Is Alec uncut? It is a question of VITAL importance.
Now THERES a question from the readers that should be in CVRPG. :U
Well, when that bear gets a swipe at him, he won't be for sure!
-Seth
He's not jewish.
He will be, soon. ;-]
..... Why would you ask that you dirty minded fools?!
Quote from: ilpalazzo on May 03, 2007, 10:01:43 PMWhy would you ask that you dirty minded fools?!
You answered your own question.
I don't get it? I think that all American males are circumcised, as are the Jewish, but what does that have to do with some ones pixelated wang?
Alec is an imaginary being in a video game based webcomic, why does it mater?
[Sarcasm] by the way if you send me the reference pictures of the princess I'll get started on those anatomically correct nude drawings you wanted. do you want her to be doing something naughty with Alec? or Darkmoon [/sarcasm]
Oh.. you used sarcasm... sad...
Not all Americans are circumcised....
What's sad is that he had to tag it as sarcasm. :-/
Surely decent sarcasm is self-evident?
yes, but I didn't want to get anyones hopes up. And, I thought it would be best if they knew I wasn't serious.
Oh, go on. You know you want to draw it anyway. :-]
I want someone to draw it, just so I can have the satisfaction of putting it up on the website.
I know if I have to take a reputation as a smut artist, I'd rather it be over CVRPG porn than DMFA.
Oooh...that has a nice ring to it.
DMFA artist by day! CVRPG smut artist by night...
Yeah, but let's face it, you'd start to draw the porn, then get distracted and go back to working on DMFA.
Yeah. I'm too lazy for porn.
And if you started on that, DM would simply start doing Mab/Lexi/Lore... encounters.
Okays for some werid reason I am feeling a Avenue Q song coming along in head cause of you Amber and Dmoon :erk
Quote from: Gildedtongue on May 17, 2007, 06:50:58 PM
And if you started on that, DM would simply start doing Mab/Lexi/Lore... encounters.
Nope, there's no way. I can't draw.
Cause, seriously, if I could, there'd already be CVRPG porn.
Quote from: Darkmoon on May 17, 2007, 08:43:42 PM
Quote from: Gildedtongue on May 17, 2007, 06:50:58 PM
And if you started on that, DM would simply start doing Mab/Lexi/Lore... encounters.
Nope, there's no way. I can't draw.
Cause, seriously, if I could, there'd already be CVRPG porn.
Prehaps some hot and steamy stick figure action then? Cyanide & Happiness style?
You know you want too >:3
Well yes... it is quite tempting...
I wonder if there's an effective way to have Stick-Alec get tentacle raped...
... Stick tentacles to him?
ooh, I feel so inspired...
..
to draw, of course.
A priest, minister, and rabbi decide to try to convert bears in the wilderness.
They reconvene and share their results.
The Priest claims that his bear was so mezmerized, he accepted his first communion.
The Minister claims that his bear was so taken by his faith, he accepted baptism.
Looking at the bruised and casted Rabbi, they ask him what went wrong.
"Perhaps I shouldn't have started with circumcision", he says.
I could prabaly make sprite ones.
I'll try drawing Princess! Hehehe...will try to complete by Sunday if you're serious!
-Seth
Oh my stars and garters...
ooh! draw her with a collar on and then draw another woman behind her with a horsewhip...
what?
I am damn serious. If someone draws it, I will put it up. I have no shame at all.
OK, here you go! Very NSFW to start off!
http://www.bibp.com/cvrpg-princess01.jpg (http://www.bibp.com/fanart/cvrpg-princess01.jpg)
Lmfao, you really drew it.
Well, I'll be true to my word. I'll put it on the site, next update... or as soon as I remember.
niiice.
It's up on CVRPG. Feel proud, Seth.
Heheheh thanks! I think I'll take the tentacle bet too. LOL
-Seth
Not bad.
As I stated before, you draw it, I'll post it.
