VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:Lol, I think that for me this is becoming a case of "Someone is wrong on the internet" and I have this almost patriotic urge to try to correct everyone. I think it would be better if all the plaintiffs were at least very young, but from what I gather plenty of them are legal adults who should be able to take a little criticism without the fabric of their self esteem coming unwoven (or at least giving that impression by what they say).
VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:I noticed that, too. I think some people dont' realize that not every webcomic reviewer is part of some Bad Webcomics Wiki Borg operating under the loving wing of John Solomon.
VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:Also I kind of want to point out (to the folks with issues) that no one would be complaining saying you don't have the "authority" to review comics if you were giving entirely positive reviews. If you said "This is a great great comic with no considerable flaws!" I think they'd find you a perfectly qualified reviewer.
VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:Lol, I think that for me this is becoming a case of "Someone is wrong on the internet" and I have this almost patriotic urge to try to correct everyone. I think it would be better if all the plaintiffs were at least very young, but from what I gather plenty of them are legal adults who should be able to take a little criticism without the fabric of their self esteem coming unwoven (or at least giving that impression by what they say).
RobboAKAscooby wrote:Sadly it's the society the world has created, thanks in no small part to the internet, people believe they are "special" and that anything negative they're told is wrong (I get this all the time at work from customers) and it's only gonna get worse with the next generation...
LibertyCabbage wrote:I'll be posting interviews on my blog on the next couple Tuesdays. One's with the CG forums' horniest member, and the other's with a webcartoonist who's kinda famous.
Cope wrote:LibertyCabbage wrote:I'll be posting interviews on my blog on the next couple Tuesdays. One's with the CG forums' horniest member, and the other's with a webcartoonist who's kinda famous.
Is it sad that I thought you meant McDuffies before I remembered that interview you did with me all those years ago?
VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:I think some people don't understand what a "review" means, and think that it is entirely valueless no matter what unless it's 100% supportive buttpatting of the artist![]()
VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:As for having the "authority" to write reviews, that's definitely relevant a lot of the time, and it's probably gonna be a bigger issue after I start linking to my awful old webcomics soon. But I always think to myself, why do I need "authority" and credentials to post my opinions online, when creators never need any sort of legitimacy to justify posting their comics online? According to conventional wisdom, it's okay for any random person with an Internet connection who can check an "I read the T&C" box to post a crappy webcomic, but God forbid you write anything unfavorable about their work unless you have a master's degree in cartooning, an awesome webcomic with 100,000 readers, and your own 12-step program on how to be famous and successful.
I think you're more interested in these "plaintiffs" than I am. If someone wants to hurl childish insults and act like their cute little opinions mean something, I don't really care. If I had more time on my hands then maybe I could respond to all the haters, but I don't, so when I do choose to respond to someone, it's only when they're actually being mature and respectful.
McDuffies wrote:Have they finished art school? Have they gone through the kind of rite of passage that published comic artists do through? Have they been chasing published artists on conventions to show them their work? Do their comics have to pass through any kind of editor before getting published? Have they ever been published anywhere except by themselves? Have they ever gone through any kind of selection anywhere?
Anyways, it's ridiculous that often the sole reason they can publish their comics anywhere is internet's lack of selectiveness, but then when they get criticized by an online critic, suddenly they're not ok with it anymore.
One thing you can do if you want to bait them, though, is add a P.S about how they reacted to criticism.
LibertyCabbage wrote:Writing: A bland, newspaper-style webcomic like Critters might appeal to the elderly and the easily amused,
Wingmen's on a level beneath that, not even demonstrating the basic storytelling skills required to deliver a joke.
peterabnny wrote:Hey, thanks for the plug, LC!
Unfortunately, I lost the elderly demographic when I made a disparaging comment about Betty White, and now the AARP is hounding my ass for saying something bad about a beloved American icon. Sheesh - who'd have thought those old people would be so mean?!Fortunately, I still have the easily amused crowd, which encompasses a great many people, so I got that going for me.
