Shirt.Woot

Dear wooters,
I am not posting this for attention as some may feel. I am not posting this because I am being threatened or held at gun point. I am however deeply and regretfully sorry for posting a design slandering another artist. I was under misinformation regarding this artist. I was fueled with anger for losing because I was under the mindset this artist was a cheater and was playing the system to bolster votes and cheat the derby. I was wrong. So this is my way to publically apologize for being a jerk and an ass. I am truly sorry. You don't deserve the hate brought towards you and I just added to it with my design and comments. I however want to congratulate you on placing 2nd this last week. That's what I should have done instead of posting the design.

With all sincerity,
midgerock

Takes a big man to admit his mistakes. I don't have any clue about the goings on around here but I applaud you for owning up. Well played.

This post = GMV.

Stuff always goes down when I'm away from my computer for days at a time and my wooting consists of what little I can do from my phone.

Wha' happen?

jmmbell1987 wrote:Stuff always goes down when I'm away from my computer for days at a time and my wooting consists of what little I can do from my phone.

Wha' happen?

He's probably talking about this. Props to shirtwhat.com, without whom I likely never would've found that entry.

Frankly, Midge, I think you were right about the entry when you submitted it, and I'm still unsure why you changed your mind. If you don't want to address it in public, feel free to PM me b/c if the person in question is truly being railed against unfairly, I'd like to hear about it.

Never been afraid to admit I was wrong.

midgerock wrote:Dear wooters,
...I was under misinformation regarding this artist. I was fueled with anger for losing because I was under the mindset this artist was a cheater and was playing the system to bolster votes and cheat the derby. I was wrong.

How do you know this? Please feel free to let everyone how you came to know that you were wrong?

I think that would help stop "unnecessary" hatred.

To be clear, I was running under a the supposition that someone was cheating and using fake accounts to bolster votes. This conspiracy theory has been propagated for a long time. Woot previously has made announcements to the extent that he is not cheating but as time goes by people forget, move on or don't want to believe "the establishment". I am newer to woot than most and bought into the conspiracy theory and as a result ran with that context when I lost. But when someone from Woot made it clear to me that this was not the case that indeed this artist has been playing legitimately and not cheating that people, real people are voting for his designs I realized how much of an error I had made in slandering and fueling the fire to these propagated lies. It just needs to die. I truly regret my actions. And hope others can learn from my mistake and take with them the knowledge that this artist isn't cheating. I know people still don't like the fact he wins constantly and would like to see art from other artists. My hope in that is I as an artist and others would take up this challenge and meet from a different angle and not through lies and mud-slinging which I regretfully participated in.
I need to focus on my art as many have advised which I am going to do and maybe provided a more competitive product that might just win. I hope that clarifies my change in my tune.

It takes a lot of passion and effort to compete in the derby as often as you do, midge. You're only human to get frustrated and taken in by the rumors.

All this unfounded conflict isn't healthy though, so I'm very glad Woot helped put your mind at rest and you were classy enough to apologize. I sincerely hope it helps more people put this in the past.

Onwards and upwards. :^)

man, i hope all those rumours aren't about me!

I still believe he is cheating. I am convinced I have found a way to cheat the system and it would be undetectable. It really isn't that hard. It frustrates me that even his weakest of designs stomps some amazing and very wearable designs. One day I will try my theory and see if it is actually possible, but not to the extent of actually ruining the derby. personally i still feel that your entry was just because its the same design over and over and it wins over and over... unless woot wants 500 designs of freaking rabbits and death and shiny swirls they need to start making this a little more worthwhile for artists who deserve some prints! If I knew I'd make 40k a year drawing one image every week and not even having to change it up at all, I'd do it.

panderb wrote:I still believe he is cheating. I am convinced I have found a way to cheat the system and it would be undetectable. It really isn't that hard. It frustrates me that even his weakest of designs stomps some amazing and very wearable designs. One day I will try my theory and see if it is actually possible, but not to the extent of actually ruining the derby. personally i still feel that your entry was just because its the same design over and over and it wins over and over... unless woot wants 500 designs of freaking rabbits and death and shiny swirls they need to start making this a little more worthwhile for artists who deserve some prints! If I knew I'd make 40k a year drawing one image every week and not even having to change it up at all, I'd do it.

I'm a big fan of your one and only derby entry. I think you have the chops to make it in this crazy design world.

panderb wrote:I still believe he is cheating. I am convinced I have found a way to cheat the system and it would be undetectable. It really isn't that hard. It frustrates me that even his weakest of designs stomps some amazing and very wearable designs. One day I will try my theory and see if it is actually possible, but not to the extent of actually ruining the derby. personally i still feel that your entry was just because its the same design over and over and it wins over and over... unless woot wants 500 designs of freaking rabbits and death and shiny swirls they need to start making this a little more worthwhile for artists who deserve some prints! If I knew I'd make 40k a year drawing one image every week and not even having to change it up at all, I'd do it.

*facepalm*

i love your stuff midge, and i vote for it every time...i think the reason why designs like yours and some of mine dont do well is because we make more "risque" designs, they are more edgy and tend to alienate certain people. but that is what i enjoy drawing and i wont stop just because its not the average wooters cup of tea =) just know that even though your design might not be popular here, woot is just a small piece of shirt designing, and its an even smaller piece of the art world. there are millions of people who enjoy the type of art you do, so please, if not for me =), keep it up for them.

