"Everything about DeviantArt and Side 7 drama" @deviantartdramahub - Tumblr Blog

"Those with no content more than a week old will not be able to contribute here."

With all due respect to more important things to say upfront, it's vital to bring up that if you've heard anyone say that, it's not wrong. It's a month-old thing and now no exceptions will be applied.

#submission

That moment when rule enforcement in your community is so incompetent that administration doesn't catch a scammer in the first 10,106 scams, but you also go down for maintenance right after the initial archive in a way that signals to a classic amateur sleuth that you don't like that fact being well-known via archive (look at the archive dates) and that you'd put more effort in expressing that. The Buzzly community, hit with the same issue at the same time, shot the issue down when the target count became a few hundred and did not feel the need to go down for maintenance. Does this not have any implications on y'all?

Being outside those bounds, fortunately not really.

Because it's been relevant enough to say here this week and to respond to, I must say that, in an alternate universe, I might have sided with "Lovelesslass" in her current conflict with "Triagonal", if not for the fact that her actual definition of what constitutes her boundaries comes at the sacrifice of others' boundaries, and the fact that the way she and her friends (who she invites to mass brigade "Triagonal" across different mediums) go about the resulting disagreements gives away who is right in the situation, and that she is using fallacious thinking to call it justice. "Triagonal's" side never clamped down on freedom of speech so hard as the "Lovelesslass" side is doing.

I especially think that HyperionBlueGT person gives away what's going on here. Nobody in their right mind is going to mind if you flag him accordingly.

How would you figure?

Photographic memory does not exist. It's a fake version of eidetic memory created by Hollywood. Eidetic memory is a rare childhood occurrence. Not a skill or talent that a 30+ year old would have.

This sounds more like an issue of phrasing than anyone referring to an actual diagnostic term. Kind of like how people say they have OCD because they don't like their welcome rug being in a tilted angle by the door.

People are asking me if I feel bad for an artist I know who is referred to as LovelessLass. It seems tragedy can cause a 180 in person as she was seen crying to someone originally accused of being a pedo because their Discord friend Meuhphine (who himself did a 180 after being the Discord mod who banned Triagonal from a depression-related server and made a big stink about her complaining about it out of said depression out of the fact she coped with her depression by talking people out of suicide, all because someone told the other mods a rumor and they adhered to presumption of guilt, which by the way offends ME as someone who soon will have to sacrifice her own privacy in the name of kid protection laws, because people tend to forget Triagonal's haters were IN FAVOR of privacy invasion, hence their commentary on politics) had his life privileges (including his server) taken away for successful conspiracy to encourage self-harm and also terror (which anyone can verify in places like Disboard, and more proof can be offered) among people suspected of what Pikky was suspected of, and the supposed pedo and their friends shared the deets about their fallen comrade. Do you have any words that would be worth saying here?

No.

Not a question but an overall explaination, the reason why I haven't updated any on here about what is going in my half of the Deviantart universe is well - I've been busy, there's a glitch that's not showing the submissions page and also well the major issue is that I don't have that many stories or major conflicts to share. I've very much been asking to have all the posts about that one very specific person that I talked about for a while on here removed, because well i'm done with that, i already ended the whole thing on my side.

Is that a good explanation?

Yes.

That moment when you assume being on Jeffrey's list is your biggest concern, but then you find out you're on Stingy's list, which managed to catalog everyone encompassing the largest possible complex web (and this Triagonal sign)...

Is this not a mundane finding at this point?

So my view on the P word by now is quite famous. If you're a pedo (an actual one, not someone who barely scraped the bottom of the Allport Scale), that's bad. If you witch hunt people over who might be one? Also bad. If you do both? Worse than the other two, because it shows a willing lack of restraint and an impediment to the human factor. Even worse if you come from a community which is sadly successful in both off-site but is not scolded for the P word by the very people who have been invited into unrest over it for one person. Those who are not the P word while criticizing it only sometimes are worse than those who criticize it all the time or not at all, since it shows they're not incentivized to criticize it by any actual disgust or leniency, since feelings of disgust and leniency are themselves not choosy (i.e. they're weaponizing what might be an otherwise good intentioned effort for their own vendetta or agenda, which is arguably the worst kind of human).

With that said, with the "Triagonal drama" going on for so long, for reasons that concern me in ways I might as well ask about, I'd love to know how members of a certain part of the art community think it's alright to turn a blind eye to the adulteration of otherwise innocent content but still complain constantly of someone who was said to have said a few inappropriate things once who hasn't even been around for years. If I could ask a question where you're urged to answer in a yes-or-no question so as to not be roundabout about this topic, surely the code of ethics of the people running the show here considers the first part of what I said to be good, binding wisdom, enough to condemn the hypocrites alluded to in the second part of what I just said, right?

