Designs coming soon, and "the skull debate"

OK, I spent way longer than intended reviewing those other custom artwork decks, I really want to take what I can from that and start getting some of my own designs up! For the next couple of posts at least. It's good to check out the competition, guage how good my finished designs have to be, study the host of decks that mine will be rubbing shoulders with and going toe-to-toe with, learn from the successes and shortcomings of those decks, but for the next few posts I will focus on the sketches and concepts I have been coming up with over the last week or so.

Also, a very interesting point arose on a forum called The Magic Cafe, where a poster named Artie Fufkin said:

Most enduring designs aren't "things" as such.
Even those well known cards with "things" on them are somewhat non-threatening.

Think an angel on a bicycle.

Personally, I think cards with very, very long lives generally don't have any"thing" on them, but are pure design.
Like Bee's, Tally's, Steamboats, etc.

Skulls have been done, and done, and done.
I really can't see any of them being considered interesting for more than a few years before they fall off the radar. 

This gave rise to some very interesting perspectives in me, and brought to light a very important point: namely, should I have skulls in my deck or not? And maybe, the challenge for me is to create a timeless deck that will strike that elusive balance between the new style and the old school, and still have skulls on it.

The thing is, Artie is totally right in what he says, and I had already considered his point even before he made it, but, I do love skulls and I am confident that if I chose to include them in my deck design they would rock. The point is should I include them in the first place?

Let's ask skully...