CVRPG: Sin City Edition
As horrified as I am about this development, I do have an interesting question...would "adult" art of any character who appeared in CVRPG (who wasn't from a video game, of course) be permitted?
Because I can think of a character or two who could be tentacled, and my qualms about this are affecting me less strongly than they should be, sadly...
I guess it just depends, really. Are you doing it because they appeared in CVRPG, or are you doing it simply because you hate the characters?
Alec getting tentacled.
If this is safe for work/school where you are, consider quitting.
http://www.bibp.com/fanart/cvrpg-alectentacled.gif (Xtra NSFW!)
-Seth
:judges
*edit*
Tricky tentacles tastelessly tease and titillate anally aroused Alec.
Oh dear fucking lords, that is fucking brilliant!
Oh, and:
Artwork Posted. Challenge Issued.
LOL it's fun to do these challenges...for the lulz...and for the practice!
Actually that's the first time I'd ever drawn anything with tentacles. I always found that concept to be confounding.
-Seth
Well, it's just big floppy penises. Go watch porn, and I'm sure you'll see enough of them... just in the wrong color is all.
I do have to admit, these challenges are quite amusing. So long as you are game, I'm sure I can come up with fucked up shit for you to draw.
QuoteCVRPG: Sin City Edition
As horrified as I am about this development, I do have an interesting question...would "adult" art of any character who appeared in CVRPG (who wasn't from a video game, of course) be permitted?
Because I can think of a character or two who could be tentacled, and my qualms about this are affecting me less strongly than they should be, sadly...
The harmonic dissonance in this post made me grin like a fool...
I'm fucking amused by everything in this thread.
Oh, how my sad little forum has devolved into tentacle porn.
LOL I'll give the hardcore lesbo action a try tomorrow. Even though I have insomnia right now it's not the 'creative' kind, heh heh
-Seth
Well, remember, use internet porn as a guide if you can't come up with a good pose on your own.
In my experience, EVERYTHING devolves into tentacle porn.
Quote from: Darkmoon on May 27, 2007, 11:31:24 AM
I guess it just depends, really. Are you doing it because they appeared in CVRPG, or are you doing it simply because you hate the characters?
Excuse my language, but why the hell does it matter?
I mean, it's one thing if you're going to allow porn drawings. I might find it distasteful, but I'm not going to cry too much about it as long as everything's equal (and somebody doesn't find out and complain). But if you're going to discriminate based on motivations, then that kinda throws the artistic freedom argument out of the window. It you're going to allow it, then make it no holds barred.
No, it makes a clear distinction, honestly. If you're doing it because they appeared in CVRPG, they you're obviously going to want them represented as the CVRPG style of character. You aren't just going "well, Dracula sucks, so I'm gonna draw him," and then do your own interpretation of Dracula, simply to vent.
It's a matter of context, and there's only so much artistic freedom allowed when you're talking about "fan art" for a website.
Oh, and for the record, if you find it distasteful, don't look at it.
Whoa...why are you getting all testy? Just because I may disapprove or disagree doesn't mean you have to get all defensive. If I were really upset by this, you know I would have ranted and raved by now in a 13+ paragraph post, as well as deleted all my files from my folder on the site.
What does concern me is this whole idea of finding certain forms of expression that are okay in some curcumstances and forbidden in others. I believe that if one wants to abide by standards, then all means do so, but be consistent. It's one thing to say adult fan art will not be displayed. That makes a clear boundary that may limit freedom but can be consistently applied. It's another thing to say, adult art will be displayed, but only if the artist had pure intentions. Not only is that a scary Thought Police mentality, it's also going against the whole reason of opening the site up to adult content. As far as I'm concerned, FUCK context. All that matters is the finished product.
Yes, I understand it's fan art for a (fan) website, but don't you think it sets a dangerous precedent to make more rules when you're breaking the rules to begin with? It's not about hypocrisy, such as of looking at something one's arguing against, but consistency and the impact a lack of consistency will have.
