Webcomic Hate

[Levi-chan]

Regardless. I still stick with my point that theres nothing wrong with laughing at the dregs of the internet, and a bit of tough love would make these forums a much better place. The whole "hyper defensive when given harsh crit" shit should never have gotten the legs it did.

I'd classify Dawg's criticism in that thread as harsh, and you're right, there's nothing wrong with that. What's "wrong" is infantile criticism that's more focussed on the entertainment of the critic and anyone watching.

Uh. A webcomic creator's freedom to create whatever he or she wants to place over the internet comes with anyone else's freedom to skewer it. No caveats, no matter what the circumstances are. Even if they make pariahs out of them.

What I don't get is why people pay attention to critics they deem infantile. Seriously. If you think someone's criticism is of no worth, or if you think that words from someone who is just there to entertain themselves, why listen?

Van is probably capable of being violent in real life, but he payed for that, while on internet he hasn't had consequences that he couldn't revert by begging some admin to let him back in.
Internet easily drags the worst side of a person because of lack of consequences for the one who insults and because you can't really see the effects of your actions in live. It's made into a playground for people's fantasies, where they can act the way they can't afford in real life.

The same applies for webcomic artists. The internet allows for the creation of art that is way below the standard of what people normally see. And with very minor consequences, if at all.

[Guildmaster Van]

Oh, so it is a legality issue. OK.

You, Kwill, Robin, or any moderator have failed to show this legality issue to me.
So point it out.

Point out where it specifically states sprite comics are against the ToS.
You can't, because there is none. As I posted below towards Kwill, the only statement there is a vague phrasing that states that Comic Genesis can take anything off the site if it thinks it will be "liable" for something. Basically, it's an argument that can be used to justify removing anything from the website.

Still, for my entertainment, try to prove to me it's a legality issue. I want to see your work, young man. I want links and documentation to back your position up - references, references, references, people! We'll count it towards extracurricular activity this semester.

Van, Dude, calm down a bit?

I'm am calm.
If I wasn't I'd be calling Yeahduff a spineless sandy pussy shitstain that licks the crusty anus of an inbred Israeli sheep farmer and Kwill a sycophantic cockgoblin with a half a brain from his survived backalley coathangar abortion (Hey, no rule about hypothetically calling someone something)

Instead, I'm spending Quebec's provincial holiday to pack things before I move while coming back here to have fun by stirring the pot. Don't think my posts are fueled by anger - most of the time they are fueled by the desire to annoy, irritate and provoke.

More than anything - it's fun
I figured people would have simply stopped replying to my incendiary posts years ago when they realized what I was up to, but I am more than happy to argue with people for the sake of argument. Like every other time, this thread will blow over and be forgotten until the next time I decide to stir the pot.

There's no harm done, and despite the way I fling insults around I don't hate or hold grudges towards anyone I've argued with ('cept David Cheung, and Yeahduff until I'm bored of teasing him). The moderators will eventually end my fun, so let me have it while I still can

Reality begs to differ:

If you have been following this comic for a while, I do intend to restore the stories I had to purge, just with sprites I made myself.

If you had bothered reading his old stuff before he tore it down you would have seen what I was talking about. You don't seem to have bothered reading his comic at all.

Since we're debating about what made him purge his archives, not what's in the ToS, that's not at all relevant.

So, basically, once I prove you wrong you about how Robin is full of shit and playing The Almighty Moderator you turn around and say it's not relevant? It's relevant because ANYONE who is told what they are doing is against a ToS will immediately read up on the ToS. At least those with enough common sense to read fine prints and bring used cars to mechanics prior to purchase will.

Second of all: comicgenesis has a particular policy towards Sprite comics - that is to say, unless they're home made, they violate the terms of service. That said, I don't know if you made the sprites yourself, so just keep it in mind as a general statement.

Which supports my argument that Robin's final post did more to influence his behavior than your remarks.
(Also, the relevant article in the ToS would be #4, particularly the last sentence.)

Once again, Robin closed the topic and you assume her remarks are the world changer. There's no guarantee if this guy even read anything on the second page, and by then he had already stopped updating his comic prior to page 2 of the thread (Yes, I actually check that kind of thing. Last update was about his little D&D parody, which remained there even before Robin shut down the thread)

The last sentence of Term of Service #4 states "COMIC GENESIS reserves the right to refuse to publish any material which, in COMIC GENESIS' discretion, would increase COMIC GENESIS' risk of liability."

