08-4-2011 at 2:52 AM

I'm not sure it would help people feel better about the rule, but it would definitely clear up a few of the current misconceptions. <br /> <br /> For the record, I never said their feelings shouldn't be protected. Well, "protected" might be too strong a term. Do they have a right to not have their work bashed/insulted? Of course! But I don't like feeling that I have to walk on eggshells just because someone might take offense at something I say. Maybe "respected" is a better term... Yes, artists and their work should be respected.

08-4-2011 at 2:23 AM

Would it make people feel better to amend the rule to actually say that no -public- critique is allowed unless asked for, but that you are allowed to contact the artist privately and ask if you can offer a suggestion?<br /> <br /> And an artist's feelings -should- be taken into account. They're still human beings, and deserve to be able to keep critique in a private setting that is respectful between both parties. Public critique has gotten out of hand more than once, so I honestly can not bring myself to actively defend it. Private critique, however, is a one-on-one situation, and can be taken or left at the artist's discretion. I'm still not seeing convincing arguments that would change my mind, personally.<br /> <br /> Even today, I received private feedback about one of our monthly items, I agreed with the critique given, and I fixed the issue. It was quick, private, and painless.

08-4-2011 at 2:14 AM

That brings up an entirely different problem, though. If I posted something without asking for critiques and someone messaged me privately and said "Can I critique your work?" I'd automatically assume I'd done something hideous and horrible that they didn't feel they could bring up in a public setting. <br /> <br /> Also, this doesn't really fit with the rule. If someone wants critique, they'll ask for it. If they don't ask for it, we <b>aren't allowed</b> to critique. How does this leave room for sending a message asking for permission? If they wanted the help, they would've asked. If I have to go to them and say "I saw your artwork and would like to offer a critique," wouldn't that send them the message that there's something wrong with it that I felt the need to point out even though they didn't ask for it? Seems counterproductive if the goal of this is to protect the artists' feelings. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the logic behind it.

08-4-2011 at 1:56 AM

Message the artist and ask if you can critique a picture before jumping ahead and doing so. If the artist agrees, offer the crit. That's what Carni is talking about and doesn't break the rule since you have permission.

08-3-2011 at 10:43 PM

In The Rules (of which the great majority of users will abide by), it says that there is <i>no art critiqueing allowed</i> UNLESS the artist specifically asks for it. By reading that people assume that means no critqueing whatsoever, positive or negative. That's what it says, doesn't it? However, we're supposedly allowed (according to replies on the forum topic) to privately message the artist and offer critique. Wouldn't this be breaking the rule if the artist doesn't have it said somewhere they they want critique? That PM could be reported, and the user could get a warning/fine. It's not stated in the rules that we're allowed to do that, so it's perfectly possible.<br /> <br /> It does NOT say we're allowed to message the artist and offer a critique in The Rules. Therefore, users do not know this is acceptable and find it restrictive. Feeling restricted is not a good feeling, and it scares people off.<br /> <br /> Seeing the number of artists (including the topic poster himself!), it's pretty obvious the artists of Ala want to be critiqued. There may be a few who don't, but they are in the minority. They may post saying they don't want any crits. That's how I've seen it run on other art-based sites. In the real world and online, we think it's a given to be allowed to give a crit. Being told we aren't allowed to... I find it to be a turn-off, to be honest.<br /> <br /> Now, why can't the rule be changed to allow only positive critiqueing? That way, no one's feelings should be getting hurt, as it is /positive/. If it's not positive, it's negative. If it's negative, it's harrassment. We already have a rule against harrassment on Ala.

08-3-2011 at 6:17 PM

I've read every response on this thread and haven't turned a blind eye to anything; I read your response especially thoroughly, Ehm.

08-3-2011 at 6:19 AM

I just want to point out one thing:<br /> <br /> Site Art Critiques can "always" be given to the Head Site Artist directly, for anything done for Alacrity. This way, you guys can still express yourselves directly to the person that can have something done about it.<br /> <br /> Other than that, I have nothing to say on the matter.<br /> <br /> Personally, I don't approve or disapprove.<br /> <br />

08-3-2011 at 6:10 AM

Like Xy and Lenny, I too explained in my response why and how this issue is a great deal more than it being "a little extra hassle". If you don't want to read all the responses, that's your choice, but please don't say that you didn't see something when you weren't looking for it.

