_{I dunno.. But if they've already had a DD before I guess it's kinda unfair}

--
_{ಠ_ಠ}

It's only fair if someone works hard and produces great art, that they get the praise that they deserve?
I'm not too sure... maybe DD's should only be given to up and coming/new artists rather than well known ones.

If they're already popular it will most likely end up in the "popular" section so there's no need for them to waste space in the DD where unexposed artists' could be. It's unfair in my opinion.

--
_{Gay is the Way}

i think that since the point of a daily deviation is to give exposure to unknown or relatively unpopular artists, that already popular artists should NOT be spotlighted. i think it's ok to give multiple DDs to an unpopular artist who remains unpopular, but when you go and give like...5 to a popular artist, then woah there deviantart, QUIT FUCKING UP.

Yes.
I don't give a fuck about how popular the artist is or is not, as long as the art is GOOD, as in GOOD GOOD, MEANING good, then hell yeah, they deserve a Daily Deviation.

--
SPREAD THE LOOOVE.

Oh, whoops, but I forgot to say one thing.

Yes, if they give DDs to popular deviants more than unpopular ones, then that's bullshit, because the popular artist must have all the popularity they need.
But yeah, don't exaggerate, give the unpopular people a chance.

--
SPREAD THE LOOOVE.

It kind of depends on the person, I guess.
I mean their success probably gives merit to their popularity and so forth- and I figure I'd feel kind of ripped off if I worked on something amazing and didn't get recognized for it because I had 1,000,000 pageviews or something.

I love it when DDs shine light on undiscovered users, though. It's awesome when they do that.

I'll use Tracy Butler (*tracyjb) for example. She has around 5 DDs as of a few days ago, but the works chosen are ones from all sorts of eras from her time at dA, so I can see the reason in that. Besides which, her most recent DD is freakin amazing. xD

I'm kind of on the fence about it, though. Sure, DDs are meant to showcase the amazing, but it'd be nice if they showcased the amazing that people hadn't already seen.

I honestly feel that it depends on the situation, the work put into the piece, and the amount of times the person gets a DD.

For example, if an already popular artist went way above their normal output and produced something freakishly fantastic, I see no problem in giving them a DD. They deserve it, they worked for it. Then again, when I think of popular, I'm saying a couple hundred thousand pageviews, not in the millions. Why someone with 2 million pageviews needs a DD is beyond me.

I feel like there are PLENTY of unappreciated artists out there that could benefit from things like a DD, but that they shouldn't settle for mediocre just because they didn't want to shine the light on someone who's already too popular. Sorry if the sounds idiotic. I suffer similar feelings since I'm a spotlight reviewer on smackjeeves and sometimes have to fight the 'quality' vs 'opularity' argument.

--
98% of teenagers put shit like this in their signature.
If you're part of the 2% that don't, copy this into your signature.

_{Koii approves of this comment}

--
_{Kokkoii-Matoku's Number one rule:
Never Give Up
Live it, Learn it, Love it
^-^}