[X] My Assistant

*retracted*

Apparently some people on this forum can't see stand the idea of debating differences of opinion in a serious and respectful manner, so I'm just going to delete this. Debating different points of view can get very ugly very fast if those involved aren't mature enough to handle it, and I severely underestimated the maturity level of some of the users on this forum.

This post has been edited by BradRepko: Feb 19 2010, 21:57

The likelyhood of lurkers coming here to see this post is low. The likelyhood of regulars taking real critiques positively is also low. Reviews are subjective and based on a persons taste in -whatever-. If the guy doesn't like vore then he doesn't like vore. Or if he doesn't like the persons art style then that too is valid.

I don't see any reasonably point to this thread. This isn't a critique, it's a defensive post about something you like. It's the same as if someone posted "ghost suck" and I'm like "no they don't and here's why". If you disagree with the guy, write up your own review and post it, and please don't post it as a reply to the other review; I'd rather not see the gallery review space becoming a bickering ground.

This post has been edited by Spectre: Feb 19 2010, 20:52

This is a thread for me to defend my galleries from what is actually legitimate criticism.

Fixed that for you.

You know what, forget it. You guys can't handle a serious, adult debate without responding in a childish manner.

This post has been edited by BradRepko: Feb 19 2010, 21:50

You know what, forget it. You guys can't handle a serious, adult debate without responding in a childish manner.

So, you are saying it is a MASSIVE COINCIDENCE that the review you choose as your test case is a negative one on one of your galleries? Riiiiiight.

If you can't take people calling you a self-serving tool, don't be a self-serving tool.

And, to note, your reaction is incredibly childish. "People don't agree with me. Waaaah!"

This post has been edited by Boggyb: Feb 19 2010, 21:56

Here's what a critique should look like:

Your response to lordoftheuniverse sounds more like an advertisement for the gallery and the artist than an actual critique, though both can be confused for one another when they only mention the positive things about it in a colorful manner. There are many important points for a gallery uploaded: Art style, length, content, receptivity, etc. All of them are important one way or another, though often times one or two of these overpower the others. Being that the gallery in question is a western drawn and of vore, it is fills a very small niche on this site. Particularly is the art style, as a developed art style with a finished look will help bring out and amplify any emotions or responses of the characters and of the readers. While sketchy material can sometimes add to the work, it does not for this piece. The artist does attempt to take some care to describing the actual digestion process of -something-, though it's accuracy is questionable later (especially the passing of an intact skeleton, this would not be possible if the ligaments were also digested). To some people this act of showing the digestion is agreeable to those that like gore, while others may not appreciate it. Ultimately the art style is working against it, but that is to be expected.

Also, this is in Website discussion. If debating opinion about a person's case on a per review basis was what you wanted to do, you're in the wrong place; I have intentionally handled the thread as a "website discussion" thread.

This post has been edited by Spectre: Feb 19 2010, 22:38

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/mad.gif) Okay, putting the fact that I may have put this is the wrong section aside, let me be perfectly clear. You two have been spouting lying, slanderous bullshit about my post that ruined a perfectly valid topic and earned you every point of negative karma I could give you, which granted, isn't much. However, since Boggyb has decided to retaliate with his own negbomb, let me explain to you why you were dead wrong

1) The fact that I was biased towards my own gallery and it's review is utter bullshit, as the work therein wasn't my own. Since it wasn't some group of randomly assorted pictures but a full comic, and the review only dealt with the the comic, my gallery wasn't under attack, so I had no reason to feel defensive of my gallery. The review was about Alberich's work, and my critique analyzed his work, not my gallery

2) Neither of you could see that I was agreeing with the initial review on all counts. I only stated a view point he failed to miss. My entire review was basically a very drawn out way of saying "Alberich's graphic style does indeed suck, but it is the only vore sequence as of present that features that amount of pain and digestion. Because it is the only work that shows that extent of pain of suffering during digestion, even with better quality works out there, his works continue to be a gem to the vore community." I chose to say that in drawn out paragraph, but in no way was I disagreeing with the reviewer's comments.

