An important question.

[Knight]

At least they were housebroken

[Destina Faroda]

Um, no.

Darkmoon, I see what you're saying, but it's just another version of "It's my site."

You're not the artist who drew the pictures.  You may have rights to do whatever you want with the images he drew you, but you didn't draw them, so you can't say what Seth was thinking as he drew them.  You may even think you know what he was thinking, but it would be no better than the priest who knows exactly what God's word is.

By the way, ER, something can't be explicitly implied.

Funny, just a few replies ago Darkmoon was chiding me for reading into his words more than what he thought was there.  Now you insist that there IS something there.

[Knight]

That's funny, you thought darkmoons supposed "fuck you" was explicitly implied... am I wrong?

reading into his words more than what he thought was there

By the way... if that isn't patronizing, I don't know what is.  Aside from the fact that you TOLD me that artistic thought can't be explicity implied, gathered, whatnot; when any college course on the subject will tell you otherwise.  That was pretty patronizing as well.

[Amber Williams]

I guess the key is how one presents it.

Cause even if both pics look the same, if you are specifically told by one artist "I drew this because you asked and we're being silly" versus "I drew this because I hate the character and want to see them degraded"...it does in a way make a subtle impact to how the person will view each pic.

And yeah...one artist might be lying...but if someone is going to be all buggery and lie about their motives, thats their own perogative.

And double yeah...anyone who sees both pics without knowing either background wont notice a difference between the two.

I guess thats the power of human influence and intent though.  Two people can look at the same picture, one being told the history behind it and the other just seeing it for the first time...and both will have a completly different feeling about it.

[Seth C Triggs]

For what it's worth, we infer intent all the time and judge actions by them all the time. All actions have a certain context. If I just busted out with the drawings saying "HAY Darkmoon I think Princess and Katrina are totally hot and here they go totally boffing each other!!!" I think I'd get flamed to eternity.

However, these drawings are being done for the lulz; for the fun of it.

I do note that intent and context are frequent staples of the penal system at least in the West. We have different grades of offenses. We have offenses which are deemed involuntary, or deemed justifiable, or even negligent.

Indeed, intent and context are very big things in the whole realm of comedy. Subtle changes in the targets of a joke in CVRPG, for example, might make a particular comic offensive to a group of people. And that's why it's perfectly logical to parse the intent of submitted fanworks.

-Seth

[Destina Faroda]

So many lovely replies.

I think I'm not being clear.  Of course we infer intent all the time, but to use the intent as a basis for quality control rather than one's perception is a dangerous line of thinking.

If there's a fan work that's been presented, I'm either going to want it based on what it is or isn't, not because the person intended to be mean or funny whatever.  If someone surprised me with fan art, it's the art itself I'm going to judge.  If anything, if it were something that I would like, I'd much rather be pleasantly surprised than have to ask someone to draw something for me.

Adding text to explain the work makes an impact, but an unnecessary one.  Can't the pieces stand on their own?

And ER, I wrote "not so subtle," meaning implicit.

I perceived his words as no different than flipping me off, as they were an utter dismissal without discussion.  What he meant doesn't mater, just how I take them.

So why should the "fun" of it matter?

[Knight]

Ok, well you're right on the linguistics.  I should have said obviously implied.  Art wouldn't be so fun if there weren't many different ways to take it in.  Taking it in with the implications, real or imagined, can be just as rewarding as viewing it as a standalone.  It doesn't mean either is factually correct.  That's why it's art.  It seems like you are pushing your personal preference as fact.

[Seth C Triggs]

I was assuming D'moon is going to put the images in a gallery with explanatory text much like what is on the front page at the time of this writing.

My intent should hopefully be clear in this thread at least as far as the participants here are concerned. It was just having fun with a silly request of the site owner. I rather hope that there's no inference needed in order to discern my intent thus far.

