I submitted those TV heads back in 2017. At the time, I did not see a rule against such an item. I wasn't tapped on the shoulder and told "sorry, ain't happening" when those were in the queue. It didn't even cross my mind my TVs would be considered a base edit.

I am truly sorry my items have caused such a discourse. It is really frustrating and stressful to have these rules scattered. I understand that.

Hopefully the rework of the rules will ease that confusion and eliminate frustrations.

❤

I don't think anyone blames you for this.

this is absolutely not your fault, so please don’t think that! The TV heads are amazing and fun, however the archaic rules that now suddenly popped up again are the issue. While your items were a catalyst, that doesn’t put this conversation on you ‘v’

Yeah, the real issue is this list of rules that don't make any sense, are inconsistently enforced, and are not accessible to users.

The wording - or maybe enforcement, but if that's the interpretation that ship has long sailed - of this rule has always been a cluster. It'd be nice to see it cleaned up.

Edit: Not even going to touch the response I got when I asked staff about this previously, but let's just say it fits within the theme of experiences in this thread.

You aren't to blame at all! The issue is based on the rules that clearly need to be retouched on because its caused issues with other users who have tried submitting/designed similar but were denied. It would be nice for subeta to revise old rules that double standard items that are on the site for use.

Y’know, I feel like another major problem is that there is a request for feedback and yet when users try and initiate a conversation, there’s absolutely no response from anyone. Perhaps I’m impatient (most likely) but this feels like an ongoing issue.

Is it convenient to say that it’ll be a back and forth, and then to just .... not?

So are you gonna clarify the rule you explained but no one can find? Or the one that was edited which goes against what you said? Or should we just expect a rule overhaul to go with how you want things to be in the future? I’m so confused right now... none of this makes any sense and it really sounds like you’re going to implement your own rules and that’s a little scary to hear.

I don’t want to risk getting punished by getting lots of random denials for questioning you but the fact you ignored so many posts and only replied to a couple minor points and ignored all the big ones just really scares me.

sorry but i'd really appreciate you looking at this and replying to some of those questions?

Quote by Emyon

@ Saint I&;m sorry for pinging since you&;ve probably gotten a bunch of pings to this already, but this is in reply to your post:</p>
<p>You mentioned that the noodles were denied based on the rule: &quot;Artwork replaces features and/or edits the avatar base&quot;
That rule is nowhere to be found. I looked in the rules page, and in all of the FAQ and guides in the forum. If i missed, please direct us to it.</p>
<p>I&;m guessing you&;re quoting a &quot;denial reason&quot; as you said, which would mean that is something you, as staff, can select for denying an item. It&;s not something we, as users, can see.
I&;ll also guess that that denial reason is there because of the old rule &quot;You may not submit any images that edit the avatar base or replace features in any way. This includes repositioning arms or legs, but also restricts drawing original facial features. You may submit clothing that enhances these features such as makeup that works with existing base eyes or lips.&quot; - Pulled this from the subeta wiki, which is outdated.(that is a link)</p>
<p>That rule has since been updated, as seen here: &quot;At this time, we will still not be accepting user-made mouths/lips, noses, and eyes. The rules for base edits have been rewritten on the CW submission page to reflect that this is the only base edit no longer allowed (as long as the other CW rules are followed, of course).&quot; (that is a link)</p>
<p>if facial features are the only base edit not allowed anymore, then object heads are not against the rules, and the &;denial reason&; you can select should not be used for that.</p>
<p>Further, you have said yourself that base edits are allowed, since that is what the &;body mods&; are. (also a link)
And, &quot;Artwork replaces features and/or edits the avatar base&quot; directly contradicts the official submission category &quot;All base edits&quot;, which shows it&;s an obsolete denial reason and it should be changed. I would suggest replacing it with &quot;Artwork replaces facial features&quot;, which is the actual current rule.

There will be a coming rule overhaul that should clear some stuff up that we are working on! :) We are just working on getting everything cleared up, looking at what we do and don't allow right now, and making sure everything is more clear, concise, and transparent than it is now.

Regarding the rest of the questions in this thread, I am reading them, but I am also still on shift at my full-time job and cannot make long posts addressing every single question at this time. Just wanted to pop in to alleviate that particular concern for right now!

So you’ve ignored all the legitimate concerns here and are now overhauling the rules? How are we not supposed to be terrified?

This really is coming across as you’re changing the rules to back up past denials and I’m sure that’s not how you MEAN for it to come across but that’s how it reads.

It should never NOT be legitimate to reference older approvals or items released by the site for public consumption.

If object heads were okay in 2017, they should be okay in 2020.

If the sheer possibility that someone might make an avatar with closed eyes was okay in 2018, it should be okay in 2020.

If orange horns are okay for staff to make knowing that people are going to put them on grey bases, and okay for CW releasers to do as recolours of their existing horn items knowing that people are going to put them on grey bases, they should be okay for CW releasers to make with the intention of putting them on grey bases.

