Bejaymac posted at 7:19 AM Sun, 11 August 2024 - #4488300

Main issue is that DAZ have a strict "no attacks" policy on the forums.

The company, it's staff, the forum staff, the content creaters and even the user base is covered by this.

So you can't heavilly crit them, slag them off, make them look bad, or even make them look stupid.

Before you ask, yep I've had thousands of posts deleted over there, and for all of the above, as a result I'm probably going to be one of a small group, who are "Pre Moderated" on a permanent basis.

Can you tell me, if that is the principle, what the post:
"Some companies will allow it (under the ideal of fan art), some companies will nail you between the eyes.
(fair use is a defence, not a reason to use. Its suppose to be used in court to defend/explain why you have the right to use something)
It depends on the companies terms"

Was breaking the "No attack" policy? (keep in mind, this was in reply to posts above it, stating flat out that daz was breaking IP right)
BTW the topic of the thread had been in regards to the EL and to fan art.
NOTHING in that post, is wrong. It is factual and provable.
It did not attack anyone. It referred to the fact some companies like Nintendo will, very aggressively pursue almost anyone using their IP and some companies, don't care and will let their fan base make what ever.
INFACT....
Provably(as it was shown via the email chain that followed this)
There were posts in that 18 page thread that were far, far worse in stating flat out daz was wrong and those posts were allowed to stay.
(They finally, after releasing items clearly direct copies of movie and book characters and people were going "hold up, do you even have the permission to do this" they removed the entire thread.)

I have had posts removed that did flat out state "Hey you have made a mistake" and on those times, I held my hands up and had to keep my mouth shut, because I was shown the ToS point it violated.

But the above post....didnt break anything.
That, was when I decided I had enough of their “favouritism” and selective censorship and very selective use of the ToS.


And btw, the "No attack policy"? I made a post in reference to how their wording of certain "sales" was confusing. Particularly to those with things like dyscalculia. I then had to get posts taking the utter mick out of the fact "Oh Daz math is too hard"(an actual post quote).
I referenced in my post that being “inclusive” shouldn't just be products that show a character in a wheelchair but also take into account that some of their customer base is going to be ND(neurodivergent). And it had plenty of posts that made jokes about it.
So that "no attack policy" must be very selective. But it proves the point that the mods, base their exercise of ToS rules purely on personal likes and dislikes and not on what the TOS is actually saying.

https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/

Commission open.