-Seth

[Amber Williams]

If there's a fan work that's been presented, I'm either going to want it based on what it is or isn't, not because the person intended to be mean or funny whatever.  If someone surprised me with fan art, it's the art itself I'm going to judge.  If anything, if it were something that I would like, I'd much rather be pleasantly surprised than have to ask someone to draw something for me.

Because sometimes intent really makes a major difference.  I have gotten a couple fanarts that based on pure quality would be considered sucktastic...but I knew A) they were gifts and B) the artists who did them were very young and by no means a professional.   If I were to judge solely on the art, I might very well end up sounding like a total assmunch of an artist who only cares about art as long as it is "exceptional quality"

So why should the "fun" of it matter?

Why shouldn't it? If Darkmoon really wanted images, he could commission someone to draw high quality porn.  God knows there is a ton of artists who would draw lesbians for money.  If he's dicking around on the forum, he likely is doing so because he is trying to have a fun time, not because he necessarily wants images.  So in that case, the fun does matter because it is part of the activity itself.

[Destina Faroda]

ER, if there are different ways to take it in, then that only makes intent an even more neglible factor.

Granted, since we're talking about art, opinion is going to play a big role, but I'm not the one saying "It's my comic" and using that fact to make his opinion iron clad law.

Seth, then let me play the intent game, then.

I think it's your intent to draw those drawings to simlutaneously get in good with Darkmoon and to pimp your site.  It's your intent to drive a wedge on this board between those of who would object to this material and those who would accept it.  You do this intending to get closer to Darkmoon, along with llearch, and have him toss me and anyone else aside who likes his work because you have more talent and simply can.  And now you reply in this thread, not to make clear your intent, but to disguise it and to get points for going against me.

Mab, I'm not saying intent never makes a difference in any situation.  What I am saying is with art -- not a site, not a product, but art -- intent is meaningless.  If you incorporate "fun" into it, then it invites something that's not only unquantifyable, but  unable to be replicated and an excuse to be biased against the artist rather than the art.

Besides, Darkmoon just said that he does employ quality control.  Are you calling him a total assumunch who only cares about art as long as it is "exceptional quality?"

[Seth C Triggs]

Seth, then let me play the intent game, then.

Okay!

I think it's your intent to draw those drawings to simlutaneously get in good with Darkmoon and to pimp your site.

I already am "in good" with Darkmoon. We talk pretty frequently—already met IRL. Actually, I met him before I even became a fan of CVRPG, which I pretty much instantly fell in love with once I sat down and devoted some time to it.

My site really doesn't need "pimping" so much; it's really a hobby and I don't draw any revenue from it whatsoever. I already have plenty of people that enjoy the comic oddly enough, for all of its flaws. I draw the drawings because it really is fun to take little challenges like these. You'll find that I do this pretty frequently for other comics and comic artists I like, just because it's fun and it's particular easy because I have a rudimentary style.

It's your intent to drive a wedge on this board between those of who would object to this material and those who would accept it.  You do this intending tp get closer to Darkmoon, along with llearch, and have him toss me and anyone else aside who likes his work because you have more talent and simply can.

I'm not interested in wedges, my friend. Wedges are totally uncool. And I've never once talked to llearch. I really don't much fancy drama, personally...so I tend to not brook that kind of stuff back on my own home base. (Had some bad experiences with drama on the Internets before...can't let that get out of hand again.)

In my experience, nobody really needs to try to drive a wedge; they tend to occur inadvertently.

I don't want anyone tossed. But I did offer my opinion, and my personal ethos is to always pick the side of expression—indeed, that's why I chose the webhost I did. You would find that I'd offer similar arguments elsewhere.

I also believe that your characterization of my sketching as some form of "talent" might be a gross overestimation.

  And now you reply in this thread, not to make clear your intent, but to disguise it and to get points for going against me.

My intent was never disguised; I am only on this forum to have fun. And I respond to challenges for fun, for I feel it's a nice, loose group most of the time. Kinda makes me homesick in a sense!

And for what it's worth, in discussions of intent, there are often counterarguments made just like what we are doing.

