This looks like Grif’s handwriting, we were always thinking of gags and scrapping half of them! I like 103 pancakes because it implies 104 is the limit, and if he ate 104 he would perish

Thank you so much!!! :D

I diiiid!! I gotta put my stuff online more these days 😭😭 thank you so much!!

are you in Burbank? @kristengish.bsky.social 's bae is in BTU I believe

Marcyyyyy!!! 💕💕

Tysm SEANNNNN 😭😭

awwww GEEEENE!!!

If you wanna see some of my stuff click on over Nosfera-TO my portfolio:

www.norameek.com/storyboards

Yeah! Imagine the confidence you’d feel as a member if it was fellow members documenting a problem like that and deciding to stand up together, instead of being siloed alone and not knowing who shares your issue. Organizing doesn’t happen in an intake form - it happens with each other!

This being social media, I'm not going to go into "what's the plan?!" but rest assured that no matter which way the vote goes, myself and your fellow negotiators have your back. Happy to chat with any member who has Q's. The only wrong choice for animation workers is not to vote.

Additionally, story artists who write have a 15% bump in the Nick contract and the AMPTP should follow suit. This is another item I believe we're more than strong enough to secure back at the table.

artists on streaming shows work on (two 11 minutes packaged into 22's).

To me, this means that instead of classifying board artists as the higher-paid Production Board, producers now have a written excuse to classify new hires as ASP, effectively giving them an 8% paycut with little recourse.

Regarding my craft, story: It's great that we brought the Animation Story Person classification up with a significant pay raise, but it comes with the AMPTP's added language that ASP applies to streaming projects 20-30 minutes in length, which is what basically all storyboard -

These are two provisions I believe that we're strong enough to go back to the table for. I've seen our strength firsthand as I was planning and executing the actions we took and I don't have to enumerate it here - we have strength in spades.

We can't eradicate AI, but 2 big gaps in the dam are missing from what I consider good guardrails: protection from refusing AI tools as a condition of employment, & that designers, boarders, etc. cannot be given an AI asset to work off that will affect their credit and compensation.

With tech-related clauses like AI, we're not looking at 3 years of impact. It's more like 10 or 20, since contract language historically doesn't change much after new implementation (just take a look at our New Media/Streaming clauses that are still giving corporate discounts after 10+ years).