Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

  • Welcome to Artists Beware! 

    All posts have been reviewed prior to being allowed in.

    Comments are moderated:  Please review the Commenting Rules.  Comments that don't meet our rules will not be posted.

    If your post is resolved:  Contact one (1) member of staff or leave a comment, and we'll update your post!

    If you are the bewaree:  Review "I've been posted to Artists Beware, now what?".

    If a beware needs a tag update:  Post a comment!

    To contact a member of staff:  See the Staff page or fill out the Contact Us form.

    Posts are not deleted unless you can prove they are fabricated.  If this is the case contact one (1) admin, and we will help you asap.

  • Caution: Voregence - unprofessional conduct

    • Who: Voregence / MouthGoblin
      Where: https://www.furaffinity.net/user/voregence/
      When: 05/25/2019
      What: Commission
      NSFW Content Resolved

    I will preface this with saying that I am genuinely actually very happy with the result. I am just displeased with what had to be done to get it.


    This is the final result, and I do genuinely think it's a good one.


    Moving forwards to the content to the beware:

    Initially no problems were had aside from it being overdue. I don't have a screenshot of it but the journal stated a turnaround of 2-3 weeks and this took over a month. I consider this pretty negligible, however. I took no issue with this as I know life happens and I had seen some journals about her going through a rough spot so I just waited quietly until she got to me. 

    Payment was sent on May 25'th 2019 through paypal, and promptly paid up front.

    Moving forwards to the 20'th and 21'st of June, correspondence began through email. The initial product that I got I did like, however I just wanted a minor change for character accuracy sake.

    This was the ref provided



    This was the secondary reference I had provided for clarification


    This was the initial result


    This was the second change


    This was the correspondence surrounding that. Following this second change was radio silence, and someone brought to my attention it was being posted in its unfinished state. This understandably annoyed me a little bit. I can understand menstrual pain needing someone to take a break but this was over 24 hours of no correspondence before I found out it had been posted(End of my workday on the 21'st). The result was me asking her to respond or I would open a dispute with paypal.








    Following this final correspondence, I had gotten radio silence for a bit more than an hour. At that point I decided to opt to open a paypal dispute - the problems I had were quickly resolved afterwards to her credit and within an hour of the dispute having been open I closed it having been satisfied.


    Proof of the dispute being closed


    The following morning I woke up to this. In the comments she proceeded to slander me more, and has offered to disclose my name to attempt to force me out of the community by being unable to commission artists.


    Overall I would say this behavior is overly dramatic for the type of situation it was, and I hope it doesn't continue in future. Customers should not have to open disputes to get minor changes like this with the reasoning of "I'd rather move on to other projects, you'll have to deal" nor be slandered behind their backs.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    • Administrator

    This is one of those weird ones where I personally see what you indicated in your reference sheet, but can also see how the second fix would be debatable.  I would definitely suggest making a close up detail shot of those as a quick go through of your gallery shows that it's done in a variety of different ways.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I do plan to add in that specific detail shot. Under most circumstances I wouldn't be bothered much, but given the nature of this commission and the treatment I had received I did in this case. 

    Either way I do see a need to further clarify it and will be adding that to my ref sheet. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You've stated that you will be making some updates to your ref and that's a good thing, but please be certain to give any emphasis on your ref that you consider Must Have. If there is anything to your character you find you must have, no exceptions, make that clear on your ref.

    I understand your eagerness after the wait but filing a charge-back after only an hour's wait is completely unreasonable. I even find the act of sending an ultimatum after only 24 hours to be out of hand on your part. And you clearly don't understand now menstrual pain can be for some people, because if you did, you wouldn't have pulled the hammer after only an hour. For some people the pain can be as bad as kidney pain and will literally make a person bedridden, which the artist in question did give an example of it's severity. It's as good as being sick. You don't have to answer this, but consider for a moment, if she said she had been ill, would you have been this impatient? Would you have still expected a reply within an hour or would you have been more lenient?

    While I wouldn't go so far as to say your filing a charge-back is blackmail, it is underhanded. I can see why the artist made the journal in question, which does not name you in any way, and in submitting this you've outed yourself. It's not exactly professional to vent in a public journal about a client even unnamed, but I'm at least sympathetic to the artists' frustration due to your strong-arm tactics, and I can see the journal has since been removed.

