Webcomic Hate

[McDuffies]

Well, as long as you're aware that what you're doing is just a bit of soapboxing for the sake of draining your personal stress, and as long as you're not fooling yourself that you're doing some kind of great favour to webcomics as whole, noone can stop you.

If you really want to help someone, how would you do it? By calling them idiots straight away, or by... well, choosing words that they are more likely to accept? Anyone who thinks that he's actually achieving something through a flood of insults (short of entertaining people who are easily entertained) is just fooling himself. I took part in endless mocking of Mookey on this forum for my own pleasure and nothing else. I don't think it makes me a freaking hero. If I wanted to give a honest advice make webcomic community a better place - I would have chosen words that actually stood a chance.
And it's not like internet isn't already full of people who are transfering stress from their daily lives into forum dramas and blogs. Any kid can start a blog with rants about his daily annoyances.

[Yeahduff]

Well, there are people who will never visit tips and tricks, there are people who cant draw and write and make no effort to improve. There are people who will deny and argue against any negative comment. There are people who are quite happy to churn out crap. Worse, there are people who will happily read crap.

In these cases, I find it is my GOD DAMNED DUTY to laugh at and mock these people, and god bless Solomon and Co for handily collating stuff for me to laugh at and mock.

How very noble of you.

[Dallawalla]

Does anyone else find it hard to get people to review them honestly and critically though?

[Komiyan]

Does anyone else find it hard to get people to review them honestly and critically though?

Somewhat, yes. It really makes you wish you could see your own comic through completely new eyes and come to your own conclusions..

[Redtech]

The comments at http://malethoth.comicgenesis.com are probably more interesting than the comic is at times, but a good example of what can go wrong when you get reviews! (The wonders of the 'find random comic' button).

[Fishies]

The comments at http://malethoth.comicgenesis.com are probably more interesting than the comic is at times, but a good example of what can go wrong when you get reviews! (The wonders of the 'find random comic' button).

Wow, reading that is kind of depressing. Every comment is about how it sucks.

[Berg]

Well, there are people who will never visit tips and tricks, there are people who cant draw and write and make no effort to improve. There are people who will deny and argue against any negative comment. There are people who are quite happy to churn out crap. Worse, there are people who will happily read crap.

In these cases, I find it is my GOD DAMNED DUTY to laugh at and mock these people, and god bless Solomon and Co for handily collating stuff for me to laugh at and mock.

Your DUTY, huh? You also think it's your DUTY to encourage and compliment the good ones, or does this moral obligation only cover berating people?

[Guildmaster Van]

Does anyone else find it hard to get people to review them honestly and critically though?

In your case, it's probably because of your comic's content.
Your writing isn't horrible, but it doesn't save being put off by the art.

You don't have to be have great art - take White Ninja for example, but changing your comic's art would definitely make it much better. I have a feeling that if you did that people might start reviewing you without you even asking

Your DUTY, huh? You also think it's your DUTY to encourage and compliment the good ones, or does this moral obligation only cover berating people?

The webcomic world is filled with enough dick sucking circle jerking as it is. That's the only way to describe the tolerance to bad comics. People would rather give comments like "its ok" or say nothing at all than to tell someone what they're doing is bad. And sometimes people do EVERYTHING bad.

So yes, is IS our duty to be "mean".

Shine on, ShineDog.

[KWill]

The webcomic world is filled with enough dick sucking circle jerking as it is. That's the only way to describe the tolerance to bad comics. People would rather give comments like "its ok" or say nothing at all than to tell someone what they're doing is bad. And sometimes people do EVERYTHING bad.

So yes, is IS our duty to be "mean".

Being a dick about it, though, only adds more white noise that drowns out legitimate criticism.

[Yeahduff]

Your DUTY, huh? You also think it's your DUTY to encourage and compliment the good ones, or does this moral obligation only cover berating people?

The webcomic world is filled with enough dick sucking circle jerking as it is. That's the only way to describe the tolerance to bad comics. People would rather give comments like "its ok" or say nothing at all than to tell someone what they're doing is bad. And sometimes people do EVERYTHING bad.

So yes, is IS our duty to be "mean".

The webcomic world is filled with enough petulant snark as it is. People would rather lazily make cutting remarks than actually say something useful to maybe help lesser comics get better.

