To me the biggest controversy FurAffinity has ever had will be, and probably (and hopefully) always will be the note leak. It's one thing to bring back what was once in public view, and thus public memory. It's a whole other to expose things that were never meant for public consumption to begin with.
I think it's going to be a theme in the coming years. Gone are the days when an artist can pretend that they were always a gift to their form. That they were always as talented as they are now. That's the thing with a publisher studio. Sure they reject you, but in a way they were protecting you from having your work reach an audience before it was really ready. Now that those safety nets are disappearing you have to be the judge on whether your own work is ready for public consumption. And only the most introspective of people are going to know that accurately. Even they will get it wrong once in awhile.
So, you'll have to embrace your growing moments, and not fear the mistakes the past you made. Instead recognize them, and use it to inspire your fans, and your enemies, that anyone can become better. As long as they don't allow themselves to be beaten by their failures.
It is sort of like the Google controversy and the "Right to be Forgotten". The thing is, who has the right to be forgotten and at one point do they no longer have that right? To me what should be demanded, more than being forgotten, it for the right to be forgiven. If society will not forgive a man who declared bankruptcy a decade ago, then it is not the man's problem, nor Google's problem for linking to a decade old article, it is the reader basing their judgement off of outdated information and being unable to determine that information is outdated. The problem is with being unable to forgive the mistakes of the past.
The same goes for if someone is criticizing an artist's current talents through the lens of their decade's old works.
To me the biggest controversy FurAffinity has ever had will be, and probably (and hopefully) always will be the note leak. It's one thing to bring back what was once in public view, and thus public memory. It's a whole other to expose things that were never meant for public consumption to begin with.
I think it's going to be a theme in the coming years. Gone are the days when an artist can pretend that they were always a gift to their form. That they were always as talented as they are now. That's the thing with a publisher studio. Sure they reject you, but in a way they were protecting you from having your work reach an audience before it was really ready. Now that those safety nets are disappearing you have to be the judge on whether your own work is ready for public consumption. And only the most introspective of people are going to know that accurately. Even they will get it wrong once in awhile.
So, you'll have to embrace your growing moments, and not fear the mistakes the past you made. Instead recognize them, and use it to inspire your fans, and your enemies, that anyone can become better. As long as they don't allow themselves to be beaten by their failures.
It is sort of like the Google controversy and the "Right to be Forgotten". The thing is, who has the right to be forgotten and at one point do they no longer have that right? To me what should be demanded, more than being forgotten, it for the right to be forgiven. If society will not forgive a man who declared bankruptcy a decade ago, then it is not the man's problem, nor Google's problem for linking to a decade old article, it is the reader basing their judgement off of outdated information and being unable to determine that information is outdated. The problem is with being unable to forgive the mistakes of the past.
The same goes for if someone is criticizing an artist's current talents through the lens of their decade's old works.