[I know I said I'd spare flaming you, but it's too near & dear to my heart]

[stauf]

-> Refer here. <-

I've just been told that I'm not an artist because I don't have a "contract."

So, smarty-pants , I guess something like -> THIS <- just designed itself ? Guess what .. ? I made that without a contract or client, and without money.

The best part is that you will get more credit for what shirt you decide to put on today then I

Comments

[safelyinsane]

I couldnt get to the pages... Just the first page.. Hooooooooooowwwwwwever... I have to agree with you. You are an artist. Just because you're not famous doesnt make you any less of an artist. Infact... Some "Famous" artists are not artists at all. They're merely puppets.

Music is your palet, and through that you paint your own world.

[luet]

Holy crap Matt.
YOU DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO READ WHAT I WROTE BEFORE ATTACKING IT.
Nice of you to "flame" me for something I NEVER SAID
Holy god.
Get a grip.
And name calling? Cool...

[emmy_g]

I'm sorry, but it's pretty clear that's not what she meant. She was comparing your argument to the argument that someone who does not have a contract should not be considered an artist. She clearly said that she thought it was wrong to say a musical artist without a contract is not an artist. Just my opinion, but I don't think it's fair to post something like you did.

*flop*

[jimparadise]

Yeah, man... I read it and it pissed me off at first when I got to that specific comment but as I read onto what she said next it was clearly explained that that's not what she was implying or stating at all (quite the opposite it seemed).

Ma $.02....

[littlebitty]

dude, i'm going to have to agree with emily and nathan, that this is a PRIME example of misinterpretation