There are tons of lousy webcomics, many that are made by people who don't care if they get better. That's the nature of the internet, and if they're getting something out of it for themselves, well, fuck everyone else. Sometimes nothing needs to be said.

Now if someone actually does mean to get better, and is doing everything wrong, cut away. Of course, despite what you seem to believe, there absolutely is a difference between constructive and "'mean.'" "Laughing and mocking" doesn't fall under constructive. Be direct, be honest, but don't be a dick.

But that's only interesting if you or Shinedog or anyone else are actually concerned with helping other people, not just getting your rocks off by belittling others.

[ShineDog]

If someone sucks balls but is actually making an effort I'm going to encourage that, I'm not going to rip them a new arsehole about it. I'll criticize them legitimately so they improve. (O.k, no I wont, but I would if I ever bothered posting where they would read it)

The ones that really get to me are the ones that get a readership when they just flat out suck. I know its repeating the same names over and over but horrible gack like CAD or Dominic Deegan or whatever just make me angry when people read this lowest common denominator crap when there is excellent and worthy stuff that exists thats worth reading.

(If I started posting my stuff online I would expect people to go to town on it, and rightly so because I'm a pretty poor writer and my art never got where I wanted it too. Until I'm confident it's not laughable, it'll stay offline.)

[Guildmaster Van]

Being a dick about it, though, only adds more white noise that drowns out legitimate criticism.

Now if someone actually does mean to get better, and is doing everything wrong, cut away. Of course, despite what you seem to believe, there absolutely is a difference between constructive and "'mean.'" "Laughing and mocking" doesn't fall under constructive. Be direct, be honest, but don't be a dick.

Consider the difference between legitimately criticizing a legitimate comic and pissing on someone that points themselves out for scorn through the atrocity which is their comic. I am capable of making both distinctions. Some people I point out where they can improve and what I dislike, and others simply have no room for improvement because my only advice is to tear everything down and start from day one again.


Will anyone within sight of this text agree with me in saying that naming a game sprite comic "Death By Chibi!" with the tagline "Your soul is screwed!" is a very, very, very, very bad idea?

Also, does it give you this face?

[Wendybird]

Contrary to what some people seem to believe, even very,very,very,very bad ideas do not excuse meanness.

[Dallawalla]

Does anyone else find it hard to get people to review them honestly and critically though?

In your case, it's probably because of your comic's content.
Your writing isn't horrible, but it doesn't save being put off by the art.

You don't have to be have great art - take White Ninja for example, but changing your comic's art would definitely make it much better. I have a feeling that if you did that people might start reviewing you without you even asking

Thank you.

[Yeahduff]

If someone sucks balls but is actually making an effort I'm going to encourage that, I'm not going to rip them a new arsehole about it. I'll criticize them legitimately so they improve. (O.k, no I wont, but I would if I ever bothered posting where they would read it)

Do you stop to make the distinction? Why can't someone who's secure with sucking just go on making a comic? Why do they need your go ahead via the "making an effort" litmus test?

(If I started posting my stuff online I would expect people to go to town on it, and rightly so because I'm a pretty poor writer and my art never got where I wanted it too. Until I'm confident it's not laughable, it'll stay offline.)

What's the use of that? Are you making stuff right now or just letting your ideas sit in your head? Truly, if people only started publishing themselves when they were polished and working at full speed, we'd be missing a whole lot of great art today. I'm willing to have some amateurish bullshit sitting around where I can ignore it than give up The Ramones.

Consider the difference between legitimately criticizing a legitimate comic and pissing on someone that points themselves out for scorn through the atrocity which is their comic. I am capable of making both distinctions. Some people I point out where they can improve and what I dislike, and others simply have no room for improvement because my only advice is to tear everything down and start from day one again.

Yeah, I can make the distinction. One's valid criticism. The other is amusement at the expense of others and nothing else.

Will anyone within sight of this text agree with me in saying that naming a game sprite comic "Death By Chibi!" with the tagline "Your soul is screwed!" is a very, very, very, very bad idea?

Heh, can't say that's a link I'll be clicking. But my day will go on just fine knowing it exists.

[KWill]

Consider the difference between legitimately criticizing a legitimate comic and pissing on someone that points themselves out for scorn through the atrocity which is their comic. I am capable of making both distinctions. Some people I point out where they can improve and what I dislike, and others simply have no room for improvement because my only advice is to tear everything down and start from day one again.

