Revised Idea for List of Shady Artists and Commisoners

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

After reading all of ya'lls comments on the last entry, I have taken a lot of what ya'll said into consideration, and I think I have come up with a better idea for the critria for a list.
I think the list should include artists or commisioners who have robbed folks for over 100 dollars. I think that when this much money is involved in a business deal it is pertient to warn others about the artist or commisioner invovled reguardless of their excuses. I know there was one poor furson out there who was robbed for 400 dollars for a custom plushy, and after hearing about his repeated effort to contact that aritst, I think that in this case the artist's reputation does need to be jepordized, because that is alot of money to loose.
I think if we had a list around that specfically warned people about the amount of money this artist or commisioner has made off with, it would certainly make the official list a lot smaller, and really draw attention to the people who have large dollar amounts involved in transactions that didn't follow through with the merchandise.
What do ya'll think?

Comments

[moonstone-wind.livejournal.com]

Good idea Im game to help out as best I can

[thornwolf.livejournal.com]

sounds good to me.

[kerstin-orion.livejournal.com]

This makes sense to me. If you're charging (or paying) more than $100 for art, it indicates (to me, anyway) that the artist (or buyer) should be aware of the seriousness of the transaction.

[wolf-nymph.livejournal.com]

sounds great to me too =3

[skathkatt.livejournal.com]

Perhaps it could be a sort of 'running total' of how much they have been paid with nothing to show.

That way when/if a person gets their act together, then they will not be penilized as their name could either be removed when all debts are paid or the name could be left but indicated (with a toal of 0) they have cleaned up their act. Then, after a given amount of time, their name could be removed.

[lemonfruitpie.livejournal.com]

:O! genius idea. I second this.

[the-snappy-wolf.livejournal.com]

This I'm game for but I still think we shouldn't just let people who take $10 or $50 or whatever just get away with it, hard earned cash is hard earned cash, it's like saying just because someone didn't shell out $100 for something that their trouble, and bad experiance is moot. I think all amounts taken should be added to the person's total.

[yaochi.livejournal.com]

The idea of a running total sounds sensible.

Bad deals might only be a single event, whether large or small.

But if small events turn into a regular pattern, this also should be serious.

In other words, 200 dollars from one person is really bad. But 50 dollars from each of four people is a pattern.

Whether commissioners or artists, information is good to know.

We always want for people to have their efforts and desires to come to favorable ends. But we need to be aware.

[kavsie.livejournal.com]

This sounds like a good idea. But still, even less than $100 should be listed...I've been ripped out of almost $50 (if you added up all the money she stole, it would be well over a hundred dollars), and that is hard earned money. From five dollars to five-hundred, it's all earned money lost, and should be realized, in my opinion.

[thaily.livejournal.com]

Still don't agree.
It sucks to get conned out of money for both the artist and the customer, but bad customers/artists already get mentioned in this community.

I think it would be better to dedicate a site for both artists and customers on how to safely commission/be commissioned by people than to just make a shitlist. Notorious people on both sides are well... Notorious already.

And a shitlist wouldn't protect people from first offenders, or even repeat offenders who change their name etc.

[abirritate.livejournal.com]

*delurks*
Sorry, but this smells like drama fodder and a bad idea reeking of internet cliques and wanna be smof-dom.

People change, but the internet is a curious time capsule, and things like this never go away. The taint of drama can be nasty and misplaced. In the land of the internets, it's all one person's word against another's. Isn't this community enough of a warning to artists?

[banrai.livejournal.com]

I'm throwing in with you two. It's a ludicrous idea, as has been pointed out by many others, sometimes stuff just happens that causes commissions to be very late, or even never get finished at all. Another thing to keep in mind, is oftentimes we only get one side of the story, the side from the person that feels 'wronged' for whatever reason.

Many times things happen in real life, people lose their internet, have crisises, lose their jobs, whatever, and communication lapses and then suddenly when they manage to get back on their feet they find that the people that had commissioned them thought that they were never going to get their half.

And, again, I agree. It's a DramaLama bomb waiting to happen.

[neongryphon.livejournal.com]

I have to agree. If you are going to make such a list of bad artists/commissioners, then you need to at least add a date of their last offence. If it was more than a year ago, they should probably best be removed from the list altogether. And instead of values, you could give them red marks by their name for each offence where money was lost.

I really endorse the idea of a do’s and don’ts guide for commission buyers. I know a lot of artists run commissions differently, but some basic common-sense guide lines would benefit both parties - like checking out an artist’s commission record/feedback, or just asking about them on this community.

Well...

[dustmeat.livejournal.com]

Years and years ago I got paid 100 bucks to do a commission, but then my computer went down and I lost the contact info. For years I tried to find Wyndstar (the customer) but to no avail. So technically I ripped him off for $100.

Just saying, maybe we should only list REPEAT offenders?

Re: Well...

[skathkatt.livejournal.com]

But in this instance, if both the customer and commisioner were aware of the list, 1) you could tell your side of the story and 2) it could be a way of finding the customer. The 2nd one is the part I like best about the whole idea.