    I can concede that the wait without contact isn't good, and that at the very least she should have noted that the were 3 spikes in the ref, but everything else after that? That's all on you.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've read a lot of bewares on this site and this is the only one I personally have to disagree with. By agreeing to commission an artist, you agree to their TOS. Some TOS include the right of the artist to post in-progress and finished commissioned artworks. If you didn't want your commission to be posted and found few things you disagree with their TOS, you should've asked the artist if they could keep the commission private, or not commission them at all. As Celestina said, that would be better if the reference had a close-up side of your OC to see the spikes clearer. The artist made fixes and was willing to work with you normally till you mentioned dispute because they haven't answered you for 4 hours. That would be understandable if that would be for few days while they still update their account daily, but these were only few hours. You must remember that artists don't sit by their computers all day and therefore not gaining a response for few hours is reasonable. 

    I think this conflict could be avoided if you could word your message better: instead of mentioning immediately a dispute, you could've stated your concern about the public post and tell them you would like an update soon. They would answer you regardless for mentioning dispute or not, and possibly wouldn't complain and instead just fix the mistake if you hadn't rushed to mention dispute.

    The public journal was unprofessional for them to post and possibly wasn't the best idea as that should stay private. At same time, if I were in their place, I'd understand their reason for committing such deed. The main issue of the argument is impatience and unread TOS although the artist mentioned that they gave you to read them before beginning of work. That all could've been avoided.

    Edited by Happyartz
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    • Administrator
    24 minutes ago, Happyartz said:

    I've read a lot of bewares on this site and this is the only one I personally have to disagree with.  

     Not a big issue; but this isn't a beware but a "caution". Enough to give pause; but also enough you can take it with a grain of salt.

    Everything else you said I am in full agreement with.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    • Administrator

    Yes it was originally submitted as a beware, but we downgraded it. There's no way this qualifies for a beware. The like feature is disabled for mods, but I'm in full agreement with Armaina.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I completely agree with armina. Also i would like to point out in the closed dispute image...  It says you requested the full amount back?

    Even though it got closed if a full refund was requested after the artwork completed even with minor problems is not okay. Now if this isnt the case with it being a full refund...  please disregard this comment about it. 

    In my opinion the mistake was minor and not worth threatening a chargeback over. 

    Honestly i wouldnt work with either of you after this. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There were some external factors in play here that I was asked not to include in the submission. If you would like to know about them, contact me privately. But rest assured that this is not a common practice of mine, in over 100 pieces commissioned this is the only time I've ever opened a paypal dispute.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In this case it wasn't a 4 hour delay, it was around 26 hours total along with the posting and some external factors that lead to my being aggressive in this case. 

    I don't have hard feelings about it, and honestly if not for the journals and attempts to slander me this wouldn't have been submitted. This is me putting the full story out on a public post so people can form their own decisions on the matter. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    • Administrator
    Just now, Rionquosue said:

    attempts to slander me 

    I'm curious what part of what the artist said was false, and when did they publicly name you?

    Slander (in this case libel as it"s written) is not "someone said things I don't like about me". It's specifically "someone said something directly about me that is false to specifically financially harm me."

    As a moderator it's our job to be as impartial as possible, but nothing the artist has said is libel. You attempted to gain the entirety of the amount back, and you most certainly are not entitled to that.

    Also 26 hours is still a short amount of time. She's right. Not everyone is available constantly or consistently. I've easily pulled 16 hr shifts at work and can take longer than 26 hours to respond. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There were definitely missteps from the artist's behalf, but this is a situation where the both of you are at fault to some degree. You've acknowledged the issue that came up in the process of attempting to get the piece edited, which is fine.

    But your subsequent response after it wasn't up to your personal standard was out of line, imo. If they had been outright ghosting you for over a month, I'd say it was cause for alarm, but you hardly waited at all for her to get back to you, and in a way, you forced her into a corner and her reaction was justified to an extent. It's even worse that you pushed for a chargeback for the full amount.

    Looking at the artist's price range for this sort of work, it absolutely looks like it was a full refund request.

    Work was rendered, even with the communication falling apart with the unprofessional conduct on both sides, this is unacceptable. This alone would make me wary of ever working with you, or even recommending you to others as a client.