That is an extremely vague legal term that can mean anything. It translates out to "We can say no to anything we want to if we pretend we'll be liable for it"
If you want to play lawyer at least play it right.

The bottom line is there is no specific clause stating sprite comics are not allowed - only the ominous statement that Comic Genesis has the right to throw you off the site if they feel fit - and the point of all of this was to say even if the kid read what Robin said the likelihood of listening to her is slim to nil, especially when she's enforcing some unclear policy that anyone can see with two clicks of a mouse. Ask yourself - "Would I listen to her?"

[McDuffies]

The same applies for webcomic artists. The internet allows for the creation of art that is way below the standard of what people normally see. And with very minor consequences, if at all.

There's a whole world of difference. 1) It's not the "no consequence" aspect that drives people to webcomics - it's the "no quality control" aspect. 2) By making a bad comic, you're hurting noone, unless you're forcing someone to read it. By flaming someone - well the very point of flaming is to hurt someone. You can ignore comics you don't like - if you don't ignore them, it's your own choice. If you're flamed, that's much more difficult to ignore, since the flaming is actually directed at you, and you're the topic. 3) If you make a comic and then get flamed, isn't that a consequence?

[Guildmaster Van]

I don't neccesarily think that, but it is violence without consequences. Van is probably capable of being violent in real life, but he payed for that, while on internet he hasn't had consequences that he couldn't revert by begging some admin to let him back in.
Internet easily drags the worst side of a person because of lack of consequences for the one who insults and because you can't really see the effects of your actions in live. It's made into a playground for people's fantasies, where they can act the way they can't afford in real life. Someone's fantasy is to be a cartoon character who makes people laugh, and someone's is to be a strong macho man who punches everyone who steps on his shadow.

My internet fantasy is to be a bisexual female purple spirit wolf named Wolfeedarkfang.
Ha ha ha, I kid, I kid

You are correct about the internet, Duffies, but you're forgetting one thing: it's the internet
At any time, anyone can simply shut down their computer and log off, hence why I feel zero sympathy for kids who kill themselves after being "cyber-bullied". I don't pity people who feel the need to be a victim of things, especially when they keep putting themselves into circumstances where they will become victimized.

Blah blah blah. Spare me copypasting from some blog dedicated to making up excuses for acting like an asshole or wherever you've copied than from.

I wasn't talking about myself at all, nor saying that I was better than anyone. I've been an asshole to people, as many of people here can testify, but that's how I know that being asshole is easy, and being reasonable is difficult, and all the more reason to respect people who have more self-restrain than I do.

It's nice that you're admitting you're a troll though.

Aww, that was actually totally OP, Duffies :O
Give me more credit than that

In any event, though it may have come off that way, the comment was not directed towards you although it was spawned from something you said

[Levi-chan]

The same applies for webcomic artists. The internet allows for the creation of art that is way below the standard of what people normally see. And with very minor consequences, if at all.

There's a whole world of difference. 1) It's not the "no consequence" aspect that drives people to webcomics - it's the "no quality control" aspect. 2) By making a bad comic, you're hurting noone, unless you're forcing someone to read it. By flaming someone - well the very point of flaming is to hurt someone. You can ignore comics you don't like - if you don't ignore them, it's your own choice. If you're flamed, that's much more difficult to ignore, since the flaming is actually directed at you, and you're the topic. 3) If you make a comic and then get flamed, isn't that a consequence?

Just as people can choose to view or not view a webcomic, they can choose not to respond, or ignore criticisms that are worthless. I don't think the aspect of direction really matters; the process of filtering what you acknowledge or don't is a binary choice. You do or you don't.

Also, the matter of what other people ignore, pay attention to, or are get hurt by is something we can't control, nor should have any responsibility for. It's their choice. We all have varying degrees of sensitivity, and to account for all of them is hardly possible.

[Levi-chan]

Sorry to double-post, but just to make it clear. It's not that I defend the methodology that critics like John Solomon use - in fact, I think it's flawed, and I question its merits. The amount of improvement it /actually/ cultivates is a tad questionable, compared to other critique sites. Also, it creates a clique of people who are less concerned about artists' improvement, and are just there to feed their schadenfreude.

I am however, defending his freedom to do so, and the lack of filtering that the people who are hurt by him exercise.

[Redtech]

So in summary, either stick to your guns, get a bigger stick or use rockets. Seems like a suitable metaphor, no?

[IVstudios]

Oh, so it is a legality issue. OK.

You, Kwill, Robin, or any moderator have failed to show this legality issue to me.
So point it out.

