svarz currently has conditional DNP set - only the artist or commissioner are allowed to post.
However, they are unable to upload anything currently, nor do any art-related things, per their Twitter:
https://twitter.com/SvarzArt/status/1804321786256822736
https://twitter.com/SvarzArt/status/1863461278460571874
So they gave a green light for anyone to upload their yet yet unsubmitted art to e621:
https://twitter.com/SvarzArt/status/1809731298648285326
Can the DNP rule be lifted based on that? Or do we need to submit these works with the last link as a permission from the artist? It's very unlikely they'll submit any requests themselves.

to my understanding, their C-DNP status would not be removed. however, if a user has proof that they were given permission to upload and shows it to whichever staff member would handle the Svarz posts they uploaded, those posts can be undeleted. this also goes for Avoid Posting, however i don't know whether or not a twitter post would be considered enough as permission to post. the ones users opted to show were usually private messages, so a staff member can say whether this counts.

cyanoger said:
Can the DNP rule be lifted based on that? Or do we need to submit these works with the last link as a permission from the artist? It's very unlikely they'll submit any requests themselves.

CDNPs would never be lifted unless specifically requested by the artist themselves.

Adding totally unrelated links to the source field that is not of the artwork itself can be considered Sourcing Abuse. Do not do that.
Instead, you should add a link to the permission given to you in the description of the post or in the comments.

As for the specific tweet giving permission itself, I'm not sure if that would be accepted.
The wording seem vague (i.e., does "these" mean the artwork immediately before the tweet or their entire gallery?) and they misnamed e621, but that's just me bring nitpicky.