Hey guys, so I just want to make a quick video real fast just because I'm still working on the buttons video and I expect it should be done fairly soon but there's been a couple new updates that I just want to make sure I get everything nailed down for. So this will be given to you in the meantime, I promise you I'm getting to work on that. So it is very recently come to my attention that there is a Twitter account called Free Art Requests at the handle of We Draw Your OC. Now it seems they've come under a little bit of backlash due to the way that they have treated one individual and I just want to talk about that situation very quickly because I don't believe it is everything that everyone thinks it is and I'm going to explain why in this video. Now a Twitter user by the name of Snake Hugs actually posted a call out about these individuals because they had canceled their request of his after he had requested one status update on it in D.M.s after it had taken close to a month to complete. On paper that sounds bad and people pointing out other things that make it sound worse but I don't believe it is this bad and I don't believe it is outside of their rights to have made the decision they did, especially when taking into a few other things into factor. Now I'll give you a moment to read the tweet as well as the D.M.s attached to it just so that way you have full context for this situation. All right, now that you've done that I'm going to put the rules that we draw your OC guys placed on their thread so that you can have a further frame of reference here. Now if you are like many people on Twitter you've probably paid a lot of attention to rule number 10 and used that to justify the situation. They're being fairly tyrannical with the way they write their rules and things of that nature. The issue is rule number 10 is not in question here. This person broke rule number 8 if you refer back to their own tweet and their own D.M.s so calling rule number 10 here tyrannical, calling it unreasonable, calling it anything other than just rule number 10, it's not relevant to this situation. Rule number 10 was not broken and I agree if rule number 10 were broken we'd be having a very different conversation but as rule number 10 is not the one that was broken and did not result in this pointing out that it is a stupid rule and that it is just very tyrannical that's not relevant to the situation whatsoever. It's like saying well that restaurant threw me out for a noise disruption. They would have thrown me out anyway just because I wore a hat inside so they're obviously not reasonable. If that were the case if you had been thrown out from wearing a hat inside we might have a different conversation but you weren't it would have been a noise disruption in that hypothetical situation. So pointing out rule number 10 as an unreasonable rule does not justify this person in any way and it does not make them look any worse in this context as that's not the rule in question. I also believe it is an important thing to remember that these individuals ask for no compensation. These individuals ask for no monetary gain. This is all done entirely at the request to people who want their OCs drawn. So I think that offers them a little bit more of a defense point. They're doing something entirely on their time and their time. They're not asking for anything back. They're not requesting any kind of payment or requesting anything in kind of reimbursement and that I think is a mitigating factor as well. They are permitted to make these sort of cancellations. This is something that they're doing out of the goodness of their heart at that point I don't believe necessarily that it's something that you can criticize somebody for for canceling something especially when even if rule number 8 was written in a vague fashion which has been pointed out to me. Even if rule 8 was what written in a vague fashion. It was a knowable that this would not be acceptable and this would be what happened. And honestly since this is a request and it's not coming at any cost to the person who had who who was canceled on or and it's not it's there's no gain for the people who did the canceling I don't see that it's necessarily justified this call out here. Now there was one final point that I wanted to bring up which is that the full context was not displayed which we can establish here in this reply from snake hugs which came after I started inquiring about this on a friend's thread. Now you can see here that the account was actually willing to give him a second chance the way that they had promised inside of their rules and it was not stated that he was ever given a second chance and he was actually allowing people to stay under the impression that he was not being given a second chance and to me that's an incredibly disingenuous thing to do. Moreover as you can see the dates and the timestamps we can see that this wasn't a message they sent after the call out was made this was sent weeks in advance the same day of the cancellation. He knew that he was allowed to request again and still did not display that information and I'm not exactly sure why to be honest the only thing I can reason out is that displaying that information offers some kind of defense for the account and that that would inherently make his call out look weaker. That's all I can reason out I don't live in his head so I can't say for sure what his motivation on that was at the same time though I think it's very suspicious that he was not willing to show that hey these guys are actually still making good on that part. They're willing to give me a second chance I just think this was a little unreasonable. If that had been displayed in full I would think that this video was probably not necessary but the fact that he's willing to stand by this call out and allow these allow people to stay under that impression that they were not even willing to give a second chance I think that's an incredibly suspicious thing and I think that's very important to keep in mind when talking about this situation. Now many people think a lot of things one way or another about this situation and I agree that some of those rules are either poorly worded or simply tyrannical as we've established. However I also think it's worth pointing out that we weren't given the full information by the person making the call out. Moreover the top of the rules preface that all of these things you know this is what's going to happen and so far they've made good on everything they promised on their end for those rules. So I'm having a lot of difficulty seeing why this art account is actually in the wrong here especially when you also again factor in that they ask for nothing back. They ask for no monetary gain and they do this completely for free. So at that point I'm having a lot of difficulty seeing why they're getting any backlash in this situation especially when again we were not given full context. Alright that's just going to do it for today. The links to my social media as well as the artists who do my character stills they will be in the description and the pinned comment. If you had some thoughts one way or another about this situation I would love to read them down in the comments and I will catch you guys later.