AdderXYU wrote:My hostility is toward both. But the fact of the matter is, if the "designer" had a shred of self respect, they wouldn't have put this in the derby. This is about basic worth.
Lets say you're auditioning actresses for a role. One young woman comes through and blows the roof off. They tap into the emotion of the reading you give them, they're genuine and likable in your questioning, they look like how you imagined the character. You think it's all over. But maybe an hour of auditions later, another girl skips in, wrinkling her nose and looking totally beguilingly cute. It's nice for a moment, but then she reads her script and can't escape the poles of monotone and valley girl. Interviewing her is worse... she doesn't grasp a second of what you ask, and the things she does think she knows are even more embarrassing. You mark her off the list, but the others around you praise her. They even insist that the auditions stop and she gets the part. That's what this is. This shouldn't even be an argument. There should be no opinion in the way of the simple fact: this is not good enough, it never will be good enough, we shouldn't allow it to be good enough, and everyone who thinks it is good enough is not fit to be selecting. There is real money on the line here, and real respect to be lost for the what, maybe 10 legit artists still bothering with this site? You're hiring someone who not only seems untrainable, but who is showing no effort even, and no desire to improve. Someone who not only is deficient on execution, but incredibly deficient on ideas. I know, some of you dolts spend all day on woot while working, so maybe that's why you like rewarding zero effort with a paycheck, but is that really the majority?
It's nice that you alert us to your coming by saying "Troll spotted," though.
Your entire analogy is COMPLETELY flawed because you don't assume that the valley girl is just getting into the part. Furthermore, likening shirt.woot to an audition for a role is just a poor analogy overall. Designers aren't auditioning to fit into a predetermined design. They are given a theme, but that's not the same thing AT ALL. It's not like reading for a part at that point, wrecking your analogy completely. Your argument would hold if the derby each week was "Okay, you have to depict a happy person dealing with a grumpy person. GO." With how intentionally vague the derby descriptions are, you can't liken it to reading for a part at all.
To put it in woot terms, sekiyoku has shown that they are capable of actually designing stellar work that wouldn't draw your criticism of "b-b-b-but stick figures."
Why does this apply to your analogy? Because stick figures fit the concept well, and I still think they fit the concept BETTER than any other avenue of design simply because of their simplicity.
To frame it in a different light, just look at some of the roles some people in Hollywood have taken. Will Ferrell is a fantastic example. He's been in good comedies, downright terrible comedies, and Stranger Than Fiction, where he played his part BRILLIANTLY. To cherrypick an example from his work and then declare him a terrible actor would be ridiculous.
In other words, it's all about range. Sekiyoku has displayed range in designing. The artist isn't just about all stick figures all the time. If a designer fogged that never did anything better than stick figures, your argument would apply.
It's abundantly clear that this shirt fogged because of the concept, not the artistic execution of it.
AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.
The rest of your post is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. Yes, real money is on the line. I know the connection isn't always there, but first and foremost, shirt.woot is a BUSINESS. More often than not, the more votes a shirt has, the more people will buy it. The reverse is also true. Some of my favorite designs languish at the bottom of every derby, but that's because there are clear trends for how people vote and buy on shirt.woot. If you want to beat the drum for changing the voting system, start beating THAT drum instead of calling artists out. It'll be a lot more productive in the long run. I'll let Sekiyoku speak for his or her self, but I'm pretty sure they aren't going to feel ruined as an artist when they walk away with a print and some money because Adder told them stick figures are lazy.
Which brings me to my NEXT point: respect. Really? What are you meaning here, exactly? The artists aren't going to lose any sort of respect, unless you're making the terribly flawed argument that if stick figures were banned, then REAL art would be in the fog because, news flash, that's simply not true. I mean, maybe if we went by Adder's exceedingly high, arbitrary standards, then our artist corps wouldn't have to fear for their respect. Otherwise, there is no loss of respect. They didn't lose because they are bad artists. They didn't lose because their designs are poor. They lost because voters didn't vote for them. I really doubt anyone is going to think any less of the artistic entries or their designers because they didn't fog. And if they do, that's a shortcoming of the person making that assumption, not the system itself.
Finally, this sounds poor, but shirt.woot isn't the only pony in town, and when it comes to "artistic" shirts, it is a FARCRY from the best pony in town. After a period of time, the artists are free to take their designs elsewhere. A rejection or not winning a derby on woot isn't the end of the line. If there is a market for their shirts and designs, they will be bought. It's that simple.
Like I said, your REAL issue here is the voting system. I'd love to make it a system where, when you vote, you are locked into buying that shirt, essentially setting yourself up to be automatically out $30.
And just to address any criticism of this wall of text, I'm bored, don't want to study, and am rather tired of Adder's nonsense.