You mean you found a comic that sucks WORSE THAN MINE?! WOO HOOOOO!That must have taken some doing!
You know, I was just thinking - there's so much drama and flaming going on in this thread whenever you rip someone to pieces, but I can't help but think so much of it could have been avoided if you had a little more truth in advertising in your subject heading. Instead of "I'll Review Your Webcomic" you should have had: "I'll Shit On Your Webcomic."
peterabnny wrote:You know, I was just thinking - there's so much drama and flaming going on in this thread whenever you rip someone to pieces, but I can't help but think so much of it could have been avoided if you had a little more truth in advertising in your subject heading. Instead of "I'll Review Your Webcomic" you should have had: "I'll Shit On Your Webcomic."
LibertyCabbage wrote:Anyways, Webcomic Above's coming up really soon, so you should probably shift your focus to that if you're so concerned about what other people think about your webcomic. And you can even review one of the webcomics I linked in my signature if it'd make you feel better.
RobboAKAscooby wrote:LibertyCabbage wrote:Anyways, Webcomic Above's coming up really soon, so you should probably shift your focus to that if you're so concerned about what other people think about your webcomic. And you can even review one of the webcomics I linked in my signature if it'd make you feel better.
By next Wednesday at the latest I promise...
LibertyCabbage wrote:No problem! It's obviously not in a favorable light, but I think most webcartoonists would agree that any publicity's helpful, even if it's bad publicity. And maybe somebody will click the link and think to themselves, "Hey, I actually really like this."
Of course, I could've just found a link somewhere to an online version of Garfield or something to represent "newspaper-style comics," but it made more sense at the time to link to a webcomic.
Keep in mind, though, that if any of the good webcomic-style comics submitted their work to a more conservative publisher (e.g., newspapers, maybe children's material), they'd quickly get turned down for being too "edgy" or "weird" or "offensive." In that case, that publisher's deliberately looking for something bland. Even a wildly popular webcomic like Penny Arcade probably isn't suitable for a newspaper, because so many newspaper readers are older and wouldn't get the gaming culture and references.
The negative reviews are the most exciting and get the most commentary, but if you've been paying attention to this thread, you'd notice that I actually do a lot of positive and mixed reviews as well.
Anyways, Webcomic Above's coming up really soon, so you should probably shift your focus to that if you're so concerned about what other people think about your webcomic. And you can even review one of the webcomics I linked in my signature if it'd make you feel better.
peterabnny wrote:You know, I should. Before I was still gunshy about participating in that thread, and debating whether or not I wanted to do it. But you know what? Eff that... I've already stared creative death square in its black maw after spending time in your crucible; what should I have to worry about?
oxypepePreshy wrote:It is critical that your house not really give an impression of animals, regardless of how a lot you're keen on Fido or Cosy. Places that animals are living should be stored meticulously clean up. If you should, melt away a number of incense, placed potpourri throughout strategic spots and take off as well as substitute and carpet which has been dirty. It is quite challenging to market virtually any house which has dog odours as well as deposit.Put any chair or counter nearby the door in case individuals need to eliminate their particular shoes or boots prior to vacationing your premises. The lack of a spot to take a seat is indeed a turn-off, specifically in vacation resort market segments along with aging communities.Perform small fixes. Numerous sellers overlook the should do edit vehicle repairs for example caulking the bathtub, fixing the dripping tap, traveling unfastened claws into patio panels, and many others. Caring for these minor particulars removes the biggest doubt in which customers have after they see one thing incorrect; What in addition is actually completely wrong using the place?
VeryCuddlyCornpone wrote:I wonder if some spammers are just dream-posters, because reading the posts always sounds like the "dialogue" that comprises my dreams. They make perfect sense in-dream and in context, but if you were to write them down they sound like those spam posts.
oh my god
you guys maybe i'm the spammer
Return to Technique Tips and Tricks
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest