How are you doing, comic-wise?

[RobboAKAscooby]

The ending of my story is consistent with the tone of the comic, so it'll be very much like it would end in a real life situation. So lots of exploding cars, lots of kicking and stabbing and maybe all of them getting arrested.

But if you do all that now, what will you add for Special Anniversary Edition?

3D?

[peterabnny]

Still licking my wounds after having my comic shit on, flushed down the toilet, and sent to the waste treatment plant in a review. I'm still wanting to do it, tho. If that ain't dedication, I don't know what is.

Think I'll work on the house for a while...

[TheSuburbanLetdown]

The ending of my story is consistent with the tone of the comic, so it'll be very much like it would end in a real life situation. So lots of exploding cars, lots of kicking and stabbing and maybe all of them getting arrested.

But if you do all that now, what will you add for Special Anniversary Edition?

3D?

Yeah. Eating disorders and and sarcasm IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE!

I guess they can become mercenaries after getting out of the big house. Run a meth lab or something. That way there will be more explosions.

The ending of my story is consistent with the tone of the comic, so it'll be very much like it would end in a real life situation. So lots of exploding cars, lots of kicking and stabbing and maybe all of them getting arrested.

And maybe we can have some moping?

They'll be doing plenty of moping in jail.

[robotthepirate]

Still licking my wounds after having my comic shit on, flushed down the toilet, and sent to the waste treatment plant in a review. I'm still wanting to do it, tho. If that ain't dedication, I don't know what is.

Think I'll work on the house for a while...

Mate, you deserve a clip round the head just for asking that guy to review Critters. I wouldn't take too much to heart from someone who sees having an irregular or infrequent update schedule as a capital offense. ETC.

[McDuffies]

Well may not be a capital offense but it is an issue that every review in the world would touch. Not having enough time to make it more regularly is perfectly understandable as noone sane would ask you to, say, cut down the time you spend with your kids to draw a comic. But the price to pay is that it's very unlikely for an irregularly updated comic to amass a regular audience, and it's also very difficult to keep an audience, even when a huge webcomic starts skipping updates, audience starts crumbling. It's not something that should make you neglect your day job or duties, it's simply something that Peter should have in mind in regards to his expectations from his comic.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Well may not be a capital offense but it is an issue that every review in the world would touch. Not having enough time to make it more regularly is perfectly understandable as noone sane would ask you to, say, cut down the time you spend with your kids to draw a comic. But the price to pay is that it's very unlikely for an irregularly updated comic to amass a regular audience, and it's also very difficult to keep an audience, even when a huge webcomic starts skipping updates, audience starts crumbling. It's not something that should make you neglect your day job or duties, it's simply something that Peter should have in mind in regards to his expectations from his comic.

I concur.
My readership on SHR dropped terribly over the last 6 months of sparce updates.

[robotthepirate]

Very true. But there's ways of saying that nicely.

In the same way that while its understandable to get annoyed with you neighbours' dog messing on your lawn, there's a difference between a polite note and setting bear traps. One way leads to a better behaved dog and the other potentially leads to one less dog.

[IVstudios]

How bad a review are we talking about here? Is it like Your Webcomic is Bad and You Should Feel Bad insulting or is it just snarky?

Is there a place to see the review? I'd like to read it before I try to comment on the situation.

[RobboAKAscooby]

How bad a review are we talking about here? Is it like Your Webcomic is Bad and You Should Feel Bad insulting or is it just snarky?

Is there a place to see the review? I'd like to read it before I try to comment on the situation.

Here.

[IVstudios]

Oh… that's it? Yeah it's a little harsh but I wouldn't call it over the line. Hell it doesn't even tell you to kill yourself. An internet review can hardly even be considered negative unless it tells you to kill yourself, or at least insinuates that your mother has sex for money.

Plus it's from LibertyCabbage, who's comics are usually about sentient fruit that violently murders people in the name of anarchy. Not the sort of guy who's concerned about stepping on any toes. Hell, if he didn't insult your comic I would have assumed someone had stolen his screen name.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Aye, IV, which is why I mentioned either in this thread or in some other one that you should know a bit about the person reviewing your comic if that's possible.

Some reviewers state things more politely than others. It depends on the aim of the review. Is the review for the comic's potential audience, the way movie reviews are? Or is it for the artist themself, more in line with a critique?

LC is writing reviews that don't sound much different from some film reviews I've read in the papers/online. By their nature, they don't really give advice straight out for the creator of whatever the reviewed source is. They let the audience know what they might expect if they read the comic/ see the movie.