I never saw the original comic, but if he was using video game sprites it falls under Copyright Law. Because the company that created the game owns the rights to the sprites, no one else can legally use them without permission.

[Wendybird]

Acceptable use policy, #1:

Transmission, distribution or storage of any material in violation of any applicable law or regulation is prohibited. This includes, without limitation, material protected by copyright, trademark, trade secret or other intellectual property right used without proper authorization....

[ShineDog]

The reason I like Solomons blog is that it has enough clout you get artists and fans popping in to defend the crap in the comments, and that is a joy to watch.

[Kieve]

My internet fantasy is to be a bisexual female purple spirit wolf named Wolfeedarkfang.
Ha ha ha, I kid, I kid

Thank you for that, Van. Now I will have screaming shitting nightmares for a week.

[Robin Pierce]

Begs to question: Why would he bother to restart in the first place then? And keep the name and sprite style? More likely because of the legality issues raised by Robin than anything else.

As to "dramatic reaction": Just like you said. Hence, it's more likely he reacted to Robin's closing remarks concerning the legality of his comic.

Somehow I doubt that. Robin closed the thread so no one can respond and suddenly ZOMG ITS HER WORD THAT MAKES THE DIFFERENCE.

Anyone who has a problem with my actions as a moderator can take it up with me in PM - there's no need to turn it into an arguement in a thread, dredging up issues that I considered finished. I haven't gotten a PM from the comic creator you're talking about, so I suspect that Van, you're just being arguementative for the sake of it. If there was an issue, I would have heard about it from the comic creator.

I RARELY lock threads, and when I do, I make a post explaining WHY I've locked the thread. That is what that was. I don't care or even want to know if I had an affect on the webcomic - I haven't looked at it since, and I don't care to unless the person him or herself brings it up with me.
Here look at me stating why I locked the thread:

I honestly can't see this thread being helpful to the comic's developement or resulting in anything but flames and rage, so I'm locking it. Please guys, keep crits CIVIL. I shouldn't have to moderate Comic Pitching on account of things like this.

Talk about selective reading.

As for the legality thing: ALL of the mods have been instructed by the admins to keep an eye on sprite comics that are pitched. Do you have access to the moderators forums, Van? Or say access to every conversation I've ever had with an admin member? You don't have a full picture of what's going on, so kindly stop acting like you do.

[KWill]

Uh. A webcomic creator's freedom to create whatever he or she wants to place over the internet comes with anyone else's freedom to skewer it. No caveats, no matter what the circumstances are. Even if they make pariahs out of them.

What I don't get is why people pay attention to critics they deem infantile. Seriously. If you think someone's criticism is of no worth, or if you think that words from someone who is just there to entertain themselves, why listen?

I was going to go into this, but from your later post, I figure we pretty much agree:

Sorry to double-post, but just to make it clear. It's not that I defend the methodology that critics like John Solomon use - in fact, I think it's flawed, and I question its merits. The amount of improvement it /actually/ cultivates is a tad questionable, compared to other critique sites. Also, it creates a clique of people who are less concerned about artists' improvement, and are just there to feed their schadenfreude.

I am however, defending his freedom to do so, and the lack of filtering that the people who are hurt by him exercise.

I'm not arguing that Solomon and his like shouldn't be allowed to do what they do, but that they should mend their wicked ways of their own accord. =P
It's like not holding open the door for someone who's arms are full: You have every right to it, but that doesn't mean you should.

You, Kwill, Robin, or any moderator have failed to show this legality issue to me.
So point it out.

Point out where it specifically states sprite comics are against the ToS.

Can you point out where anyone specifically said sprite comics are against the ToS? The issue at hand was and is whether he ripped the sprites from somewhere else.

You can't, because there is none. As I posted below towards Kwill, the only statement there is a vague phrasing that states that Comic Genesis can take anything off the site if it thinks it will be "liable" for something. Basically, it's an argument that can be used to justify removing anything from the website.

Yup. One of those things are sprite comics that use copyright protected images. I'd wager because that isn't entirely clear, there's an additional warning tacked on.

If you had bothered reading his old stuff before he tore it down you would have seen what I was talking about. You don't seem to have bothered reading his comic at all.

He's specifically stating now that his comic is drawn by him. He specifically states that his old comic will be up again, once he's replaced the instances of sprites not made by him. Now, perhaps he's lying now and perhaps he was lying then. Based on the circumstantial evidence, the latter is more likely.

So, basically, once I prove you wrong you about how Robin is full of shit and playing The Almighty Moderator you turn around and say it's not relevant? It's relevant because ANYONE who is told what they are doing is against a ToS will immediately read up on the ToS. At least those with enough common sense to read fine prints and bring used cars to mechanics prior to purchase will.

Moving goal posts. We were never debating whether the ToS does or doesn't say that copying sprites is illegal, up until this point. We were debating whether you could be credited with him purging his records. Whether Robin correctly pointed out that sprite comics that copy other people's sprites are in violation of the ToS has no bearing on whether the comicker believed her or not. Likewise, a clever person can see how using copyrighted sprites is against the ToS.

Once again, Robin closed the topic and you assume her remarks are the world changer. There's no guarantee if this guy even read anything on the second page, and by then he had already stopped updating his comic prior to page 2 of the thread (Yes, I actually check that kind of thing. Last update was about his little D&D parody, which remained there even before Robin shut down the thread)

Not because she closed the topic, though.

The bottom line is there is no specific clause stating sprite comics are not allowed - only the ominous statement that Comic Genesis has the right to throw you off the site if they feel fit - and the point of all of this was to say even if the kid read what Robin said the likelihood of listening to her is slim to nil, especially when she's enforcing some unclear policy that anyone can see with two clicks of a mouse. Ask yourself - "Would I listen to her?"

Of course. She's a mod, and she speaks German. =D

[ShineDog]

Isnt his new art pretty much colour swaps with some minor tweaks? Because its no less of a ripoff for that. They arent completley original, in fact he says as much. "YES THEY ARE BASED OFF FF6 SPRITES BUT THEY ARE STILL ORIGINAL AND MINE" doesnt carry any weight with me, although I have no idea how it sits legally. But in my eyes its still lazy.

Regardless, This is where I forget his comic exists.

[Bustertheclown]

I would just like to respond to the whole "it ain't hurting nobody" and "you don't have to pay attention to it" lines of defense for webcomics. Y'know, grasshoppers are cute and harmless, and largely ignorable by themselves or in small groups. However, when there are swarms of them, they're described as Biblical plagues, and have been historically known to ruin entire economies. To that end, I feel that crappy webcomics are harmful, and I have personally been hurt by them.

If crappy webcomics were uncommon, or at least avoidable, then perhaps it would just be a case of "take the good with the bad" or "live and let live." However, they're unavoidable. They're everywhere. They clog up the system, and make it very hard to find any good comics. Worse yet, in my own experience, even if by some great miracle, I do happen to find a good webcomic, I'm often so exhausted from the search, that I've lost all desire to read the thing. This disillusion, directly caused by crappy webcomics, has turned to jade over the years, which had kept me from having any passion for comics whatsoever for the last year and a half, at least. Any activities centered around comics which I had performed in that year and a half were purely out of habit. I'd lost my passion for the one thing that I'd always been passionate about. Worse yet, up until about a month ago, I was perfectly happy to give up that passion, and leave cartooning behind for other forms of expression.

Luckily, I snapped myself out of it, by getting a table at a local con, and forcing myself back into working in small press comics. I've been very inspired since May. No thanks, of course, to the festering shithole that is 99% of webcomics, and the blustery pusbags that contribute to it. If I didn't feel I needed some sort of a web presence to continue my artistic career, I wouldn't put my work online at all. These days, I hate webcomics on principle, and most of the infantile assholes that make them. (present company mostly excluded, because, ironically, the CG forum community is my favorite online community) The abundance of horrible webcomics and the talentless dirtbags behind them almost ruined my relationship with my oldest love! Fuck them, and their ugly manga eyes and stilted emo writing! They deserve to be hurt, the way they hurt me.

I don't believe that every scratch and scribble should be posted. I don't believe that excuses and filler count as an "update". I don't believe that people should focus on their hit counters or livejournal responses to keep themselves motivated, or that some sort of numerical "popularity" makes those people or their work worthwhile. Creating comics, because that's what's in your blood, should be your motivation. Webcomics are missing an all-important element which is present in every other form of media; monetary investment, and the natural level of discrimination which that investment creates. Anywhere outside of the internet, people have the good sense to think before they publish, and to ask themselves, "should I really spend money on this?" Even when the crap makes it past the filter, the secondary filter of low-run and nil distribution for vanity press means that I'm not faced with the prospect of an inescapable vortex of lame when I seek entertainment. But, since the internet is free, we don't get that filter 'round these parts, and it's a damned shame. I would like to see a filter, even if it's in the form of trolls that make 14-year-olds cry.