I can only think of one potentially acceptable exception, and that exception would be when the art (not the idea, not the design, but the actual execution and craft) is not up to present-day quality standards. (And staff artists should also be held to those standards. That damn grey lineart is icky and desaturates whatever colour is inside of it.)

The revamp of the awkward wolf revamp by Akita is proof positive that there is nothing so technically difficult that nobody in the userbase will be able to do it correctly.

It really is coming across as "you want it codified? Okay! Let me tell you everything you got away with that you're never going to be allowed to do again!"

Which is punitive.

I know you're busy and I respect that, but this needs to be clarified ASAP. Tell us you're talking about art quality, not freedom of design, PLEASE.

once again, I appreciate you taking the time out of your schedule to reply, but once again you’re dodging the questions that are actually causing us to worry. Most of us are all working full time jobs and yet can find the time because this is important to us, and we don’t get paid for it either.

Will you be the sole person responsible for any and all CW questions and problems from now on?

Can we get another Staff voice for more input?

What is your comment regarding the links posted by ?

You need to understand that what it looks like currently is you just randomly deciding on rules and suggesting that you will be ignoring official statements made by staff in the past. Honestly, the simple fact that, as said, there might be ANY sort of fear of future denials due to us questioning you and this, is insane and speaks volumes.

I would genuinely suggest you sit down to write a detailed response addressing the worries and concerns that have been raised. Address the things brought up, address the Art quality issue brought up by multiple users concerning the grey lines on official art vs custom wearables. Make it an official site post, I don’t care, but give us something. We’re thirsty af for some transparency, and I quite honestly, subeta doesn’t classify as “confidential” so why not keep paying users informed? Is that too much to ask?

I’ll also be adding some friendly pings here because of the feedback question:

Hey guys! Sorry for the ping, but as releasers, artists and overall buyers of cws, I think this might be your time to offer some feedback. I would suggest reading ’s post further above, maybe reading back if you’d like? Anyways, no pressure on actually posting, but since we got multiple responses from staff for once, this might be a good chance to get your voice heard. Thanks a lot!

day 46

the subetan staff still do not appear to speak our language. a handful of us have taken on the daunting task of attempting to decipher the strange scrawlings that have been left on our wall, but progress is slow and thus far bears no fruit. we are hoping that with time, a mutual understanding can be reached. perhaps by blinking twice to signify a yes or a no, or, if necessary, puppeteering using sticks and socks.

pray for us.

this is the funniest shit ive read in days.

Honestly, this is such a cluster. I'm not generally one to rock the boat, but with CW's being the biggest source of income for the site??? I assume, it seems like it's a joke. And if I'm afraid to say anything because of retaliation, I'm sure others are too. When one person has a monopoly over the way things work and there's no transparency, it's scary. I'm genuinely scared of the state of CWs. I am scared to question any of it. I'm scared the site will be gone one day when I log in.

& it's all swept under the rug and ignored. SO???????

I'm still not sure I feel comfortable saying more than this, because it would affect my status as a releaser.

definitely list every single rule, even if they are tedious. condense them so that there's a "these are the rules that you will run into typically" if you/other staff feel it necessary to do so, and then go on and list the rest. i personally don't like the idea of categories; i think having all the information in one spot on one page is best so nothing gets lost to readers trying to find a specific answer and then not knowing quite what category it might fall into. rules & guidelines should be separate from any kind of FAQ or denial examples or pricing category outlines - these other resources are very important and also need updating, but mixing all of these things together into one format will probably muddy everything.

more importantly though about my first point -- if any one single person gets a denial for a "secret" or "hidden" rule that isn't listed after the overhaul, user trust of staff in regards to CWs will probably NEVER recover. it will be a death sentence. do not make this even a possibility, even if it is extremely unlikely. also, if there are rules that are so niche or fiddly that they possibly do not have to be listed or will never come up, i think they should be reconsidered entirely. it seems counterproductive? but naturally it depends on what they are.

it's easy to read from this thread that people are paranoid, feel mislead, and feel like they are not treated equally - either amongst each other or compared to staff. while i don't personally feel that way and think there are some overreactions/paranoia, that's the state of things. even if it's considered by staff (in general) and other users to be unfounded, it has to be treated like it's real because it is in fact real and people are expressing it as how they really feel.

this is slightly derailing from what we're talking about in-thread so i'm being as brief as i can but: as far as being unable to reply due to being at work -- that's understandable! however, there have been two (one, two) very large threads calling for changes, clarity, and offering massive amounts of feedback, and you have not acknowledged either of them since 01/31/20 - which is just a little over 6 weeks ago. this is frustrating, and imo not an acceptable standard for communication. this is why i imagine people are as worked up about this as they are - it's definitely why i'm kinda grumping out about it.