I find it odd that you'd actually decide to draw line in the sand on this one. After all, you're one of the ones who's usually against restrictions. Besides, you almost had me inspired to go beyond my self-imposed restrictions and make an attempt at some uncharacteristically adult artwork (even though I can't draw for shit).
What rules am I breaking?
Interestingly enough I can now picture the princess wearing revealing black underwear sitting on a giant skull with sharp pointy teeth saying "you're bad!" with a voice similar to the white bitch of Gnarnia. [Epic Movie reference]
I find that context makes a big difference in the sense of fanarts, as what one person may see as a compliment, another might see as an insult. One scenario I remember had a friend get a gift art that had two of her characters being dismembered by the third and the person was like "Its a joke about what would happen if this character had LSD! :D"
But when you spring a mutilation pic involving the other person's characters out of the blue...it can really throw someone off. But then I guess that tends to go with anything that could be considered offensive, in that it requires one side or the other to consider it offensive.
Course the topic isn't really about mutilation pics but porny pics...so eh. It will likely vary from person to person, but I can see and understand why some people have the opinion there is a very big difference between someone drawing something as a joke, and drawing something as something serious. And in some ways a bit of the campy fun does get sucked out if you know the picture was drawn as a means of visually taking a character down a peg.
In the end it likely just boils down to individual artist or web-owners personalities and preferences. Some people might just prefer having happy porn on their site or have certain requirements. Granted at times it might seem a bit mundane (I remember one person being all "Now I will allow unconsentual sex and blood...but I dont want anything gay whatsoever. Even PG kissing." on their site)
I guess it just comes with the priveledge of owning ones own webdomain.
cvrpg.com is hosted by Powweb. Under their Terms of Service, the "Rights and Responsibilities" section is something under item B.
QuotePornography. No Customer shall use PowWeb's services to engage in pornography. This includes uploading or publishing material that would commonly be considered "indecent," "appealing to the prurient interest" or referred to as "adult" material. In addition, linking to these sites is not allowed.
Now, of course, PowWeb isn't going to actually do anything unless someone complains. However, if there's an abuse department and it catches wind of this, they may tell you to take the offending material down...or may shut down CVRPG entirely.
About mutilation pictures, I have far fewer reservations about those than I do porn, because mutilation pictures are usually so over the top that it's nearly impossible to be disturbed by them. I can see why some people would be upset about them, but I feel that if you allow porn drawings, you should allow mutilation drawings as well. I mean, many people would agree that it's as silly for someone to draw Princess impaled as it is to show Katrina and Darkmoon in the act. And if someone can be seriously distrubed by the depiction of extremely graphic violence, then why allow the depiction extremely graphic sex acts?
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 28, 2007, 10:35:29 PM
cvrpg.com is hosted by Powweb. Under their Terms of Service, the "Rights and Responsibilities" section is something under item B.
QuotePornography. No Customer shall use PowWeb's services to engage in pornography. This includes uploading or publishing material that would commonly be considered "indecent," "appealing to the prurient interest" or referred to as "adult" material. In addition, linking to these sites is not allowed.
Now, of course, PowWeb isn't going to actually do anything unless someone complains. However, if there's an abuse department and it catches wind of this, they may tell you to take the offending material down...or may shut down CVRPG entirely.
Wow oh wow, I'm glad I went with Hasweb (http://www.hasweb.com) for my comic then! I like to stay away from restrictive TOSses...helps reduce the strain on my writing, heh heh...
Well, as for why graphic violence is often seen as more disturbing than graphic sex (even from my perspective), I'd like to offer that graphic sex can have a very positive context of love and togetherness, while generally graphic violence would be commonly understood to involve excruciating pain. Excruciating pain is most definitely not fun, while for the vast majority of people, getting one's rocks off with someone you rather dig is fun.
