Quote - I think you're confusing Flash as a website tool with Flash as a standalone art form here.

Nope.

Flash is -- first and foremost -- a website tool.  That's its primary purpose, and that's what the vast majority of Flash users use it for.  I am not denying that Flash can be used specifically to create art -- but I am pointing out that "art" is most definitely not what most Flash applications are created for -- unless if one considers ubiquitous web advertising to be an art form.

*> Quote - Here, you're confusing an art and games site (Newgrounds) with a site that mixes art, communication, commentary, and all sorts of other things (Youtube).  Not so much different types of subject matter, but different purposes of subject matter.

I'm not "confusing" anything.  You are the one who is confusing sites of varying purposes with one another in an attempt to draw non-existent parallels.  I, on the other hand, am pointing out the clear distinctions which exist between them.

*> Quote - Well, if you're going to talk about whether something is "precisely" the same website, you can defend yourself to eternity just by defining terms.  Cgsociety is a place where both professionals, and people who want to learn, post artwork, discuss techniques, and buy from the website store.  Renderosity involves aspects of CG beyond 3D as well.  They have the same purpose, and same major features.

While it is certainly true that Renderosity has aspects of CG beyond 3D -- I believe that most anyone would recognize that the emphasis here is decidedly upon 3D.  I don't believe that you can say that about cgsociety.  Cgsociety involves everything from gaming-specific graphics to film techniques to whatever -- everything CG.  While you can find all of that here, it isn't the primary focus.

Like I stated earlier -- perhaps the lesson here is that Renderosity should tighten up its forum policies and start individually reviewing submissions to the galleries before allowing them to be posted.  After all -- that's what cgsociety does.  And we need to follow their example in all things, right?

*> Quote - Look, I've seen a dismembered penis on a dinner plate with a fork stuck in it on that site.  The artist was going to title it "Genitals for lunch" before deciding on some other title (what was it - "Not Kosher"..?)

Not something that I personally care to see.  But there are websites where such subject matter is "kosher', and within the rules of those websites.  Rendo isn't one of them.

Quote - The artists were cool with it.

Good for them.

*> Quote - Cgsociety's central focus is its forums, not its gallery.  The majority of new and incoming work comes through forum posts.

That's good to know -- although a lot of work comes in through forum posts here, too.

Quote - Well, I disagree in a way that's my central thrust, here.  Despite having the kind of growth that many website have had, Renderosity has failed to live up to its true potential owing to the fact that it struggles with its base, trying to protect the website from a sense of offense that the artists in Renderosity, for the most part, just don't have.

Here you are making some substantive assumptions.  For one thing, you are taking attitudes which you hold to personally -- along with a few other occasional posters (a very tiny group, considering the website's overall membership) -- and then you are projecting those attitudes out onto a supposed majority.

Sorry -- but I reject the reasoning because I reject the underlying assumptions which the reasoning is founded upon.

Believe me -- the administration at Renderosity knows who their members are.  And they know what "the most part" of those members want.  By contrast, you are in no position to know the facts of the case as to what "the most part" wants -- nor are you in any position to claim that knowledge.

Quote - And this is why other websites of the same purpose (a phrase that I consider more insightful and important than the phrase in its field) do as well as they do - they let the artists be as irrepressible as artists can be.

Yep.  "Irrepressible".  Another word for "anything goes".  Cgsociety isn't "anything goes".  In fact, I know of very few websites which truly are "anything goes".  Even those websites which claim to be such have been known to expel unruly/unwanted members for the things that they were doing to the site.

If anyone wants to lay claim to the mantle of truly allowing "irrepressible" to be the ruling culture of their website -- then they can't have any rules.  Everyone should be allowed to do anything without being 'repressed' or hindered in any way.