08-3-2011 at 1:43 AM

I already expressed it's something more than extra hassle. I am afraid that people will ignore my statements about accepting art crits and they'll just go silent about stuff they don't like.<br /> <br /> I just want to underline and repeat, even if Carni accepts art, it's still art and it's personal perception. I want people to criticize and express what I do wrong. We can discuss, we don't have to listen, but I am always open for it. I won't change site art I did already unless, like Carni said it's something we both missed, but if you say, hey that and that was kinda off, I will keep it all in mind for next time! I need that feedback. More than air.

08-2-2011 at 10:52 PM

Rob, I think it's more than just the hassle of adding the statement. The problem is, Ala runs on donations so the members pay for the art that's here on Ala. If there is a site item that does have some issues with it and the artist does not put "accepting crits" then none of the members get to say anything about it. Someone might notice something that the team hasn't. And those suggestions shouldn't necessarily be put off. <br /> <br /> My suggestion is that if someone has a positive critique to give an artist, then can message them privately. Being polite respectful and not in public. That way we can get the opinions of the members but still ban all art bashing.

08-2-2011 at 9:21 PM

Had I decided this thread was pointless and the rule was staying I would've done many things except what I've done. I would've closed the post, marked as "not subject to change", commented to the likes of it, lots of things. I'm very open to hear what people have to say, I'm waiting for something more convincing than "a little extra hassle" to change my mind.

08-2-2011 at 6:40 PM

Geist;<br /> <br /> I really meant a typical freedom of speech, within reason. I don't go strutting around saying every silly thing that's on my mind. It just felt for me that sentence "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't speak at all" is kinda... uncomfortable. At least to me. I feel that way and it'd be nice if you respected that.<br /> I don't demand taking it down cause it hurts my political correction or something.<br /> <br /> <br /> I feel same with you, about your art etc. And we both know we'd both ask to crit each others art first. IF there are people who just flame others art, it's harassment, to me, not critcizing. But there are certain people I know who will ALWAYS fix my stuff without even asking and I'd like them to be that way. I will just keep it in AIM and MSN then, to prevent trouble.<br /> <br /> So in conclusion, I will conform, I posted a huge sentence on my profile. I can see that there's no point for me to speak out more. I said my stuff, as gently as I could, not hurting other people.<br /> <br /> The rule will stay anyway, and this debate only leads to dissappointement for both sides. I'd rather not gank up on anyone's posts, as I respect every opinion.

08-2-2011 at 1:26 PM

Wow guys. Seriously? Reading this thread, a great many of you make it seem as though not being able to critique art when not asked is the end of the world - or at least, Alacrity. I am very disappointed. This is absolutely ridiculous. I cannot put into words how ridiculous this is, there isn't a word for it. Astounding, mind-blowing, jaw-dropping overreaction works pretty well.<br /> <br /> I have worked as an artist. Alacrity, commissions, tattoos, you name it, so I'm not talking out of my backside, here. I love critique. I love being able to improve and I love hearing insight.. but I only want open critique when I ask for it. When I don't? I'm totally cool with, and would prefer, if people message me in private. I'm not going to turn it away or tell people to shut up. I'll still use that crit. That's all these people want, is to be messaged privately and treated respect. Don't they deserve it? On a website like Ala, a website they <u>work for</u>, responding to critique in private looks.. considerably more professional than trying to handle it out in the open, especially in regard to those 'crits' that come from personal preference rather than a genuine flub in the art. It also feels much less intimidating to deal with PMs rather than a horde of users as in the Riddler fiasco. Please, do the people who turn out art n for this site a favor. Allow them to do their jobs professionally, and don't make them feel threatened by an onslaught of public crits. Arguing against this does the art team and the website an incredible disservice.<br /> <br /> And Xylax, I really do love you, bud. You know that I do, I think you're a phenomenal man and the art that you do is really breathtaking. I respect your thirst for critique. But understand that your fellow artists have needs, too, and that for a lot of them, one of those needs is to not be stressed out by their job. They can still get critique. And so can you, by adding one simple sentence to your art posts. "I would like critique on this picture." Just post your art in an open forum and ask.<br /> <br /> Also understand that freedom of speech applies only between you and the government, at least in the US. Alacrity is based in the US and is not run by or funded by the US government. ;)<br /> EDIT: Before someone calls me on it, also know that that is not saying you do not have the right to speak your mind. You totally do, that 'freedom of speech' misunderstanding just drives me a hair nuts.