Also, though it's surely obvios by this point, whenever you submit to have your work reviewed, you always have to be prepared for the bell-curve possibility that this reviewer will be someone who winds up really finding an extreme amount of faults with your comic. The same comic can be seen as a poster-child of excellence by one reviewer, and a flawed squishy tumor by another. It's a bit of a roulette game.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Also, though it's surely obvios by this point, whenever you submit to have your work reviewed, you always have to be prepared for the bell-curve possibility that this reviewer will be someone who winds up really finding an extreme amount of faults with your comic. The same comic can be seen as a poster-child of excellence by one reviewer, and a flawed squishy tumor by another. It's a bit of a roulette game.

I particularly like that sentence.

Considering how I reacted to my review I've tried not to comment too much on peter's - mainly because I don't want to sound hypocritical - but I honestly don't see much wrong with the review (although LC may want to work on his tone a little) it pointed out some valid issues, complimented the positive aspects of the work and did a decent job of separating himself from the audience.

Personally when I go into a review I expect my work to get torn apart - although this time was different.

[LibertyCabbage]

Still licking my wounds after having my comic shit on, flushed down the toilet, and sent to the waste treatment plant in a review. I'm still wanting to do it, tho. If that ain't dedication, I don't know what is.

Think I'll work on the house for a while...

You shouldn't be getting this upset about what a random person writes on the Internet, though. And while this kind of reaction doesn't bother me personally, I think a lot of people would be more reluctant to give you criticism after reading something like this, which hurts your comic in the long run.

Mate, you deserve a clip round the head just for asking that guy to review Critters. I wouldn't take too much to heart from someone who sees having an irregular or infrequent update schedule as a capital offense. ETC.

Actually, I think peter should be praised for having the courage to submit his webcomic for review.

Well may not be a capital offense but it is an issue that every review in the world would touch. Not having enough time to make it more regularly is perfectly understandable as noone sane would ask you to, say, cut down the time you spend with your kids to draw a comic. But the price to pay is that it's very unlikely for an irregularly updated comic to amass a regular audience, and it's also very difficult to keep an audience, even when a huge webcomic starts skipping updates, audience starts crumbling. It's not something that should make you neglect your day job or duties, it's simply something that Peter should have in mind in regards to his expectations from his comic.

Yes. Perhaps I should've expressed this more clearly in my review.

I concur.
My readership on SHR dropped terribly over the last 6 months of sparce updates.

Right, you know what I'm talking about. It's also not a coincidence that the most popular webcomics update often and consistently.

Very true. But there's ways of saying that nicely.

In the same way that while its understandable to get annoyed with you neighbours' dog messing on your lawn, there's a difference between a polite note and setting bear traps. One way leads to a better behaved dog and the other potentially leads to one less dog.

I know, and I do try to be as nice as I can in my reviews without compromising the integrity of my criticism. I'd like to be able to write longer reviews and explain things more clearly, but I'm comfortable at the moment with sacrificing some clarity if it allows me to continue to post reviews daily.

Oh… that's it? Yeah it's a little harsh but I wouldn't call it over the line. Hell it doesn't even tell you to kill yourself. An internet review can hardly even be considered negative unless it tells you to kill yourself, or at least insinuates that your mother has sex for money.

Some of my reviews have definitely been negative, but I think calling my review "an orgasm of hatred" and etc. is a little ridiculous.

Plus it's from LibertyCabbage, who's comics are usually about sentient fruit that violently murders people in the name of anarchy. Not the sort of guy who's concerned about stepping on any toes. Hell, if he didn't insult your comic I would have assumed someone had stolen his screen name.

Hey, my comics weren't just about sentient fruit killing people! I totally had a sentient hot dog kill a guy one time! And I've actually posted some pretty positive reviews in that thread, including the last one I posted.

[LibertyCabbage]

Aye, IV, which is why I mentioned either in this thread or in some other one that you should know a bit about the person reviewing your comic if that's possible.

I dunno, I don't feel like being squeamish about getting reviewed really helps anything. A worse scenario than getting a bad review is getting complacent.

There is an element of bias involved, but I try to be as objective as I can. In my review of Critters, I admitted that I don't like newspaper comics in general, so it's not a surprise I wouldn't like Critters. It's a little unfair, sure, but at least I'm being honest about it.

Some reviewers state things more politely than others. It depends on the aim of the review. Is the review for the comic's potential audience, the way movie reviews are? Or is it for the artist themself, more in line with a critique?

LC is writing reviews that don't sound much different from some film reviews I've read in the papers/online. By their nature, they don't really give advice straight out for the creator of whatever the reviewed source is. They let the audience know what they might expect if they read the comic/ see the movie.