Try running a website like that, and see what happens.  It wouldn't be too far removed from the concept of allowing the gangs to take over and rule downtown Los Angeles for their own amusement.  A few "bosses" with gangs of weaker hangers-on following them.  Advancement by stabbing the other one -- power by force.  Nice idea.  It's done on USENET -- but I'm not aware of too many websites of any size with such a culture.  Including cgsociety and Newgrounds.

*> Quote - Xenophonz, I don't dislike Renderosity - or at least, I don't dislike the pictures that get posted to this site.

But I can be disappointed in it, even if I like the site.  So I've been personally boycotting the place, reducing my viewing to the one or two artists I like the most.

So one day, I visit the forum and see Xenophonz giving the usual line - "If cutting artistic freedom is wrong, why is the site doing so well?"  I'd heard it before, and decided to finally say something.

I note the quotation marks around the above statement.  But I don't recall ever typing out those words anywhere.........I believe that it's called 'putting words in someone else's mouth'.

With the statement "if cutting artistic freedom is wrong", you have attributed your opinions to me.

"Artistic freedom" isn't a synonym for anarchy.  Although that's obviously the way that some would like to define it for the rest of us.

Some hold to a principle which states: "We can force you to be free."  The essence of freedom, of course, being defined for the rest of us.  Not being a thing whose nature we are permitted to define for and by ourselves -- under the rules which we prefer to live by.  No, no......we must have 'freedom'.  And we must have it your way.  Not our way.

It's another example of the truth of the old adage: "Freedom isn't free."  Especially not when the inmates are allowed to run the asylum.

Quote - People have argued the point before, complaining about new and more limiting Terms of Service, but it was always from a standpoint of artistic freedom and what's right or wrong; artists who were hurt that their options were cut off, and were visiting the forum to make pleas to get their power back.  Those folks could easily have their vulnerable position turned against them in the argument.

I felt the debate needed someone more neutral, someone who the website didn't have any power over and couldn't be easily ignored by the tyranny of the majority; someone who would come in and say that people don't do what's right and fair for the hell of it, just to be nice - people do what's right and fair because it's good sense, it builds foundations, it protects you against the future.

Renderosity thinks that its artistic community is a hedge that needs to have its branches pruned; but no, it's a tree that needs to have its roots watered.

Maybe one day I can stop my boycott, eh?  Wouldn't that be great.  Because I liked old-school Renderosity.

 

This is a common technique seen in use among left-leaning political debaters.  They always want to claim to be "neutral" on any given topic -- when it's quite clear that they have staked out a position which is anything but "neutral".  It's just that they prefer to avoid the baggage which accompanies their true position -- were they to stand flat-footed and defend it.  The technique represents a neat little bit of verbal side-stepping -- holding to a point of view -- and then claiming that one's personal point of view represents "neutrality".  When it so obviously does not.

I believe that there's plenty of inspiration to be had here.  That's one reason why I hang around.

Another reason is that it's just plain fun.

But those reasons are my own -- others are welcome to their reasons.  It's all an individual thing.  And that's a part of being in this place.

Renderosity is a lot bigger than it used to be.  And it's still growing, too.  Most websites have ups and downs over time --  even google is sometimes "down" in the overall traffic rankings.  But I don't think that google has anything to worry about.  Neither does Renderosity.  And this goes against all of the predictions which have been made by the doomsayers over the years.

BTW - as a side note, do a google on "Alexa".  You'll find that there is a major, on-going, and raging controversy over the accuracy of Alexa's traffic rankings.  Personally, I tend to believe that Alexa is in the ballpark.  But I wouldn't rely on them for even 85% accuracy.  After all -- Alexa tracks and obtains its rankings via spyware which users allow Alexa to install on their computers.  I'd never have it on mine.  I'd dare say that most web-literate types wouldn't, either.

As for boycotts -- they generally don't work.  Especially when such boycotts are practiced by a handful of individuals vs. "the most part" simply ignoring them.

I like new Renderosity.  A lot of other people do, too.  That's why they are here in such numbers.

Something To Do At 3:00AM