3) I started this topic to defend my own galleries from critique? *cough*Horseshit*cough* I opened this because some reviews do provoke discussion, and the comment area of the gallery isn't the place for them. My gallery wasn't under attack, Alberich's work was. I wasn't simply defending Alberich's work, I was pointing out a key point of view that the reviewer lacked. I don't know if the reviewer was a vorarephile, but regardless, it was obvious he isn't a huge digestion fan as anyone who is into long, painful digestions will tell you that Alberich's works are the only vore work of it's kind out there. Other digestion centric work doesn't cover this degree of suffering in the victim. It's not a defense of Alberich's poor quality work, rather, it's an assessment of how their is little alternative for digestion seeking fans. Suggesting that his work is so cherished only for a lack of competition is hardly a compliment or a defense of his works, it's stating that his work wins in it's category by default, as his is the only one of it's kind.


So, what did we learn today? We learned that Alberich's work is low quality, but lacks solid competition in the extended digestion genre. We learned that there is no reason to feel pride for a gallery if it isn't your work in it. We've learned that Boggyb can't tell the difference between agreeing with someone and negatively criticizing someone. Oh yea, and we learned that I have no idea where any of these fucking posts go.

Boggyb, you deserved that negative karma I gave you because you clearly couldn't tell that I was agreeing with 'lordoftheuniverse' and not criticizing him. You insulted me, put words in my mouth, a suggested I am an ego maniac, which is laughable when you realize that I utterly despise myself. I started this thread with good intentions, to help build up the review system and bring positive discussion and critiquing to enlighten people of how to better use the review system that Tenboro has so painstakingly rigged up for us. That wasn't good enough for you though, was it Boggyb? You had to turn my attempt to try and help the site, and Tenboro himself, into a power struggle. Well, good for you, because you succeeded, I'm giving up the Reviewer's Critique. Debate can help fuel better reviews and bring about more attention for the reviews, at least it always had for literary reviews on sites like Writing.com, but apparently you'd rather start personal attacks and a smear campaign rather than try to help make the gallery reviews better.

When I gave you that dozen or two negative karma, I almost called you a douchebag, but instead I chose to take the high road and avoid using such provocative language. It's kinda ironic that when you retaliated against me with a neg bomb of your own, you called me a royal douche. Who's really the douche though, the guy who was trying to help build up the site or the guy who was just looking to go around making up insults?

This post has been edited by BradRepko: Feb 23 2010, 20:01

You two have been spouting lying, slanderous bullshit about my post that ruined a perfectly valid topic and earned you every point of negative karma I could give you, which granted, isn't much.

I did not lie, therefore, I could not slander you. I consider what I said to be the truth.

However, since Boggyb has decided to retaliate with his own negbomb, let me explain to you why you were dead wrong.

OMG!!!! How evil of that Boggyb fellow. I mean, you should be able to neg whoever you want without facing any consequences.

1) The fact that I was biased towards my own gallery and it's review is utter bullshit, as the work therein wasn't my own. Since it wasn't some group of randomly assorted pictures but a full comic, and the review only dealt with the the comic, my gallery wasn't under attack, so I had no reason to feel defensive of my gallery. The review was about Alberich's work, and my critique analyzed his work, not my gallery

You have a vested interest in galleries you post having a good rating (a better rating means more people are likely to visit it which means more GP). Point #1 refuted.

2) Neither of you could see that I was agreeing with the initial review on all counts. I only stated a view point he failed to miss. My entire review was basically a very drawn out way of saying "Alberich's graphic style does indeed suck, but it is the only vore sequence as of present that features that amount of pain and digestion. Because it is the only work that shows that extent of pain of suffering during digestion, even with better quality works out there, his works continue to be a gem to the vore community." I chose to say that in drawn out paragraph, but in no way was I disagreeing with the reviewer's comments.

You are still justifying your gallery. And quite frankly, your comment has nothing to do with the review in question, but is more a comment on the "vore community" and the underrepresentation of the "amount of pain and digestion". Point #2 shown to be meaningless.

3) I started this topic to defend my own galleries from critique? *cough*Horseshit*cough* I opened this because some reviews do provoke discussion, and the comment area of the gallery isn't the place for them.

Yet you started with a review that can be perceived as being critical of a gallery you posted. I don't see that as a coincidence.

My gallery wasn't under attack, Alberich's work was.

See my first point for a refutation on that.

I wasn't simply defending Alberich's work, I was pointing out a key point of view that the reviewer lacked.

