I think you have the patience of a saint, Nick. You're a good moderator trying to implement the will of the people. The problem is that the pettiness and holier-than-thou attitudes of those fearful of embracing art for art's sake undoubtedly makes your job virtually impossible. Because no matter what is decided, the flat-earthers will whinge loudly, as they always do. They'll see their sacrosanct "pure" fractals as an abomination when tampered with. They know nothing of art, all they know is their own narrow, dogmatic beliefs which have not a thing to do with the meaning of art.

The obsessed concern of some people as to whether or not something constitutes a "pure" fractal makes my stomach roil. This kind of thinking is a bone in the throat of anyone hoping for fractal art to ever attain legitimacy as an art as opposed to a mathematical exercise or ego-driven pursuit. Anyone who deems it necessary to define art by their own narrow standards, or define what a fractal should be and how it should be made should be ignored with a relentless vigilance. All it does it narrow the playing field and frighten away any artist with a scintilla of innovation.

Trying to please the majority in itself is not a bad thing; it only becomes dangerous when the majority are the equivalent of a Mandelbrot Taliban. I hope the true meaning of art prevails, although every time I read a thread like this one, one of many discussions I have seen, my hope for that kind of healthy, logical thinking dwindles to the size of an atomic particle.

Mindy