Will anyone within sight of this text agree with me in saying that naming a game sprite comic "Death By Chibi!" with the tagline "Your soul is screwed!" is a very, very, very, very bad idea?

There's nicer ways of saying "start from scratch" than how you did in that Comic Pitching thread. Effectively, you achieved nothing except for adding a bit more crap to the internet. If your goal is to improve the internet by reducing the amount of atrocious webcomics, you're going about it the wrong way. If you're mocking people because it's fun, then you're not really adding anything worthwile to the web either.

You don't need to take every bad webcomic as a personal insult. They're incredibly easy to ignore, even if their owners advertize.

[Dotty]

Exactly.

There's enough snark and snipes on the internet, and definitely enough in webcomics. It was to a point here that I was getting snarked at for doodles, and when I'd ask for elaboration on what was wrong, I just got more snark, no actual constructive information to work with. Thankfully those idiots are gone, and this environment is actually worthwhile to hang around again. If you think telling an artist to go die in a fire, calling them a circlejerking cocksucker, and shutting down decent webcomics along with the crap because you can't keep your bile contained in your effort to provide the lulz, is helpful in any way...no. It's not. I've tried explaining to webcomic review people who want to make a good review site that you can't just review bad webcomics and then rip on them for pages on end. Why are you showing me a terrible webcomic? Why are you reviewing only terrible webcomics? I want to know where the good ones are, I don't care about the crap. If it's garbage, I'm not going to find it on my own, but if I do, I'll likely not give it much of a chance anyways. It's just cheap laughs and ego inflation at the expense of someones self esteem. There's criticism, constructive criticism, and bile. Bile has very little practical application.

Am I saying there's no cocksucking or circlejerking in webcomics? Fuck no. That's how most of those little comic groups got started, I'm sure. Call me crazy, but I much rather an environment that's actually pleasant and productive to visit and talk to people than one thats filled with insults and jabs. I've been able to take criticism over the years, and it's made me better. Criticism is good, very good. Only when constructive, though, otherwise it's a waste of my time, and generally when presented in a childish format with overuse of the word "cocksucker" I'm going to not even bother reading it.

To summarize, I've seen a lot of "critics" utilize a format that was similar to a post by Van earlier in this thread, calling out Yeahduffs testicles or something. ( Please note, not a jab at you, Van. Just a damned good example. ) Stuff posted in that juvenile format is stuff that I'll generally skim over, and then completely dismiss the poster as juvenile, or a douchebag. I've known Van on here for a couple years, and he used to go by Van Douchebag, this behaviour is nothing new to me, did not shock me, but I totally rolled my eyes. It's that kind of crap the webcomics community doesn't need. ( Crap as in that sort of reviewing format, not as in Van. Should be noted {is this circlejerking?} I used to enjoy white hydra, and Vans fun little style. Then it got rebooted, I stopped reading till he caught back up, which never happened because he disappeared. He seems to be back now, and for the most part a bit more mature, though sadly seemingly corrupted by 4chan. I'll chock this up to a win however, should he get back to doing a comic or two. )

[ShineDog]

I seem to remember you getting good advice, and then arguing and ignoring the advice, thus setting yourself up for snark.

(Maybe I'm thinking of someone else, because you people keep changing your god damned names.)

[Dotty]

I seem to remember you getting good advice, and then arguing the advice, setting yourself up for snark. Maybe I'm thinking of someone else, because you people keep changing your god damned names.

It mighta been me, I have a tendancy to agree with most of what someone I respect or believe is trying to help me with says, but if they say something I disagree with or do not understand, I ask for elaboration.

And that is when they decided to just snark at me from then on out, when I asked for elaboration because I didn't quite understand what they meant.

And then I just repeatedly got called a cocksucker with sneaky subtle jabs and left for a while.

[McDuffies]

Bah. If you're a jerk who snarks over internet, in real life you might as well be a pussy who wouldn't have guts to say the same thing to someone's face.
Dishonorable thing about being an asshole on internet is, it's a very safe place to be an asshole: you don't have to pay the dues for that, you don't even have to stand behind your words. You take joy from hurting someone who is thousands of miles away from you, and very unlikely you'll ever have to face him in real life.
Being an ass on internet is for cowards. Restraining yourself on internet, even if something does annoy you, is something to be admired.