    It doesn't matter if you've commissioned 1 piece or 1000 pieces in the past, shit happens and you react in the manner *you* perceive is correct in the moment, but ultimately it isn't right. If I were you, I would take a step back and look at the situation objectively to see where you could improve on your manner of communication.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I didn't actually put much thought into the refund amount - admittedly I do feel guilt for that now. I was quite frustrated at the time.

    The reason I call it slander is due to the nature of it. There was an active attempt to push my name towards some individuals and a good deal of her throwing it around in her telegram and to my knowledge discord channels as well. This was going on to a mild degree about her annoyance at having to make changes and after the initial email with messages saying I was blackmailing her, and a few other more minor statements/insults such as calling me an asshole.

    And, as the bottom of that journal cited, she did say that if people asked her for my name it would be provided. She has since deleted the journal it appears, though. I would say that's to her credit.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    14 hours ago, Bourbon said:

    This caution definitely doesn't look good on the customer. I have menstrual cramps that are the same strength as labor contractions, it's not uncommon for me to be offline or unresponsive to commission business during my periods because of it. It can be debilitating and isn't something the artist used just to get your sympathy. As someone else said, it's no different than someone being sick with a flu and not being around for a few days. 

    On top of that, demanding they respond to you and then filing a chargeback on them within a day for a full refund (when you got your art and the changes you wanted at that point were small with just a mild difference in sizing) is a huge strike against you.

    Also, like it or not, the artist has every right to warn their friends and fellow artists about your behavior towards them. I definitely wouldn't want to work with someone who filed a dispute because of a minor edit not being done immediately. Should they have posted a public journal? No, probably not. It's never a good look when an artist vents about their clients in a public place. But that doesn't mean they were unjustified, nor does it make it slander/libel. 

    There was some major external factors that lead to my aggression under these circumstances. To put it simply there was trashtalk and mention of intentionally ignoring me.

    While I am certainly not belittling how discomforting cramps can be, it was the combination of silence + behind curtains talk that lead me to decide to take these actions.

    And, as mentioned at the start of this article and in comments, I am happy with the product and the only reason this article was submitted was due to them making a journal to publicly deface me. You are free to draw your own conclusions from what has transpired.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You keep bringing up 'external issues', citing them as reasons for your aggression, but they are not included within the post. If it pertains to your circumstances with this commission, then they should have been included in your initial posting if you consider these things to be of great importance.
    You only continue to vaguely allude to them, but you do not provide proof of this conduct against you.

    The external situation either pertains to this situation or it doesn't, you should decide where you stand there vs continuing to prop something up that comes off very 'he said/she said'.

    If the things said are ultimately unimportant in the realm of this post, then you should drop them all together and not use them as a justification for yourself, plain & simple. The conclusions drawn are only to this point because of what we as a community can see in this post, with the information provided and your subsequent responses.

    Putting the onus on the community is kind of ridiculous when the burden of proof is on you as the OP to this caution post x: 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    • Administrator
    10 minutes ago, rikki said:

    -snip for length-

    It was asked to be excluded by us because the telegram chat in question had a lot of third parties in it, and we were unsure of the level of privacy this chat had or has.

    It isn't anything different than the journal other than other users and the artist calling the OP names. OP was never directly named. The artist called OP an "idiot".  The artist was frustrated that the PayPal dispute could put their account in jeopardy due to the no adult rule for paypal.


    Edit: refreshed myself on the chat, so it's more accurate now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Celestina said:

    It isn't anything different than the journal other than other users and the artist calling the OP names. OP was never directly named. The artist called OP an "idiot".  The artist was frustrated that the PayPal dispute could put their account in jeopardy due to the no adult rule for paypal.

    This is the thing that needs to be emphasized, OP in comments continues to claim that the chat is what prompted his actions but that chat log didn't happen until after the threat of fling a dispute. (but before the actual dispute itself) In that situation I think any artist would feel need to vent in a private group briefly. There's simply no compassion on the OP's end as he disregards all emotional and physical stress and opts to push harder instead of reconcile at all.

    It's like I said before, even with the wait and debatable circumstances regarding the readability of the ref, (which is pretty much the only grounds as to why this was accepted in the first place) everything else is on the OP.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

  • Create New...