08-2-2011 at 12:51 PM

My point is, if an individual artist still wants critique after the fact, then there is nothing on the site saying they can't ask for such critique.<br /> <br /> And you're right, not everyone is going to like everything an artist does, primarily for the fact that everyone has their preferences. But it is impossible to cater to absolutely every single preference, and an artist would drive themselves mad trying to please everybody.<br /> <br /> If someone spots a true and genuine mistake, they can courteously ask if they may make a suggestion, and the appropriate place to do that would be in private messages, or they could even submit a report to the issue hub, which would get forwarded to me. If someone is being courteous and asking, it isn't likely they'll be turned down, and they have already set the stage for a respectful conversation over whatever issue they might have with the art.<br /> <br /> But when it's a free-for-all, I have seen it happen more than once that people will just throw out critiques based on personal opinion and preference, and when it comes to opinions, as you say, it's subjective and can often times come across as insulting whether a person means it to or not.<br /> <br /> This rule is not in place to prevent critique, it's there to prevent -abuse- of critique. If people can respect one another enough to both announce "I'm open for crits" and to ask "may I offer a critique" within a situation where they are offering that critique one-on-one either with myself, or one of the art team members, then that leaves almost no room for misunderstandings, hurt feelings, or crit-abuse. It also keeps things on a personal level rather than public, where one person's comment of discontent sets others off and makes them feel comfortable voicing further discontent, or looking for more to be unhappy about. If a person feels they can not offer a critique on a one-on-one basis instead of rallying other members to "gang up" on a certain issue, then they clearly don't care enough about the issue.<br /> <br /> Again, there's a difference between genuine mistakes and personal preference, and you and all the other artists on the team know that I do not expect any of you to please 100% of the community.<br /> <br /> As for non-site-artist members, all the same principles apply in showing respect and courtesy on both ends of a discussion about critique. What is so hard about asking a person in messages if they mind if you make a few suggestions you feel might help them, in a setting where they won't feel attacked or vulnerable?<br /> <br /> Also, before anyone assumes that I've been "coddled" too much regarding my art, I took art courses in college where everything was open to critique, my husband is an artist and is not afraid to critique me, though he -always- asks if he can make a suggestion first because he respects me, and my breed art is handed out to the entire art team for critique and redlines before I continue forward. So I'm no stranger to critique and have no problem with it, when it's done with -respect- and -courtesy-. I can not stress those two things enough here. It seems like a lot of people just want license to stomp all over any artist they choose and that the person just needs to "deal with it" or that the person is "too sensitive" and more several people in this thread are acting downright aggressive and demeaning to anyone that would disagree with their point of view on the matter. While those of us defending the new rule are more concerned about everyone respecting each other and being courteous to one another, no matter what. If you ask me, it's much more in Alacrity's best interests to go with the more peaceful of the two approaches. And remember, critique is NOT banned from the site. All you are being asked to do is not critique a person unless they've said it's okay, OR you can message them and ask them if you can critique them -before- you lay out your critique, in a private setting, where no one can gang up on anybody. What is so wrong with that?

08-2-2011 at 12:29 PM

"When it comes to the art team, the team already has to put their items through me, (...). What point is there in receiving further critique from the userbase on items that are finished and approved? "<br /> <br /> <br /> o__o carni you surprised me. As I mentioned, Art is subjective. What you find okay, others might not like. I can understand that you approve our stuff, but it's art and if people noticed things you didn't, I'd like them to tell that to me.<br /> You notice things that you care about. Others notice other things.<br /> <br /> Your word is the final in business, but it's still art.