I feel I'm doing the reviews partly as a movie-style informative review, partly as a critique for the creator, and partly as educational material for other webcartoonists. I also try to do it in a way that's interesting and enjoyable for me to write, because that's the main motivation I'm going off of.

Also, though it's surely obvios by this point, whenever you submit to have your work reviewed, you always have to be prepared for the bell-curve possibility that this reviewer will be someone who winds up really finding an extreme amount of faults with your comic. The same comic can be seen as a poster-child of excellence by one reviewer, and a flawed squishy tumor by another. It's a bit of a roulette game.

Right, which is why I would encourage webcartoonists to seek reviews from more than just one person.

Considering how I reacted to my review I've tried not to comment too much on peter's - mainly because I don't want to sound hypocritical - but I honestly don't see much wrong with the review (although LC may want to work on his tone a little) it pointed out some valid issues, complimented the positive aspects of the work and did a decent job of separating himself from the audience.

Personally when I go into a review I expect my work to get torn apart - although this time was different.

Thanks. I think I've learned a bit about reviewing since my review of Flying Tigers, so it's a little disappointing to get such a negative reaction after trying to be more polite and objective.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Aye, IV, which is why I mentioned either in this thread or in some other one that you should know a bit about the person reviewing your comic if that's possible.

I dunno, I don't feel like being squeamish about getting reviewed really helps anything. A worse scenario than getting a bad review is getting complacent.

I think Cuddly means more to get a handle on how the person reviews not to find a more suitable reviewer.
In this case just reading through your review topic should have been enough of a heads up.

Considering how I reacted to my review I've tried not to comment too much on peter's - mainly because I don't want to sound hypocritical - but I honestly don't see much wrong with the review (although LC may want to work on his tone a little) it pointed out some valid issues, complimented the positive aspects of the work and did a decent job of separating himself from the audience.

Personally when I go into a review I expect my work to get torn apart - although this time was different.

Thanks. I think I've learned a bit about reviewing since my review of Flying Tigers, so it's a little disappointing to get such a negative reaction after trying to be more polite and objective.

Well it sucks that my comic had to be the stepping stone but I'm glad you're learning.

In my opinion, the 3 keys to a good review - be objective, be honest, be respectful.

[LibertyCabbage]

I think Cuddly means more to get a handle on how the person reviews not to find a more suitable reviewer.
In this case just reading through your review topic should have been enough of a heads up.

Oh, okay. Well, yeah, it shouldn't shock anyone already reading that thread if I give a negative review.

Well it sucks that my comic had to be the stepping stone but I'm glad you're learning.

Yeah, totally; I don't mind making mistakes as long as I'm learning something from them.

In my opinion, the 3 keys to a good review - be objective, be honest, be respectful.

That sounds pretty good.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

I think Cuddly means more to get a handle on how the person reviews not to find a more suitable reviewer.
In this case just reading through your review topic should have been enough of a heads up.

Oh, okay. Well, yeah, it shouldn't shock anyone already reading that thread if I give a negative review.

Yeah, schoob said what I was thinking. Everyone has a different review style. Some people are little tastycakes while some are more sandpapery. If you're asking a sandpapery reviewer to review your comic, you shouldn't expect tastycakes

[Cortland]

I think I gradually got more and more tired of my comic and then brought it in for a landing when I became a dad a few months ago. Currently, I'm OK with not drawing anything.

[TheSuburbanLetdown]

I think I gradually got more and more tired of my comic and then brought it in for a landing when I became a dad a few months ago. Currently, I'm OK with not drawing anything.

Sweet! Congrats!

[robotthepirate]

Yeah, schoob said what I was thinking. Everyone has a different review style. Some people are little tastycakes while some are more sandpapery. If you're asking a sandpapery reviewer to review your comic, you shouldn't expect tastycakes

And if you are a sandpaper critic, don't be suprised if your reviewees emotions are a little bit excoriated. And though they shouldn't, the reviewee could simply disregard an abrasive review altogether instead of learning from it, which (presumably) defeats the point of the review. Even if they do learn from it, it'll take longer, because first they have to recover from the blow to their pride before they can return to the review to read it subjectively.

Of course a review that's all angelcakes and fluffy bunnies when nothing at all is even wrong wont do anyone anygood either, there's a balance.

Metaphore

I think I gradually got more and more tired of my comic and then brought it in for a landing when I became a dad a few months ago. Currently, I'm OK with not drawing anything.

And you come without pictures! Discraceful...

But congrats!