-Seth
Mainly the thing I was getting at was that when it comes to an artist or webowner, everyone has particular limits and personal standards. Some people really do see their creations like their messed up monkey-children so some actions against them will sometimes feel like an action against the person. In the case of my friend and the mutilation pic, having something like that sprung out of the blue (she got like...no warning they were drawing it or an advance notice), she at first thought it was hate-art. And while people should be free to express their dislike or whatever in artistic form, going out of the way to deliberately strike out at a person with the intent to hurt is just mean. :/
Really, to me, it boils down to what the person who owns the site/comic/whatever wants to host on their site. While there should be freedom for people to draw what they want, there should be freedom for the site owner to decide what they want to allow on their site. If they want to allow one type of mature category but not the other, its ultimately their call. Not their call to say a person can't draw it...but definately their call about hosting it.
I dunno if I'm making any sense. :B
I'm not breaking any rules, Destina. It's art. It's not done for the titilation factor, but as art and as artistic studies.
Anything that gets posted on CVRPG is bound by the guidelines I set forth. If I say that art drawn for it should have a certin intent to it, that's my perogative.
Quotemight just prefer having happy porn...
redundant? :p
Quotesilly for someone to draw Princess impaled...
on what? >:3
Quote from: Evil Richter on May 29, 2007, 12:23:28 AM
Quotemight just prefer having happy porn...
redundant? :p
Not if you've seen some of the stuff from Japan. :U
Oh, yeah, I selectively forgot about some of it. :boogie
I try to forget most of the stuff that comes out of Japan. That country is just plain fucked up.
:erk
I liked cool devices. That was hawt.
Remember, rape is just another way of saying hello in Japan. :3
Seth, from what I've seen, your hosting does seem to be more lenient, even though there is a prohibition against "violent/malicious/obscene content" in there. I do like how they actually give the customer a chance to remove the material instead of leaving it up in the air. I know people on-line who work for a Web hosting company, and from what I've heard, the customers usually don't even get that.
Still, I saw that picture of Alec and those tentacles, and I don't see how that promotes anything positive at all. How is someone being bound and titilated against their will consistent with this character and positive? If it's a joke, then I think the whole "good fun" requirement should be lifted.
Mab, I understand people have standards, often contradictory ones. I think the Web site owner should have absolute control over what goes up on his or her site. I also think there is a responsibilty that goes along with that control. Allowing adult material on the site sends several signals to people. Some people think may it's cheap or sleazy. Others may feel its a sign that the creator if the comic is non-judgemental. But given that the CVRPG itself is not an adult comic, featuring adult fan-art sends the message that fans are encouraged to go beyond the boundaries imposed by the author. By then later making this exclusive inserts a level of hierachy that is ultimately destructive. Given that Darkmoon has said he'd allow just about anything on the site, and then turn around and insert restrictions, it strikes me odd at the very least, disturbing at the very worst.
I disagree, though, with the assessment that fun be the measuring stick of what is good. More often than not, they are wrapped up on one, and people often communicate hurtful things to each other that they feel are funny. Furthermore, visual art is already an inherently stratified medium. No matter how hard I try, for instance, I will never be as good of an artist as say, Barry Kitson (http://barrykitson.pentnet.com/index.phtml). Why put another restriction on something I could draw before I even draw it? If it's okay to express offensive and "mean" opnions and not to take something seriously, why can't that same lack of seriousness apply when looking at a picture, regardless of its intention?
And Darkmoon, sorry, but that second pic --especially to someone who would be easily offended-- is definitely pornographic in nature. "Naked Princess" is tame and you MIGHT be able to get away with that excuse for that one. But just as restrictive as you are about "fan art" you find offensive, someone may find the art that you have posted offensive as well.
Quote from: Amber Williams on May 29, 2007, 12:40:32 AM
Remember, rape is just another way of saying hello in Japan. :3
"Konichiwa!" "GACK!"
Also:
"titilated against their will"
That phrase made me lol :januscat
If jackson pollock is an artist, then this shit is well within definition.
Quote from: Evil Richter on May 29, 2007, 12:41:42 AM
"titilated against their will"
That phrase made me lol :januscat
Is that implying that if a woman orgasms during rape, then it means she really wants to be raped and despite the lack of consent?