Hope this helps,


Seth

[Amber Williams]

Mab, I'm not saying intent never makes a difference in any situation.  What I am saying is with art -- not a site, not a product, but art -- intent is meaningless.  If you incorporate "fun" into it, then it invites something that's not only unquantifyable, but  unable to be replicated and an excuse to be biased against the artist rather than the art.

But that is an aspect of art itself.  A highly debated one, but it is a underlying force in art.  I mean...we could go into the Piss Christ discussion in regards to that.  Some people say the guy peed in a jar and stuck a jesus on a cross just to piss religion off.  Some people say its purpose is like you said, to be art taken as art without intent and mearly meant to be viewed as the image it is. Some say it is meant to create debate and discussion over if art is meant to be a reactionary tool or simply something to be observed neutral. 

Since the emotions attached to the viewer when they look on it are unable to be replicated, it creates a unique experience.  And some would debate that is part of arts very purpose, to invoke reactions.

Besides, Darkmoon just said that he does employ quality control.  Are you calling him a total assumunch who only cares about art as long as it is "exceptional quality?

Nah. I call him an assmunch over just about anything I can.  But I'm unfit to judge him for what he puts up on his site or deems proper content for it.  Actually...I can probably still judge him, but my opinions matter probably very little in the scheme of things.  All I can really speak for is myself, and I dont allow any mature content on my site.

[thegayhare]

  All I can really speak for is myself, and I dont allow any mature content on my site.

Hence the rather immature personalities of us, her many fans

*giggles*

sorry continue

[Valynth]

Destina...  Honestly, let the host deal with the host's issues.  Unless you work for them, you really have no say what-so-evar in what's going on.  'Cause frankly, if you find it offensive, just don't look at the damn thing.  Thats one of the many perks of a free society.

Who ever runs the server has the right to determine what the server holds and if you have issues with it raise it with them and be done with it rather than trying to do their job for them.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

You do this intending to get closer to Darkmoon, along with llearch, ...

Ex-squeeze me? Where the hell did -that- come from?

[Destina Faroda]

I have to find it funny that I, the person who is notorious for not taking things at face value, is actually arguing to take things at face value.

Seth, thanks for letting me know you're already in good with Darkmoon.  I guess this mean for once I wasn't "paranoid" enpugh.  Here I thought you were just another hanger on.  Well, I see I've met my replacement.  Thanks for telling me I'm not needed.

And sure, you say it was all in good fun but I think your intent was to actually ruin my fun and my enjoyment of a website by posting your drawings and making yourself out to be the hero.  Your influence, in my opinion, is hurtful and an attack against my very person.  You think imply I should be banned for expressing my opinion  And even in if you didn't intend for this to happen, you've hurt me far worse than I've been hurt in a while.  You know what they say about the road to hell...

By the way, you're better than I am (a quick survey of my site would reveal it), so you have talent, even though you didn't intend to happen.

Mab, I think it's the reaction that defines the piece, rather than the artist.

If I put a block of wood in the middle of the street, and everyone looked at it like it was the most beautiful thing they saw, it would be a remearkable piece of art

There are, of course, instances where I make exemptions for this with regard to art.  If someone releases a piece that is clearly propoganda or an attempt to capitalize on the beliefs of others for the artist's beneift, then that's one thing.  But if it's fan art of a CVRPG character, the only people who would care are CVRPG fans.  No one's going to be hurt if I show Raye being decapitated or Angel literally getting skullfucked.  So why make someone care by creating that distinction?

Valynth, one of the perks of a "free" society is also to voice and discuss an unpopular opinion.  Just because I have no say doesn't mean I won't express disagreement, not unless you want people to just fall in line and accept whatever's given.

By the way, I don't want him to get "caught."  Believe me, I have my files here too, and I don't exactly have any place to go.   I just mentioned it because I'm worried this could be used against him in the future, and it will be bye-bye CVRPG.

llearch, my statement came from the fact that you have been using your coding skills and other computer skills to make yourself out as an asset to Darkmoon.  It's gotten to the point where you have as much control over the site as he does.  You intended to do this to freeze out all of Darkmoon's other pals.

