I've been able to give the beta of the Weasyl site a good looking-over, and there have been a few folks who've asked me to give my impressions and opinion of the site overall. So here goes.
Weasyl is a very well-designed and well thought-out site. Its coding and design are excellent, and its moderators and admins have been very receptive and responsive about bugs that have been found--which is going to be the nature of the beast while the site is in beta. It's clear they've studied other similar sites such as FurAffinity, InkBunny and SoFurry, and have done their level best to eliminate the negative features and to build upon the positive ones of each of those sites. If you're a furry artist, I would give Weasyl an enthusiastic and unconditional thumbs-up.
I suspect, however--and please keep in mind this is simply my educated opinion--one aspect of Weasyl may prove to be problematic. I'm referring to the "Collections" feature; I have included in italics below the Weasyl guide to this feature exactly as it appears on their site, and can be viewed by clicking this link:
What Are Collections?
"Collections" are a system which enables a user to have a second gallery of submissions that were made for them, rather than by them. The Collections system's main purpose is to cut down on duplicate uploads of the same piece, so as to prevent unnecessary consumption of site space, and so the original uploader is guaranteed full recognition for their work.
Although we have this system, users are still allowed to upload pieces made for them/that include them, as long as one of three conditions are met:
1. The upload in question that was made for you is personal, and you wish to set friends-only permissions to it 2. The original creator does not want to put it in their gallery 3. The person who made your upload does not have a Weasyl account, although we strongly encourage our users to invite those artists who made works for them to the site. If they decline the invite, then go ahead and proceed!
I understand why this feature was implemented; reduction of double-posting of images reduces storage and bandwidth usage, and having the artwork posted by the artist ensures the creator of the imagery gets credit where credit is due. I have long been a supporter of furry artists, and believe very strongly in crediting these creative people.
However, the "Collections" rules, as currently stated, somewhat pull the rug out from under collectors and character owners. If you wish to post a publicly-viewable image of your personal character, but you didn't draw it, you're not allowed to do so unless the artist in question a) doesn't have an account on Weasyl or b) they choose not to put the image in question in their personal gallery. Otherwise, when the artist does post the image, they are to submit the image to your Collections gallery.
Artists are inevitably going to forget to do this on occasion, in which case, the character creator is stuck until they can contact the artist and request they do so. Having stated these details, I want to make two things perfectly clear.
First, I do not advocate taking rights or credit away from artists. When I post imagery, I'm careful to give the artists and character creators credit both on the image itself and in the text used to describe the image. I have a very low opinion of those who redistribute, post, and worst, profit, from artwork they didn't take a hand in creating.
Second, I'm not jumping the gun and calling the Weasyl "Collections" feature a failure. I'm just pointing out what, in my personal observation alone, could turn out to be a object of contention to some people. For the time being, at least, I'm hesitant to post any images to my Weasyl account--images my character appears in or images drawn by others that I have colored--because I believe they'll conflict with the "Collections" feature rules. I'll be more than happy to accept Collections submissions from any artists who wish to post images with my character or coloring in them. In short, I'm not "boycotting" Weasyl or suggesting anyone else do so. I like the site; I'm just a bit nervous about posting anything there that may not be construed as 100% my creation.
Whenever possible, I like to offer a solution to what I see as a potential problem. In this case, I would advocate the use of credits and copyright information on every image, in every story, and in every description when these items are posted on any public forum. But, as many "grab and dump" image sites bear witness, this isn't a realistic solution. Weasyl is supporting the furry artist by insisting upon credit where credit is due--and, again, I can't express strongly enough that I agree with them.
I'll be more than happy to discuss this topic with people. I'm not willing to legitimize the screaming accusations of those who feel they need to White Knight on behalf of Weasyl. I am not "anti-Weasyl," nor do I have any intention to be.
Not if everyone--commissioners and artists alike--follow the rules as stated. But therein lies the problem: it could wind up being an admin and moderator nightmare making sure they do.
Not if everyone--commissioners and artists alike--follow the rules as stated. But therein lies the p
No, it doesn't. People who get commissions CAN post their work into a Friends Only gallery even if the artist posts it. If the artist doesn't want to post the image, then the commissioner CAN post it. If you paid for something, you'll get your credit for it. All Weasyl is doing is making it so that people don't have to post the same image more than once. Anyone saying that the site is doing anything more than that is just being a Negative Nancy. :/
No, it doesn't. People who get commissions CAN post their work into a Friends Only gallery even if t
Not quite sure how raising a concern is being a negative nancy. Right now you seem to be the one who wants to really blow this up. Now, if Lou's concern is addressed great. The end. Point it out, move on.