[Guildmaster Van]

Anyone who has a problem with my actions as a moderator can take it up with me in PM - there's no need to turn it into an arguement in a thread, dredging up issues that I considered finished. I haven't gotten a PM from the comic creator you're talking about, so I suspect that Van, you're just being arguementative for the sake of it. If there was an issue, I would have heard about it from the comic creator.

I don't have a problem with your actions - I have problems with moderators. I have problem with authority because authority needs someone to be a problem. Quite honestly it doesn't matter who locked the topic - when moderators enforce arbitrary rules someone has to rebel and the first person to do it will almost always certainly be me.

I've quit a good paying job in the past over the simple fact of my supervisors literally asking me to lie to customers - do you think I'll tolerate any of this bullshit here on the internets?

As for the legality thing: ALL of the mods have been instructed by the admins to keep an eye on sprite comics that are pitched. Do you have access to the moderators forums, Van? Or say access to every conversation I've ever had with an admin member? You don't have a full picture of what's going on, so kindly stop acting like you do.

I don't care what what your full picture is. I say your picture is full of shit and you guys need to re-evaluate everything. Did anyone hire a fucking lawyer to review the ToS? I fucking hope so, because I can't stand a bunch of retarded amateurs trying to pass themselves off as a business with "rules" and "terms of service" that are clearly highly subjective and give enough leeway to a company to twist those subjective terms to exclude whatever they want. Either add a term of service stating that pixel art is permitted while sprites are not, or drop the damn subject altogether.

I offer you and the admins the chance to here and now justify yourselves on the subjects of sprites otherwise I must assume you people are simply doing whatever you want when you want without having any valid reasoning behind it until someone calls you out on it. I demand transparency!

Can you point out where anyone specifically said sprite comics are against the ToS? The issue at hand was and is whether he ripped the sprites from somewhere else.

You must have the Alzheimer's

Second of all: comicgenesis has a particular policy towards Sprite comics - that is to say, unless they're home made, they violate the terms of service.

KWill, I'm done with you
It has become a waste of my time to keep pointing out where you're wrong. This is the last response I have for you on this subject - if you intend to argue with me in the future do a better job to not be a boring mod lapdog that runs in circles chasing his tail.

[KWill]

Can you point out where anyone specifically said sprite comics are against the ToS? The issue at hand was and is whether he ripped the sprites from somewhere else.

You must have the Alzheimer's

Well, I am nearing that first quarter century some time next year...

Though I would be interested in how you read that sprite comics violate the terms of service in what you quoted:

Second of all: comicgenesis has a particular policy towards Sprite comics - that is to say, unless they're home made, they violate the terms of service.

Unless someone were to strike the bold part out, claiming that sentence says all sprite comics violate the ToS is factually wrong.

KWill, I'm done with you
It has become a waste of my time to keep pointing out where you're wrong. This is the last response I have for you on this subject - if you intend to argue with me in the future do a better job to not be a boring mod lapdog that runs in circles chasing his tail.

Debate settled then, I guess.

[Guildmaster Van]

I would just like to respond to the whole "it ain't hurting nobody" and "you don't have to pay attention to it" lines of defense for webcomics. Y'know, grasshoppers are cute and harmless, and largely ignorable by themselves or in small groups. However, when there are swarms of them, they're described as Biblical plagues, and have been historically known to ruin entire economies. To that end, I feel that crappy webcomics are harmful.

Best webcomic analogy.
Buster always has something interesting to say.

[Yeahduff]

Oh, that's so lame, Buster, if 14-year-olds killed your love of comics, it wasn't that strong anyway.

[Guildmaster Van]

Though I would be interested in how you read that sprite comics violate the terms of service in what you quoted:

Second of all: comicgenesis has a particular policy towards Sprite comics - that is to say, unless they're home made, they violate the terms of service.

Unless someone were to strike the bold part out, claiming that sentence says all sprite comics violate the ToS is factually wrong.

Ooh, this piqued my interest actually. I guess I'll give you one more ounce of my time before I take off.

Here's the part you're forgetting - who decides what is homemade? What is homemade? What is not homemade? Define homemade.
If it IS "homemade" (IE not a game sprite and was created by hand by the artist) then the correct term for it is pixel art, not sprite, and then it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. If it is a sprite from a game that has been redone, then how can it be homemade? A homemade sprite comic is a contradiction of terms, meaning Robin effectively stated that sprite comics are against the ToS. 8-Bit Theater is a sprite comic, while Diesel Sweeties is pixel art - this should be a clear comparison for even the simplest of minds.

You fucking fail it, KWill, so fucking hard.