I guess I'm the only one not allowed to judge by intent.

[Amber Williams]

In regards to the stuff said to me:
I do agree that the reaction is very much influential.  I remember in art class being shown various things in art galleries...one such peice literally being someone having put down a blanket, a stuffed doll, and an unplugged radio onto the floor.  Obviously to some it is a remarkable piece of art...after all...it's in an art gallery and in books of art.  As such, I cannot argue that some people consider it art.  Personally though...well...lets just say I personally disagree.

In regards to the rest of the post and probably everyone else as well:
I don't want to impose censorship, but this thread is starting to take a serious turn towards personal (which is under Rule 2) attacks.  Now, Dmoon and I are big kids and can handle if people have issues with how things are being run on the forum or the site...cause that comes with the territory...but I'd really advise against making attacks to other members.   

If people really want to butt heads, I'd suggest go to PMs normally...but really, I do feel it is a bit unwarrented to go into complete tear-downs of eachother's moral character.  That goes for everyone.


The biggest problem with judging by intent is that...as has been said...intent is notoriously impossible to properly judge.  It is something that is both the responsibility of the sender and the reciever, and if either is on a different wavelength, mis-communications will ultimately happen.  And then come the mis-assumptions, and then comes the drama.

So I'm asking, not because I'm one of the people who gets to wag around a ban-hammer like its an e-penis, but as someone who has been through a lot of drama-fests built around people getting too emotional and starting to unleash the fury, maybe its time for everyone to step back.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

llearch, my statement came from the fact that you have been using your coding skills and other computer skills to make yourself out as an asset to Darkmoon.

Hmmm. I offered my coding skills because I saw something that looked easy to me, and he'd said he wasn't too sure how to handle. Since I'd been thinking about doing something related, I poked about on my own and came up with something, and we worked together on it. I did some of the PHP code, he did everything else. Seriously, all I did was make the archives work easily - the rest of site, I didn't touch.

Sure that may make me an asset. He's also an asset to me. -Everyone- is an asset to each other, surely, in some way at least?

  It's gotten to the point where you have as much control over the site as he does.

I'll go with that. I guess he trusts me not to do anything to the site. Oddly enough, he's been right, so far. I'm more than happy if he decides to remove my access - there's no further requirement for it, after all.

  You intended to do this to freeze out all of Darkmoon's other pals.

erm. Ok, what the hell?

I have -zero- problem with anyone else. If one of Darkmoon's other pals wants to chip into the site, edit the code, help it out, whatever, that's -his- site, so he gets to choose. Heck, I provided documentation on the stuff I wrote just so -anyone- else could work on it.

If they want to discuss my choices, no problem. I'm listening. If they want to complain about my choices, same thing. If they have better ideas, also, no problem. I don't claim I'm -good- at what I did. I simply claim -I- did it. I'm sure I can learn to do such code better - heck, I've already learnt more than I knew then.


But freezing random other people I don't even know out? Why? How, for crying out loud?

*shakes head*



I'd have left it, as Amber asked, but I thought I should at least get a chance to defend my character. And that's about all I'm going to say on the subject, at least here. Any further complaints, take to PM, methinks.

[Knight]

ER, if there are different ways to take it in, then that only makes intent an even more neglible factor.

Why?

Granted, since we're talking about art, opinion is going to play a big role,

You think?

but I'm not the one saying "It's my comic" and using that fact to make his opinion iron clad law.

That's because it's not your comic and your opinion isn't iron clad law 'round these parts?

[Damaris]

Okay.  I've got an appointment, and I don't have time to read this thread.  I'm locking it, coming back to it, and then I'm going to probably have something to say.

Other mods, please respect the lock- I know you can post, but it's not particularly fair to post when others can't.

[Darkmoon]

On the judgement of the admins, this thread is not going to be reopened.

Anyone wanting to further discuss the merits of Alec being cut or uncut will have to make a new thread.