No I didn't mean that... but thanks for sharing your thoughts. :erk
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 12:40:57 AM
Seth, from what I've seen, your hosting does seem to be more lenient, even though there is a prohibition against "violent/malicious/obscene content" in there. I do like how they actually give the customer a chance to remove the material instead of leaving it up in the air. I know people on-line who work for a Web hosting company, and from what I've heard, the customers usually don't even get that.
Still, I saw that picture of Alec and those tentacles, and I don't see how that promotes anything positive at all. How is someone being bound and titilated against their will consistent with this character and positive? If it's a joke, then I think the whole "good fun" requirement should be lifted.
Mab, I understand people have standards, often contradictory ones. I think the Web site owner should have absolute control over what goes up on his or her site. I also think there is a responsibilty that goes along with that control. Allowing adult material on the site sends several signals to people. Some people think may it's cheap or sleazy. Others may feel its a sign that the creator if the comic is non-judgemental. But given that the CVRPG itself is not an adult comic, featuring adult fan-art sends the message that fans are encouraged to go beyond the boundaries imposed by the author. By then later making this exclusive inserts a level of hierachy that is ultimately destructive. Given that Darkmoon has said he'd allow just about anything on the site, and then turn around and insert restrictions, it strikes me odd at the very least, disturbing at the very worst.
I disagree, though, with the assessment that fun be the measuring stick of what is good. More often than not, they are wrapped up on one, and people often communicate hurtful things to each other that they feel are funny. Furthermore, visual art is already an inherently stratified medium. No matter how hard I try, for instance, I will never be as good of an artist as say, Barry Kitson (http://barrykitson.pentnet.com/index.phtml). Why put another restriction on something I could draw before I even draw it? If it's okay to express offensive and "mean" opnions and not to take something seriously, why can't that same lack of seriousness apply when looking at a picture, regardless of its intention?
And Darkmoon, sorry, but that second pic --especially to someone who would be easily offended-- is definitely pornographic in nature. "Naked Princess" is tame and you MIGHT be able to get away with that excuse for that one. But just as restrictive as you are about "fan art" you find offensive, someone may find the art that you have posted offensive as well.
I didn't say it offended me. I just said I didn't think it should be in the CVRPG fanart section.
I gave my reasons for it. You don't like my reasoning, I get that. Doesn't mean I'm changing my mind on the matter.
And I like the fact we keep using the word "titillate". That's a fucking awesome word.
It's rather titilating :bunny
I'm titillated at the titillating use of the word titillation.
Oh, and for the record, if anyone ever complained, I'd just move the art to ICVD and link to it from there. ICVD's host has no porn issues at all.
I had this wildly amusing image when I saw that of a serious courtroom trial with the judges and lawyers trying to use the phrase "titillated against his/her will" while trying not to crack up.
You can't have titillation without tits.
Mmmm... tits...
titty titillation is triple the tittle fun
Wow, that's a tongue twister.
Actually, I hear that's a fun trick for the ladies, if you know how to do it.
What, the little tongue swirly thing around the nippage?
Quote from: Darkmoon on May 29, 2007, 12:47:57 AM
I didn't say it offended me. I just said I didn't think it should be in the CVRPG fanart section.
I gave my reasons for it. You don't like my reasoning, I get that. Doesn't mean I'm changing my mind on the matter.
Just because you aren't changing your mind means I'm going to shut up anout the issue. I'll only shut up if you don't reply, or pull another power play (i.e. locking thread). But nice try on the not so subtle "Fuck you" there.
I don't see how you get to "I have no shame at all." and "So long as you are game, I'm sure I can come up with fucked up shit for you to draw. " to "If I say that art drawn for it should have a certin intent to it, that's my perogative." That's just a leap in thinking I not only disagree with, I don't understand, especially since you've never offered that as a counter to criticism before. Those are two completely contradictory worldviews. Why pull rank as a defense on this issue?
