4 ms·
Patreon went one step further - if you post content against Patreon's rules anywhere else, even if you don't link to it, if Patreon finds out, they'll ask you t
by claudiawerner 5y ago
Patreon went one step further - if you post content against Patreon's rules anywhere else, even if you don't link to it, if Patreon finds out, they'll ask you to stop doing it, and threaten to suspend your account if you keep doing it.
This is why many people who post fetish-y art (even stuff like mind-control kink) moved from Patreon to SubscribeStar. Even erotic roleplay site F-List moved to SubscribeStar.
- CamperBob2 5y agoPatreon went one step further - if you post content against Patreon's rules anywhere else, even if you don't link to it, if Patreon finds out, they'll ask you to stop doing it, and threaten to suspend your account if you keep doing it. That sounds outrageous. Is there a link to more info about this policy?
- Consultant32452 5y agoNot generally about the policy, but there is one famous instance I'm aware of: Sargon of Akkad. It was something to the effect of him calling the neo-Nazis the N-word on someone else's Youtube channel. To be clear, he used the slur AGAINST the neo-nazis. Then Patreon dumped him. Here's the first Google result I found about it, no guarantees of accuracy. https://heavy.com/news/2018/12/patreon-sargon-of-akkad-jordan-peterson/ https://heavy.com/news/2018/12/patreon-sargon-of-akkad-jorda...
- 7sidedmarble 5y agoThinking that's ok cause you're saying it to a bad person is some... high levels of mental gymnastics
- Consultant32452 5y agoThere's a very large gap between thinking something is okay and thinking they should not be able to participate in the economy and feed their family.
- claudiawerner 5y agoThe only example I remember was a little less bad, but still pretty bad in my opinion - the artist in question uploaded contra-TOS artwork on his Twitter account, and had a link to his Twitter account from Patreon. However, Patreon's own terms of service state that they look where traffic is coming from to see what kind of things you're funding with the money, and can ban you on that alone: >Because you are raising funds on Patreon, we may be held accountable for what you do with those funds, so we may also look at what you do with your membership off our platform. As a result when we talk about “On Patreon,” it means the creations you are funding on and through Patreon. When reviewing a page, we look at how creations are shared, where the page is linked to and where the traffic comes from. No matter what happens, we always give creators the opportunity to appeal a decision by contacting us and sending any relevant information they believe was not considered. We may not change our minds, but we will always listen. From: https://www.patreon.com/en-GB/policy/guidelines https://www.patreon.com/en-GB/policy/guidelines This means that you only need to link to your Patreon, not even link from your Patreon for them to find you objectionabe. About NSFW creators leaving the platform because of tighter content restrictions on fiction: https://www.dailydot.com/irl/patreon-hypnosis-porn-ban-sexual-violence/ https://www.dailydot.com/irl/patreon-hypnosis-porn-ban-sexua... https://thenextweb.com/news/patreon-continues-to-crack-down-on-nsfw-content-creators https://thenextweb.com/news/patreon-continues-to-crack-down-... Further, Patreon has communicated to artists that regardless of the age of a fictional character, certain art elements common to anime/manga style drawing (even of adults - "big head, big eyes, short height") may be considered as marking the artwork as a child - and even adding adult-like proportions such as large breasts may not be sufficient to evade Patreon's ban: https://twitter.com/Waero_Re/status/1238408555507539968 https://twitter.com/Waero_Re/status/1238408555507539968 Another artist in the thread noted that Patreon decided their content was "violent" because their drawings featured people not smiling during orgasm.
- CamperBob2 5y agoBecause you are raising funds on Patreon, we may be held accountable for what you do with those funds Wow. That is not good. Any hypothetical employer could justify any hypothetical abuse using that rationale.