THE NAME GAME!

 by Rose_Blossom

During the upcoming holiday season, particularly All Hallow’s Eve, the community is almost overwhelmed with designs of all shapes and colors, clothing items, décor items, transportation items, are all geared around the theme of the season. 

Every week, not just during the holidays, our designers show their creativity, imagination, and, yes, their courage, in submitting their items, many of which push the envelope where There Product Submission (TPS) allowances are concerned.  On occasion, however, the approval decisions of TPS are questioned, both privately and publicly.  While some of the rejections for such items are accepted without much fanfare, there are a few where either the designer(s) involved, or the public, have opinions about the decisions that are made.

Case in point:

Very recently, a very smart and prominent designer, MaxSmoke777 submitted his Halloween-themed item and called it “Skeleton –Hanging Bloody.”  The item was both approved AND released to the public.  It is not known at this time whether there were any items sold, as Mr. MaxSmoke777 was reluctant to speak with us.  What he did provide, however, was a copy of the letter that he later received from TPS, and this resulted in the “Skeleton –Hanging Bloody” being discontinued from auctions.  

Dear MaxSmoke777: 

This message is regarding your "Skeleton -Hanging Bloody" submission. This item was approved in error and will have to be discontinued. As the reasons for this action are a bit involved, please allow us to explain. 

In the weeks leading up to last year's Halloween celebration, we received many submissions that featured "Blood and Gore" designs. At the time, our policy was strictly against such items and we should have rejected them outright. But because Halloween was approaching and these items were considered consistent with the spirit of the celebration, our Approvers were instructed by There's management at the time to approve them. 

Several months ago, there was a discussion in the community about whether or not we should accept "Weapons of War" submissions, particularly vehicles that are  designed to look like tanks, fighter jets and other military vehicles. The discussion broadened to include "Blood and Gore" submissions, as many members were also concerned about these. So a survey was conducted by our Community Manager to get the There community's views on the subject. From the results of the poll, our community was overwhelmingly in favor of allowing "Weapons of War" content, but were opposed to "Blood and Gore." 

So in early June we made the announcement that we would allow "Weapons of War" submissions, but not "Blood and Gore." While we would allow Developers who previously created items of this type to retain Developer Rights to these items, we would not approve anymore items like these moving forward. As this was consistent with the outcome of the poll, reactions to the announcement were very positive. 

Which brings us to your "Skeleton -Hanging Bloody" item. This submission should not have been approved, as it features a blood covered skeleton, and it ended up being processed by accident. So we have discontinued this item and have refunded you your submission fee for it. We have also ended the auction and have refunded you your auction fee. 

We appreciate your understanding in this matter and hope to get a chance to work with you again in the future.

 Regards,

 There Product Submissions

You may remember responding to the survey referenced in this letter.  You may also remember, just recently, another incident regarding TPS and their policy to reject “Blood and Gore” submission.  It involved a certain “Wall of Ooze” announced in the forums  

Just listed...my Wall of Blood.

There made me change the name to "Wall of Ooze", actually it was supposed to be "Wall of Red Ooze", not sure what happened there but ANYWAY, I just listed my WALL OF BLOOD AKA WALL OF OOZE and TheChaz has updated the animation pack to include it.

Questions have been raised as to the consistency and fairness of TPS’s decisions.  For example, would the “Skeleton –Hanging Bloody” have been approved if it was submitted with the title “Skeleton –Hanging Oozy”?   Or, wait…no…that would not have worked because it is too much reference to Weapons of War?   But no, that’s right, Weapons of War was permitted, but not if they have traces of blood on them?   *hmmmmm… 

Also, if the “Wall of Ooze” was accepted, and other items (pictured here) that, according to TPS, do not have anything to do with “Blood and Gore” were accepted, is there possibly a bias or double-standard set by TPS by rejecting the “Skeleton –Hanging Bloody”?  These are questions that are causing a lot of attention and may need to be answered.

As an additional note, MaxSmoke777 successfully submitted “Human Skull –Freaky Regular” which has blood on it.  Is it only a matter of time before that is also withdrawn by TPS, or, like “Wall of Ooze” will it be allowed because the name met the design prerequisites?  

 

THE PEACH PREDICAMENT 

In another example of confusion caused by the approve/reject policies, you may be familiar with “The Peach Incident” involving a pair of items were recently submitted by Kattwoman.  Again, The Voice contacted the designer to talk with us, but has not received a response yet.  We would, however, like to present this case in point: 

Item A -  

“Large Stacking Pillar” (Auction item 542306)

“This will be just “peachy” if you have the head for it” 

Item B –

(Large Peach?) (Large Head?) (Large Peach Head?)  We’re not sure what the name of this item was.  It was placed in auctions as part of a set to Item No. 542306.  Oops!  We’re sorry!… THIS item has been discontinued!  

These two items were both approved, and released in world.  However, shortly after they were released, the designer was notified that Item B was going to be withdrawn and her submission fees and auction fees refunded.  I think we can assume that the designer received a similar letter as the one received by MaxSmoke777.  (See above) You can substitute “Blood and Gore” perhaps,  with “Sexually Explicit,” or perhaps “Items not suitable for children.”   

Now, if you think that if anyone purchased these two items together, before they were withdrawn from Auctions, then those people would have their items taken away from them and they would be refunded, correct?     Well…..er….um……let’s just say there are reports that the word “moderated” has been used to certain avies who have certain peaches in their pockets!  The question was raised if There rescinded the peach heads then how does a member have one.  Simple "it's in the paz that it once resided in, yes... the actual item was removed. But because pazes have memory, it saved the layout and the items associated with it. Those who logged in when the peach was still an object downloaded the texture and it still resides on your Client, when the paz is pulled it pulls the same files it would normally, and so the peach still exists in the paz". 

Now maybe these two items should NOT have been released to the public.  It’s possible that the TPS made the decision based upon the criteria they talked about.  But if a “peach” could not be released, should TPS have given second consideration to some of the other suggestive items that have been in auctions? 

These incidents are two examples that have brought questions to the minds of, not only the TB-spending Therian public, but also of the many designers who have had similar experiences getting their items approved…then withdrawn.  OR, designers who have worked their PhotoShop-fingers to the bone to get items approved, only to have TPS tell them that according to the “results of our survey,” their item does not meet their criteria.  Should another survey be taken?  Should TPS’s criteria be revisited?  What part can the community play to help TPS alleviate the possibility of duplicity or preferential treatment …OR double-standards? 

Just something to ponder over the holidays.  See  you in There!

 

*Author’s Note:

This article does not, in any way, reflect the opinion of this author, nor does it reflect the opinion of this publication.  It is merely written to bring to light several questions posed to The Voice of There regarding the subject matter.