Which still isn't relevent to the gallery. That the "vore community" has an underrepresentation of the "amount of pain and digestion" does not make that gallery any better. It is more of a comment on other vore galleries.

I don't know if the reviewer was a vorarephile, but regardless, it was obvious he isn't a huge digestion fan as anyone who is into long, painful digestions will tell you that Alberich's works are the only vore work of it's kind out there. Other digestion centric work doesn't cover this degree of suffering in the victim. It's not a defense of Alberich's poor quality work, rather, it's an assessment of how their is little alternative for digestion seeking fans. Suggesting that his work is so cherished only for a lack of competition is hardly a compliment or a defense of his works, it's stating that his work wins in it's category by default, as his is the only one of it's kind.

All of which still isn't relevant to the work in question.

So, what did we learn today? We learned that Alberich's work is low quality, but lacks solid competition in the extended digestion genre. We learned that there is no reason to feel pride for a gallery if it isn't your work in it.

You still earn GP, thus you have a motive to care.

We've learned that Boggyb can't tell the difference between agreeing with someone and negatively criticizing someone.

So you say. I refuted every point you have made.

Boggyb, you deserved that negative karma I gave you because you clearly couldn't tell that I was agreeing with 'lordoftheuniverse' and not criticizing him.

I have deserved red karma for a lot of things. That was not one of them.

This post has been edited by Boggyb: Feb 23 2010, 20:49

You insulted me, put words in my mouth, a suggested I am an ego maniac, which is laughable when you realize that I utterly despise myself.

How odd. I think I feel the same way about you. How about you kill yourself and do both of us a favor?

I started this thread with good intentions

You didn't.

to help build up the review system and bring positive discussion and critiquing to enlighten people of how to better use the review system

Your discussion was not positive.

that Tenboro has so painstakingly rigged up for us.

Stop kissing Tenboro's ass.

That wasn't good enough for you though, was it Boggyb?

It wasn't.

You had to turn my attempt to try and help the site, and Tenboro himself, into a power struggle.

By attempt to help the site, you mean help yourself.

Well, good for you, because you succeeded, I'm giving up the Reviewer's Critique.

You already said that.

Debate can help fuel better reviews and bring about more attention for the reviews, at least it always had for literary reviews on sites like Writing.com,

They can. What you posted provided no help.

but apparently you'd rather start personal attacks and a smear campaign rather than try to help make the gallery reviews better.

I'd rather them be done away with as they create another worthless toplist.

When I gave you that dozen or two negative karma, I almost called you a douchebag, but instead I chose to take the high road and avoid using such provocative language.

Of course you took the high road. Negging someone is always the high road. Ignoring what you perceive to be unjust criticism would have been what, the low road?

It's kinda ironic that when you retaliated against me with a neg bomb of your own, you called me a royal douche.

There are three forms of irony: Dramatic Irony, Situation Irony, and Verbal Irony. Which of the three are you saying this is? To me, it fails at all 3.

Who's really the douche though, the guy who was trying to help build up the site or the guy who was just looking to go around making up insults?

If you want, we could look at the toplists that matter (uploader, H@H, cleanup, and tagging) and see who has done more for the site.

There you go making up shit again. This isn't about how much you helped the sight, it's about how you are deliberately thwarting others from helping the site. You are a liar with no morals, no sense of respect or decency, who neg bombs only because he can't stand being negged himself. I negged you because you deliberately hindered the site. Before you can ask how, I'll answer that for you. I was trying the best I could to help Tenboro in one of the few ways I could, and you ruined it. In other words, you took deliberate action to try to deter another person from attempting the site. Whether my help would have succeed or not is irrelevant, cause now we'll never knno if the Reviewer's Critique section would have worked. (unless someone steals the idea) For deliberately taking action to hinder the site, and for corrupting my words and taking them out of context to slander my name, I slapped you with negative karma.

Is there a quick way to check your galleries?I'm very new here in fact I'm basically a lurker and a point was made by (SOMEONE)! that a lurker wouldn't check this, so since I'm only one point up from this that point is basically wrong.I'm very new and even more unbiased so my opinion as a "recruit" should be very important.Maybe after that you can all stop the point taking and posturing?

This thread is going nowhere slowly..