there has been total silence about any feedback on the topic of CWs from all staff. we are repeatedly asked for feedback, we give detailed, loving, passionate feedback - we even offer to volunteer our time!!, and then there is silence and nothing changes. i personally have been asking for a re-write/clarification of the rules & guidelines for at least 2 years, for example.

we all understand that staff have lives and other jobs and other commitments - and in your case, that you're the only one running the CW show atm, and we all understand that there are a lot of issues on the back end of things. but we really need some kind of transparency so we can all be on the same side as each other; there has been a lot of (and for some people, nothing but) animosity between CW staff & CW submitters/releasers/artists/whatehaveyou for years and it's like...let's not! let's just avoid that, and not do it anymore.

and the first and biggest step to that is transparency so we feel seen, and communication so we feel heard.

I don't know how long the people that have replied to this thread have been involved in the CW market in some way but I, personally, remember that they (staff) have on different occasions let up restrictions on what parts of the body that are allowed to be "edited". At first no limbs were allowed to be changed (as in position of an arm or leg etc) but then they changed that which made animal booties and arm position edits a possibility. There's been changes like that made gradually over time, and like Saint pointed out, they just end up being scattered in different places. I think it was Jessi that made the posts that talked about what changes had been made to allow more base edits but those were made within a thread, in different posts. I don't remember what ping group she used for those posts but I know that there were pings made to announce the changes. I definitely agree that these changes should have been added to an official set of rules though.

Also, to answer one of your initial questions I would probably choose to submit horns under the "Unique Limbs". It's been a long time since I submitted my Qunari horns though so I can't remember exactly what I chose back then.

Camilla is completely right; the restrictions on body mods was a really, really slow change that took place in stages over YEARS, and they were never amended or added or updated to the official rules list - this is primarily because, i think, the additional list of rules & guidelines that were not located on the CW submission page were in a forum post that got totally lost when the forum migration happened years ago. Jessi unfortunately was never able to recover that post, and those rules were never re-written or established anywhere. the loss of that forum post/the fact that it was never consolidated with the other rules is...pretty much the source of all of our problems with the ruleset at present.

+1 on almost everything here

from a personal perspective, i remember submitting my first cw and the person i commissioned it from had to tell me basically everything to do, because the guides just weren't clear enough for me to follow, as somebody who had been on the site like 9 years and had bought cws but never submitted one now, after being in the cw market for a while and having uploaded like a bunch of cws, the categories are still confusing to me. what differentiates a simple piece of jewelry vs. an ornate or complicated piece of jewelry? i've heard, from a friend who was trying to help me, that the "simple jewelry" was mostly for very small things, like basic studs. but what if i uploaded a necklace with a charm? would that be ornate or complicated? i would consider it 'simple' but based on the instruction i've gotten from other users, it might not be. also, what is a small physical feature? a mole? not at all clear what goes in this category at all.... would also like to echo the 'horns being a 2500csc item' -- my tiny horns () shouldn't be the same price as, say, something that covers the entire bottom part of the HA and a fair portion of the background, maybe like 40% of the image ( - not trying to @ anyone, i just grabbed the first bodymod i saw in the wardrobe). not sure at all what the logic is here, other than the categorization not taking things like this into consideration, especially since bodymods weren't allowed when CWs first became a thing. but still... double also, a horn isn't a limb. a limb, according to the oxford english dictionary, is an arm or leg of a person or four-legged animal, or a bird's wing. - by definition, horns aren't limbs. limbs aren't just 'anything that protrudes from the central part of a body.' also why are scars in the 2k csc category, when small physical features are in the 1.5k csc category? isn't a scar a small physical feature? what is a small accessory? i can't even think of an example of something that would go in this category that wouldn't better fit another category.

the standards seem extremely inconsistent and rules are enforced seemingly at the whim of the approver. this sort of system isnt great, and i dont think it turns into a very good customer service situation. clearer rules (to 's point) would help us, as users, and staff, as the people making the decisions about what gets approved and what doesn't. it seems super overdue.

i think that a lot of this thread has been removed from the initial purpose of the post, which is like, to have the rules updated, but there are a few other frustrations i'd be remiss if i didn't add here. 1) there's no real answer to the 'why cant we make facial feature cws' question. this seems super dumb to me, since i'm sure staff has a reason (even if that reason is 'we want to keep these items controlled by staff and staff artists') and to continue not answering it for seemingly no reason? i dont get it i guess. it would be super simple to just create a canned answer to this so that people can just stop asking you guys. or, better yet, just allow the items?? ;3; 2) the queue is sooo slow lately. i get it, and i believe there's just running it right now, which is a lot of work for one person, but why hasn't jessi been backfilled? i'm sure there are a ton of people who would volunteer to help out with this, for no pay or for csc pay. i also dont get why this hasnt been prioritized.