Not quite sure how raising a concern is being a negative nancy. Right now you seem to be the one who
Give it up. In Ari's mind, I can only be 100% wrong on this topic, no matter how diplomatically or calmly I put it. Since I have had a history of mental problems, it becomes a crutch: It's a point being made by nutjob Lou, so it can therefore be dismissed out of hand.
Give it up. In Ari's mind, I can only be 100% wrong on this topic, no matter how diplomatically or c
I like showing off artwork im proud of getting and showing others the artists hard work. making it friends only would kinda take the point away of even posting said art.
friends only, eh i'll pass :P I like showing off artwork im proud of getting and showing others the
My question on Weasyl right now is, is it free, will it continue to be free? Can't much ask it as I'm not in the beta yet though. I've had two folks I know raise concerns they wanted to charge money for it. Treating that as rumor/hearsay for now. But I'd love to know the stance.
My question on Weasyl right now is, is it free, will it continue to be free? Can't much ask it as I'
Now, these are RANDOM. I clicked browse, and then the images. I really don't see anyone having any issues crediting where credit is due. You're seriously being fickle over the tiniest of things on the new site for no reason at all. I haven't had the chance to add something to Collections yet simply because of the fact that a lot of people still aren't on Weasyl, but, personally, I can't wait to. I know that a lot of people are eager to use the collections system as well. No more "double-faving" or having to click a million times to find the original artist simply because it will all be in one convenient place. It's a nice, cozy way of bringing the commissioner and artist together.
The only reason I can see you having this "problem" with collections is because someone shafted you in the past, and this new feature gives priority to the artist over the commissioner.
And as far as "what if they forget?" goes, have you ever considered entertaining the idea that maybe, just maybe, the moderators thought about this, and that's why they tell you to put it in your Personal Friends-Only gallery? Right there is the solution to this big fucking problem that you seem to be creating over and over again, despite the fact I've already told you not to fret over it. If it's in your Friends Only, then your friends will see it, and the rest of the Weasyl world will just have to be happy with the artist's post. You are allowed to comment on their post of the work, you know, and I'm sure that saying something like "I'm glad I commissioned you for this!" would fill in any gaps on who owns what.
Oh, last thing; if you're just wanting to have more exposure to the furry community with your commissions and whatnot, go to FA. You'll get more attention, favorites, comments, shouts, and everything else there than you will on any other site right now.
I really can't believe you're still going on about this. Alright. Here we go. For starters, going o
First off, fuck you MadDog. I think it's cowardly that you blocked me because I made legitimate points on your journal. Also, you'll love Weasyl. It'd probably be a great place to post your wonderful literature, which I think would be an awesome place to collaborate with WG. You're a talented writer, and I respect that.
Now, Lou, I've talked to you for over an hour about this. You're making a huge mess out of nothing again. I'm seriously getting tired of it. Ultimately, if you really want to get down to it, if an artist doesn't give you the collection add, which seems to be the one part of the whole system that makes you squirmish, then ADD IT TO YOUR FRIENDS ONLY GALLERY. There really isn't an issue past that. And if the artist makes a point NOT to add their work to your collections, contact a mod and stop paying shitty jerk off artists to draw for you. Common sense, wolf. Go get some.
Also, White Knights kick ass. Holy magic totally outshines necromancer tricks.
First off, fuck you MadDog. I think it's cowardly that you blocked me because I made legitimate poin
Yeahhh... I'm really glad that on the entire Internet I'm the only one who can tell poor little "I can't even think up my own character" MadDog that he's a jackass. You're just like the new PayPal terms of agreement. Are you familiar with them? Surely you must be. The new terms state that PayPal users are not allowed to take PayPal to court, and that they must settle any issues with them one-on-one, where PayPal is the judge, and obviously will never make decisions fair. Wow! That sounds a lot like you, and your "I'm going to call someone an ass, then block them so they can't call me an ass back!" method. You want a grudge, you got one. You want to interject into my issue with Lou? Fine. I'll play your little game. Go ahead and bring it on.
Yeahhh... I'm really glad that on the entire Internet I'm the only one who can tell poor little "I c
Oh hell, though, just because I'm amused. ' You're a talented writer, and I respect that.'
'Yeahhh... I'm really glad that on the entire Internet I'm the only one who can tell poor little "I can't even think up my own character" MadDog that he's a jackass.'
Nice contradiction.
I believe I created many of the characters in the Weylen stories... which was the point when someone used one without my permission, and why I spoke with him.
Nope, I'm quite done. You are too. Oh hell, though, just because I'm amused. ' You're a talented wr
