't like it. It's my prerogative.

[Knight]

I can see why context would matter.  I certainly wouldn't want to host any fanart of my characters that was obviously mean spirited, pornographic or otherwise.

[Darkmoon]

Spirit is a part of it. Quality is another part of it. If the art Seth had drawn had really sucked, I woulda not posted it. Thankfully, Seth can draw like he isn't drunk and using is ass to make the pictures, so that wasn't really an issue.

In the long run, it's just my gut instinct on the matter.

[Destina Faroda]

And I don't understand why it does matter.  It's not about the right to put it up.  I don't understand why some mythical, mystical idea that the artist's thought processes or worse yet cirumstances should play a part in how something should be perceived.  I mean it's like you're taking motive and turning it into an article of faith.

Quality is one thing, and not easily quantifyable.  Intent is another.

[Knight]

Wait, why should the artists thought processes be mythical or mystical by any definition?  It often has a tangible effect on perception.

[Destina Faroda]

No, the reader's own prejudices define perception.  We can't read minds, so we don't know what really the artist was thinking.

[Knight]

Unless it's explicitly implied or stated, yeah...

[Darkmoon]

The artist's own thought process is the most import ant bit, because the artist is paying for the site.

And before you say "ah, but you take donations", anyone that donates to the site gets a quantifiable benefit out of donating, as I then "pay back" with bonus comics and other features.

[Knight]

Nuh uh.  I donated and you sent me a box of mexican tarantulas. 

[Darkmoon]

No, I sent those to you for your birthday.