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 12:40:57 AM
Why put another restriction on something I could draw before I even draw it? If it's okay to express offensive and "mean" opnions and not to take something seriously, why can't that same lack of seriousness apply when looking at a picture, regardless of its intention?
I'm not putting a restriction on something you could draw. As I said, I feel anyone should be free to draw whatever they want. That is ones right. However, I feel it is also that person's duty to not abuse said right. Worst case scenario would be like mailing to your neighbor a drawing of someone raping their 6 year old daughter. As an artist, there is a freedom to be able to draw it...but one should also know that their actions will ultimately be negative and cause hurt to another person. And in the case I just described, it then conflicts with the neighbors rights (and to an extent the daughters if one wants to get nitpicky)
I do agree that some people going to the site might get confused since they likely will not know or understand the joke between the pictures being done. But that ultimately falls to Darkmoon to decide how to present it.
Yeah, if there wasn't a final opinion say in something, we'd kind of still be arguing about the best way to build the wheel.
If the time comes that there's enough material for a separate archive of this stuff, trust me, I'll be putting them in their own separate archive. It just hasn't happened yet.
And I wasn't saying fuck you. If I wanted to say fuck you, I'd just say fuck you.
WHat I'm saying is that there's a grey area that some of this stuff falls into. The grey area, far as I'm concerned, is all defined by intent. It's going to be based on my idea of what the intent of the art was, and whether I think it should go up. If I say "draw this" and someone does, then yes, I think it's fine to put up. If someone draws it without my up front blessing, then I have the right to say yea or nay to the art.
Hell, I've not posted fan art in the past because I didn't like it. It's my prerogative.
I can see why context would matter. I certainly wouldn't want to host any fanart of my characters that was obviously mean spirited, pornographic or otherwise.
Spirit is a part of it. Quality is another part of it. If the art Seth had drawn had really sucked, I woulda not posted it. Thankfully, Seth can draw like he isn't drunk and using is ass to make the pictures, so that wasn't really an issue.
In the long run, it's just my gut instinct on the matter.
And I don't understand why it does matter. It's not about the right to put it up. I don't understand why some mythical, mystical idea that the artist's thought processes or worse yet cirumstances should play a part in how something should be perceived. I mean it's like you're taking motive and turning it into an article of faith.
Quality is one thing, and not easily quantifyable. Intent is another.
Wait, why should the artists thought processes be mythical or mystical by any definition? It often has a tangible effect on perception.
No, the reader's own prejudices define perception. We can't read minds, so we don't know what really the artist was thinking.
Unless it's explicitly implied or stated, yeah...
The artist's own thought process is the most import ant bit, because the artist is paying for the site.
And before you say "ah, but you take donations", anyone that donates to the site gets a quantifiable benefit out of donating, as I then "pay back" with bonus comics and other features.
Nuh uh. I donated and you sent me a box of mexican tarantulas. :(
No, I sent those to you for your birthday.
At least they were housebroken :(
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.
That's funny, you thought darkmoons supposed "fuck you" was explicitly implied... am I wrong?
Quotereading 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.
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.
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
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?
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.
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
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 01:40:07 AM
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"
QuoteSo 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.
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?"
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 02:00:33 AM
Seth, then let me play the intent game, then.
Okay!
Quote
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.
Quote
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.
Quote
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
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 02:00:33 AM
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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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.
QuoteBesides, 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.
Quote from: Amber Williams on May 29, 2007, 02:16:25 AM
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
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.
:tmyk
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 02:00:33 AM
You do this intending to get closer to Darkmoon, along with llearch, ...
Ex-squeeze me? Where the hell did -that- come from?
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.
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.
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 05:16:14 AM
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?
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 05:16:14 AM
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.
Quote from: Destina Faroda on May 29, 2007, 05:16:14 AM
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.
QuoteER, if there are different ways to take it in, then that only makes intent an even more neglible factor.
Why?
QuoteGranted, since we're talking about art, opinion is going to play a big role,
You think?
Quotebut 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?
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.
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.