It would have to be the customer or person that is being blacklisted that can add or minus a name (if they both agree on their stories or some such). I don't see how anyone could accept 2nd hand accounts.

The real problem is in verifying stories and claims. If someone really hates another then they can make up whatever they want to. Who do you believe? And if a commissioner finishes something, who says the customer will bother going back to the list and saying they did it.

There is just so much potential for abuse, no matter how this is done. Someone would have to plan it very, very carefully.

Re: Well...

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

Well it isn't really your fault if you tried to contact this person. I think the list should compose of folks who the artist or commisioners have tried repeatedly to contact with no avail.

Re: Well...

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

You make a very good point. We could review the stories prior to putting the name on the list and see what other sources have to say about it.

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

I can see your point on the matter, but I think there needs to be some sort of list compiled of people who to watch out for. And in the event the matter is solved, their names can be removed. I will try to keep it as drama free as possible, probably only citing the name, the current total of money owed, and a link to case stated. That way it is basically just a quick refrence for folks wanting to know what is up.

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

I like the idea of a date.

Here is bascally how it will look

Aritst or Commisioner name- Person filing complaint- Amount due- Link to Case- Date

And that will be all that will be on the list.

We can make the entry a memory so people can scroll back to it at a later date.

How does that sound?

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

If that is the case, you really can't trust anything you see on the community. I do understand you points, but I am looking to make a quick reference for folks.
Basically it will look like this
Name of artist or commisioner- Name of person filing the complaint- Amount due- Link to case- Date.

That way names can easily be removed, and it keeps things farily quick and easy.
We can make the entry of the list a memory.
My hope is that people can use the entry as a refrence for commisioning or taking commisions and be able to read through it and see if the person they are dealing with has had any past discretions.
Does that sound a little more sensible to you.

[conorchu.livejournal.com]

I would say it's best for repeat offenders, not only people with a certain dollar amount they've cheated people out of.

Such as what if 20 or so people are gypped but it's only a 10$ piece each? I think it would be best if the quantity of bad commissions counts also.

What about artists who are known for art theft? I mean this is fairly taboo but I think people should know before they commission if the artist they are considering is/was an art thief. Again this would only be on repetition, say at least five pieces or something?

[kabukihomewood.livejournal.com]

I'm all for this. I think the possibility of being put on this list would be an excellent motivation for artists (and commissioners) to actually behave. The fact that this is a community of individuals, and an open community at that, is what could make this work. For example, Fluffypawz comes in and says "I gave ArtKitty $100 and never heard from her again," could be countered by ArtKitty herself saying "You little bastard, I told you three times that I was working on this thing and for you to be patient, and that was only two months ago so chillax." Then Dragonclawz comes in and says, "Wellll that may be the case but ArtKitty did the same thing to me, and that was over a year ago and I still haven't seen my pic." Few more people chime in telling their tale of woe, and there you have it. ArtKitty can't be trusted. Instalist!

And anyone who says that "Well my life got in the way, I forgot, I couldn't get to the post office, wah wah" is an excuse for failure to finish a PAID FOR COMMISSION (and I mean when this stuff goes on for months and months and months)needs to seriously reconsider selling commissions at all. I can say this because dammit, I have done the same thing, and it's not a good or healthy thing to do, IMHO. I am working hard to turn over a new leaf and keep my promises, and personally, the threat of being put on a list like this makes me that much more willing to get shit out on time. If on the list, I think the artists should be allowed to work their way off of it . . . getting their commissions finished and shipped, or paying back the money. And until they do, well there ya go.

Anyway, enough of my rambling. Just wanted to throw in my $o.o2!

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

I agree with you. I think it would be really great incentive for artists who have wrong people in the past to get their ass in gear and actually take the iniative to finish what they started. But lending credence to the nay sayers, there would be a lot involved in compiling such a list, and I think it would probably cause more drama than its original intent. I have decied to instead make up a list of commisioner dos/ and donts, mostly because this will be a lot easier and there won't be any names flung around.
I still think this is a good idea however, but I just don't want to head something like this because of all that would be involved.

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

I have come up with a better comprimise on the situation: A list of dos and donts for artist and commisioners.
What do you think about that idea?

Re: Well...

[thornwolf.livejournal.com]

That happened to me too. Well, something similar. The guy went into the hospital and as far as /I/ know, never came out and never contacted me again despite my e-mails so..he may have died, and I kept his $200.

[banrai.livejournal.com]

Why are you deleting all of Dani's comments?

[anjel-kitty.livejournal.com]

Because they are causing drama. and I don't want that on the community. I'd figure that be obvious.

[grygon.livejournal.com]

being the furson who was robbed of such $400 I completely agree. on her yahoogroup i've met others who are in my same boat and i bet they'd like to see her out on a blacklist as well.

a small update to her commission status as posted by a friend? we can add "getting divorced from hubby" as her newest BAD!excuse for being a bad!business woman. it never stops with her, does it.