08-2-2011 at 10:43 AM

To those saying that the rule should be "specify you don't want critique" then anyone not wanting critique is in the same boat as what you're arguing for. If someone on the art team does not want critique on an item, what are they supposed to do? Not to mention, saying "please don't crit" compared to "I am open for crits!" come with very different tones no matter the mood or intention of the person saying them. Saying "I'm open for crits!" sounds positive. Being forced to say "Don't crit this" sounds negative. However, if the default is not to throw out crits that weren't asked for, then no one is stuck in the position of having to say they don't want critique, but everyone is instead invited to say "yes, I do want crit!" or "do you mind if I make a crit?" It's a two-way street, and people need to have some common courtesy for each other, instead of acting entitled and running head first into a critique without consideration for the artist. I'm not personally against critique, I know that it's all a part of learning and improving, but I also know the difference between someone spotting a genuine mistake, and someone just having their own idea of how an image should look with no real basis for critique other than personal preferance.<br /> <br /> When it comes to the art team, the team already has to put their items through me, and are even allowed to comment on one another's items if they feel something is wrong with them, and I do what I can to resolve the issues. What point is there in receiving further critique from the userbase on items that are finished and approved? If a person wants to offer critique but is unsure of whether an artist wants it, they should do the courteous thing and ask them if that person minds if they make a critique, on a personal basis, and not in places like the news posts or even the forums, because all it takes is one voice of negativity to spark other people to look for something negative to comment about, and then you get something all together negative and not constructive. I've seen it happen enough times to feel that Robyn's decision on this rule is not unreasonable.<br /> <br /> Too often people wind up being rude or abrasive in their opinions, and it is not the duty of the community to critique the site artists. That's my job as head artist, and it's the job of the rest of the team to let me know if one of -my- items has a problem to be addressed. That way we get fixes and corrections done -before- releasing them to the site, at which point those items are finished and not in need of further critique.<br /> <br /> In the end, I feel people need to respect Robyn's decision. It's fine if you disagree with it, but in the grand scheme of things I don't feel this issue deserves the outrage it's been given.

08-2-2011 at 10:23 AM

Robyn, I don't see it as you playing dictator, I saw it as you just protecting the artists feelings [which is 100% fine, because there are artists who get insulted by crit], but how are we going to have progression in art if nobody can give critique? What if there is a breed released with really bad anatomy? Will there be critique allowed? Or is it only allowed between site artists?

08-2-2011 at 8:41 AM

I like Evlon's idea &lt;3 but it's up to the site's owner. I'll conform, I guess. But I won't be as ... free of speech as always.

08-2-2011 at 8:35 AM

The issue is that quite often I find it hard to get critique normally. This rule causes me, personally to feel that critique is now generally unwelcome at all on Ala. Thusly I likely will not be so free to give critique to people, I just feel like it would be looked down upon, because of the rule. No one should feel like they can't critique art, that is a major part of the art world. <br /> <br /> Now then, a question in return. What would be so bad about revising the rule to state that if an artist specifically ask no crit, then its not allowed. Judging by the post on this debate that would be an agreeable solution, keeping your original good intentions intact. It is basically the same principal as far as the rule goes, it prevents people who do not wish to receive critique from having it.

08-2-2011 at 8:34 AM

Rob - by posting each piece on the site, adding that statement is a hassle, I guess, since majority would do that, I suppose. It's always been obvious for me and my colleagues to expect critique. I can't do monthlies and post on them "critique welcome". So, I did write it on my profile, at least. But I am afraid people will just ignore it.That's all.<br /> <br /> All my friends from Alacrity never hesitated to critique me. We support each other's development by helping and redlining, everything. It's just... default. Now, default became just sitting silent, because I won't throw only "it's awesome etc". Unless the art is perfect. Which even Caravaggio can't be for everyone, if you know what I mean.<br /> <br /> Art is subjective. For both viewers and artists. That's why critique is always a long debate and considering options.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> As you already know, this debate in my thought had one reason - to see if people who draw, paint etc expect critique as well.<br /> <br /> Sorry if people said things that maybe were too much. You, Robyn, already know all my thoughts, said also specifically to you. And now I know also yours.<br /> <br /> People said things here emotionally. I guess they might be out of place, but discussions usually get that way! (We're lucky we're not an Ukrainian Goverment when during debates they pull eachothers hair! :D)<br /> <br /> Stay positive people. Maybe don't say that person did something wrong or rude or something. Rather keep the tone of "I think that it's too much" or "I don't agree" or "I feel like it's unfair"... >_>