Yes.

Guys, bad news: JasonKhekcookie11 has put me and my friend Rain-Fireheart on the Blacklist again, here's proof:

He's clearly copy pasting these false accusations from another journal. We never did anything wrong, and my friend Rain never did the stuff he did. Jasonkhekcookie11 is lying to people

No links?

Also, meanwhile, what is Rain saying?

Let's just say anyone who wonders if the member of the art community going by my name is really me will get their sign once they notice whether people see KF covering it as constantly as other names associated with me. It's a guarantee for me at this point because I made the right friends.

Alright.

Hi, I decided to break my silence on Tumblr because I really needed to break this up to my attentions. Jasonkhekcookie11 has put me and my friend Rain-Fireheart on his blacklist again

I'm sure those false claims and false accusations were copy pasted somewhere from another blacklist journal someone put me in including other people because we never did anything wrong on DA. We never stalked people, we never harassed anyone, we never punch down accounts with smaller watchers, we're not creeps, we're not pedophiles, and the whole adoptables when people can make it for free thing is irrevelent at this point. Jasonkhekcookie11 has clearly been harassing people, including me and Rain-Fireheart without any proof or any evidence. Me and my friends didn't do anything wrong at all

He doesn't even offer proof to what he says.

Is the latest T rumor true?

Does the pope shit in the woods (you know what I mean by that).

Partially inspired by reports of how intertwined art and the flow of selective gullibility/skepticism around artists are these days, I wanted to ask a litmus test question.

Suppose you're in a spat, feud, dispute, argument, whatever you want to call it with some people, and it regards the nature of forgiveness, who has the authority to forgive, and what actually is considered a misdeed and requires forgiveness, but for some reason, it takes a completely random religious turn because someone just happened to bring it up at one point, which I might say at this point is universally second-handedly relatable (as has been slander about one's character and other things that seem to know how to inspire litmus questions, as can be seen, as is citably addressed at another point, as well as in the very things the slanderers quote).

At one point, Side 1 says Side 2, who Side 1 claims committed what amounted to a certain misdeed, will never be forgiven and is going to Hell, with no way out of their fate.

You are tempted to ask what denomination actually believes that seemingly over-the-top taunt. So tempted you don't even ask them and instead look it up.

You then learn through research that only one sect of people actually believes that but that the sect is terroristic and is known to radicalize and rig crowds of people.

Is this proof Side 1 is a terrorists' group?

I mean, Side 1 certainly isn't helping anyone amidst any questioners. That and I wonder how many people agree it's ridiculous. So me wonders what the question's end game is.

Partially inspired by reports of how intertwined art and the flow of misinformation are these days, I wanted to ask a litmus test question.

If I shared an image taken while I was taking a stroll that showed the local portable speedometer with the number 31 while I was strolling past it, is it proof I was traveling on foot at 31 kilometers per hour?

That would give Usain Bolt a literal run for his money. So me wonders what the question's end game is.

Heads up, I came to learn EagleHasLanded94 is as much the now-banned Twonaps as Triagonal was "proven" to be Squaretangular (two names often complained about by Twonaps in the past for supposedly ban evading). Consistent people, prepare the help desk!

If only that could be said here.

Genuine question, would you consider it fair game to resort to ban evasion in order to provide a direct apology to someone as the KF crowd is insinuating is the best approach?

No. That's a third person's boundaries you're being asked to violate by the second person (the one asking you for an apology for violating their own boundaries). In fact, in such a scenario, the second person undermines how much of a priority bending to them is in asking that.

If someone has to choose between apologizing to me and honoring a third person's boundaries, I'd ask them to prioritize the third person. They'll more strongly inspire forgiveness that way.

KF and co: Claims to treat @the-abyss-watcher slash @emilyncassidyarts like they do as a gesture of justice and not as a gesture of antagonism, all while also claiming they wouldn't have this gesture go beyond certain limits including off-platform.

Also KF and co: Shrugs in indifference when someone frames an act of terror involving her, saying without condemnation (as would be the case if they were about justice) "you get what you get, it was inevitable" (or, more specifically, "it was just a matter of time till someone decided to be an a-logging asshole").

Friends of @the-abyss-watcher slash @emilyncassidyarts: Do so much as give things like opposition to such framings a pedestal, filling in the gaps left behind by KF's judgment.

KF and co:

Those who are non-negotiable shouldn't be surprised to themselves treated as such. And yet they wonder why. Work with resolution or don't expect to be workable by those who are doing so. Does this not make sense to bring up here?

Yes.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

"Everything about DeviantArt and Side 7 drama"