Sta.sh
What the heck is this?
This newsletter is a community chosen selection of deviants and deviations. They are the selections exclusively from the community and featured exactly as they were suggested. The reason for this is to show you what the community is doing and looking at in the hopes to help widen your range of friends and watchers. This is also so that features aren't always chosen by the same group of people. Everyone is allowed to suggest; including suggesting oneself, so that a large web of features are created. This brings together diverse and unique artwork in one location, instead of being scattered about.
This is all galleries across Deviantart!
Previous Issues: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
How can you be included
Send a note to `misskittyoooo with the subject "Community Feature"
with the deviants name and 3-5 picks from their gallery in this format (can be any gallery):
: iconusername:
:thumb######: :thumb######: :thumb######:
You will be added to a database of selections and featured in order I receive them.
The Community Selection
If you do not like the selection please keep it to yourself. You are more than welcome to suggest yourself and/or your own favorite deviants. However, If I see any belittling or complaining about these community selections you will NEVER see your work featured.
Great features once again, lots more artists to drool over
basically, if you don't like or have comments about technical aspects of the featured art, what is to be understood is that they are only show roomed here and that the critiques' rightful place are the original places, if the authors allowed comments on their art.
If they didn't, well, no big interest of writing them here.
BTW, your displayed artwork on your page is cool. But this is out of place here
If you do not like the selection please keep it to yourself. You are more than welcome to suggest yourself and/or your own favorite deviants. However, If I see any belittling or complaining about these community selections you will NEVER see your work featured.
Well, so much for free speech and an open expression of ideas and opinions in this News item.
I mean, last time I checked asking people to be polite wasn't exactly a form of censorship.
Free speech can be interpreted in many different ways, but I don't really see the point of arguing it in a newsletter like this one, especially if it didn't call out for a debate like this. All in all, choose your battles wisely, because I think it's was extremely unnecessary to bring out a discussion where the article's main point was to just shed some light on some selected deviants.
A debate is always called for when someone tells other people not to say something they're allowed to say and then backs that statement up with a threat.
The article's main point isn't what I was questioning at all. It was the OP's attempt to silence any critics who may want to voice their negative opinions about her selections by stating them in this News item. Negative opinions which, I remind you, this site says are allowed to be expressed.
That all being said, I've expressed my point of view to the OP and the conversation with her has concluded so this issue is over. Thank you for your opinion. No further comment is necessary.
Like I said, I think you're stretching the definition a bit. You're putting a lot of emphasis into something that's really unnecessary.
All I was saying was that this argument wasn't called for and it seemed very petty, from an outsider's perspective; I never said that you were questioning the main purpose. I just didn't think the debate was very useful.
Once again, if we use your statement of how debates are called for by not telling others to do something, then you bring up another argument by your last sentence. And personally, I think you're censoring a bit yourself, by trying to stifle my reply by saying "no further comment is necessary." But then again, that could be nit-picking. :/
And if I do remember, news articles aren't supposed to be places for discussion; so we're going against dA policy right now.
In the end, it ended up not being such.
At the same time, prolonging this debate - which is what you're doing - isn't very useful either in my opinion.
"no further comment is necessary."
I just meant that you didn't have to reply back if you didn't want to and in my opinion, the entire issue was over anyways, so any further comment was unnecessary.
news articles aren't supposed to be places for discussion
I've never heard that before. I'd think if that were the case, dA would prevent people from having discussions by making it not possible to respond directly to each other's posts.
And that may be in your opinion, but I felt it was necessary due to how you seemed slightly impolite to me during our discussion [and more so by your excessive use of the same emoticon]. I realize this isn't your intention, but that's how I interpreted it.
They do actually; I've seen many news articles deleted for these reasons.