@fphoenix-7.bsky.social
Beautiful piece!
December 13, 2025 at 8:28 PM
Beautiful piece!
Nel <3, it looks amazing!
December 13, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Nel <3, it looks amazing!
Loathe as I am to make too many assumptions, but my current belief is that the powers that be on the Fate side of this collab would not want different English VAs than their currently established ones.
July 13, 2025 at 3:27 AM
Loathe as I am to make too many assumptions, but my current belief is that the powers that be on the Fate side of this collab would not want different English VAs than their currently established ones.
I do understand that, and if the bulk of members want a vote, then you should be allowed to vote. I'm just curious where those with the stance of "We need to take this deal, it's a good deal, it's not getting better, etc." land on moving forward if membership did ultimately reject it.
June 3, 2025 at 10:24 PM
I do understand that, and if the bulk of members want a vote, then you should be allowed to vote. I'm just curious where those with the stance of "We need to take this deal, it's a good deal, it's not getting better, etc." land on moving forward if membership did ultimately reject it.
Obviously it's not a monolith, but is it "Well that stinks, but hold the line"? Is it "No, the majority is wrong actually", and breaking the line? I want nothing more than the best for VAs, but for all the "we have to take this deal" I've seen, I do wonder "What if the majority doesn't want it"2/2
June 3, 2025 at 9:13 PM
Obviously it's not a monolith, but is it "Well that stinks, but hold the line"? Is it "No, the majority is wrong actually", and breaking the line? I want nothing more than the best for VAs, but for all the "we have to take this deal" I've seen, I do wonder "What if the majority doesn't want it"2/2
Craig, I feel like I have to ask, and I do mean this be to genuine: for the group of VAs(which are obviously their own peoples and not a monolith) saying "We have to vote, we have to take this deal", and if membership does get to vote on the deal, and the majority does reject it, what then? 1/2
June 3, 2025 at 9:11 PM
Craig, I feel like I have to ask, and I do mean this be to genuine: for the group of VAs(which are obviously their own peoples and not a monolith) saying "We have to vote, we have to take this deal", and if membership does get to vote on the deal, and the majority does reject it, what then? 1/2
Regarding today's latest batch of really lazy strike-busting propaganda.
There's a LOT wrong with "the chart", but this bit in particular I truly love because it makes the dishonesty of the author shockingly, inarguably clear.
Don't believe the hype.
There's a LOT wrong with "the chart", but this bit in particular I truly love because it makes the dishonesty of the author shockingly, inarguably clear.
Don't believe the hype.
May 22, 2025 at 11:15 AM
Reposted
Allow me to list just a few.
It suggests that ICDRs require consent regardless of the massive loopholes surrounding their creation, missing the myriad of ways AI voices can be made without them needing your consent or to pay you.
It suggests that ICDRs require consent regardless of the massive loopholes surrounding their creation, missing the myriad of ways AI voices can be made without them needing your consent or to pay you.
May 21, 2025 at 7:47 PM
Allow me to list just a few.
It suggests that ICDRs require consent regardless of the massive loopholes surrounding their creation, missing the myriad of ways AI voices can be made without them needing your consent or to pay you.
It suggests that ICDRs require consent regardless of the massive loopholes surrounding their creation, missing the myriad of ways AI voices can be made without them needing your consent or to pay you.
Violation of these rules may include consequences such as loss of benefits, removal from Union, etc."
It's not been "threats." (5/5)
It's not been "threats." (5/5)
May 21, 2025 at 11:39 AM
Violation of these rules may include consequences such as loss of benefits, removal from Union, etc."
It's not been "threats." (5/5)
It's not been "threats." (5/5)
There will be a discussion about whether that's actually the case or not, please provide details from your end(contract was before the strike, that wasn't actually me, etc., whatever reasoning said VA believes they're not in violation). - (4/X)
May 21, 2025 at 11:39 AM
There will be a discussion about whether that's actually the case or not, please provide details from your end(contract was before the strike, that wasn't actually me, etc., whatever reasoning said VA believes they're not in violation). - (4/X)
Which is where we are. So Union VAs can't(or shouldn't) be working on non-u projects that haven't at least signed the Interactive Media Agreement in place. What some people are receiving are notices from SAG basically stating "We've received report(s) that you have violated these rules.- (3/X)
May 21, 2025 at 11:38 AM
Which is where we are. So Union VAs can't(or shouldn't) be working on non-u projects that haven't at least signed the Interactive Media Agreement in place. What some people are receiving are notices from SAG basically stating "We've received report(s) that you have violated these rules.- (3/X)
But unfortunately there are a lot more non-u jobs than there are u jobs in the VA industry, and leadership is aware of this. So the rule has tended to be ignored, with the very stressed notice of it will not be "When There Is A Strike." (2/X)
May 21, 2025 at 11:37 AM
But unfortunately there are a lot more non-u jobs than there are u jobs in the VA industry, and leadership is aware of this. So the rule has tended to be ignored, with the very stressed notice of it will not be "When There Is A Strike." (2/X)