/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>7173279
>I'd rather the self-hating furry that posts content than the whining anon who does not.
Ah, so that's why this site is going to shit.

>>7112194
>>7112202
And if that doesn't satisfy you, it's because onlyfans gets a 20% cut of the stupid bints and because it's popular. So that means MasterCard makes a shitload. Remember that one social media site from 5 years ago? No you don't, it's dead, it milked an audience and fucked off. But during that time the jew who owned it pilpul'd some lawyers and a jew owned payment processing plan and worked out a deal that makes it so they're not accountable. Only fans won't exist in 5 years, technically "they won't get away with it" (but they will in terms of profit).
Which is impossible to do when your dealing with "art" and "private collector" sells to "private collector", what ends up happening is "private collector" is 13 year old Timmy with his Moms credit card who ends up pissing Mom off and MasterCard doesn't want to hear millions of Karens on top of Boomers everyday of the week. That and they don't give a shit about starving artists, they have no money afterall so they can be the first to get shorted (Like how it's the first to go when school funding gets cut)
No in order to do that you have to use a different patented money laundering pilpul pathfinding methodology and go to a gallery to sell dogshit for hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's reserved for the big fish high rollers who use the medium itself as a form of moving money around tax free.