I think when a rumor is repeated enough, people start to believe it must be true. If it weren't, why would so many people believe it?

Good for you for moving beyond that. I wish more people would wait for actual evidence before condemning others.

geekfactor12 wrote:I think when a rumor is repeated enough, people start to believe it must be true. If it weren't, why would so many people believe it?

Good for you for moving beyond that. I wish more people would wait for actual evidence before condemning others.

I am not the one that easily believes in rumors. But, when i see certain designs survive the danger zone promptly between 11:55AM and 12:05 PM CST every Monday for over a year, i just have to doubt it.

If one of you guys or woot! can give a logical explanation for it, i will happily shut up. Why would general public, who wants to buy a $15 penguin shirt will only do so at that exact time?

chennai8 wrote:I am not the one that easily believes in rumors. But, when i see certain designs survive the danger zone promptly between 11:55AM and 12:05 PM CST every Monday for over a year, i just have to doubt it.

If one of you guys or woot! can give a logical explanation for it, i will happily shut up. Why would general public, who wants to buy a $15 penguin shirt will only do so at that exact time?

Please keep in mind there are at least 2 different 'issues' here.

One is that tees are kept in the reckoning by shenanigans.

A second is that similar means are used to get tees to win.

Now...there's no doubt that last minute purchases have been made to certain tees to keep them on the Reckoning. However, there isn't anything dishonest about that. Any artist here can buy 10 of their own shirts a week and do a lot to keep the shirt on the list. I expect it would be hard on the pocket book, but who knows. But, it can be done. And there isn't anything that says a user can't have more than ONE account. I myself have 2. I don't use the second account to vote, but have used it to buy more than one (or three) items from woot.com. It's not illegal, it's not even something woot cares about...both accounts are in my 'real' name, have the same address, etc. Woot has made efforts to ensure that only REAL sales are used to determine reckoning stats, but who those sales are to? Why would they limit that? Fairness? Fairness to who?

Now...for an artist to create multiple accounts and vote for their own design...well, I suspect the accused isn't the only one who has done that, really. I don't say I'd respect it, but woot staff indicate it isn't happening on the accused level. I've seen several voting accounts created just to vote on a submission by a friend or child or something similar...no one complains until that shirt wins. But it likely didn't win by 2 or 3 votes!

So. This thread is about Derby activity...not the Reckoning. At least, as I see it.

panderb wrote:I still believe he is cheating. I am convinced I have found a way to cheat the system and it would be undetectable. It really isn't that hard. It frustrates me that even his weakest of designs stomps some amazing and very wearable designs. One day I will try my theory and see if it is actually possible, but not to the extent of actually ruining the derby. personally i still feel that your entry was just because its the same design over and over and it wins over and over... unless woot wants 500 designs of freaking rabbits and death and shiny swirls they need to start making this a little more worthwhile for artists who deserve some prints! If I knew I'd make 40k a year drawing one image every week and not even having to change it up at all, I'd do it.

Do it next week. Ruin the derby. Seriously, if it's possible, do it, expose the flaw. It will only garner attention if you can change the outcome of a derby. Then the flaw can be fixed. Do it.

Just do it.

chennai8 wrote:I am not the one that easily believes in rumors. But, when i see certain designs survive the danger zone promptly between 11:55AM and 12:05 PM CST every Monday for over a year, i just have to doubt it.

If one of you guys or woot! can give a logical explanation for it, i will happily shut up. Why would general public, who wants to buy a $15 penguin shirt will only do so at that exact time?

being a fan of some of the artist here on facebook, usually before a design of theirs is reckoned they send out a "last chance to own!" link to everyone...im sure that their fans want to keep their shirt alive and could easily be responsible for why shirts are quickly saved. not to mention that if my mom thought my shirt was about to dissappear she would probably order ten and give them as presents, because thats what mothers do ;)

Mavyn wrote:Please keep in mind there are at least 2 different 'issues' here.

One is that tees are kept in the reckoning by shenanigans.

A second is that similar means are used to get tees to win.

Now...there's no doubt that last minute purchases have been made to certain tees to keep them on the Reckoning. However, there isn't anything dishonest about that. Any artist here can buy 10 of their own shirts a week and do a lot to keep the shirt on the list. I expect it would be hard on the pocket book, but who knows. But, it can be done. And there isn't anything that says a user can't have more than ONE account. I myself have 2. I don't use the second account to vote, but have used it to buy more than one (or three) items from woot.com. It's not illegal, it's not even something woot cares about...both accounts are in my 'real' name, have the same address, etc. Woot has made efforts to ensure that only REAL sales are used to determine reckoning stats, but who those sales are to? Why would they limit that? Fairness? Fairness to who?

Now...for an artist to create multiple accounts and vote for their own design...well, I suspect the accused isn't the only one who has done that, really. I don't say I'd respect it, but woot staff indicate it isn't happening on the accused level. I've seen several voting accounts created just to vote on a submission by a friend or child or something similar...no one complains until that shirt wins. But it likely didn't win by 2 or 3 votes!

So. This thread is about Derby activity...not the Reckoning. At least, as I see it.

Thanks! I understand that this thread is not about Reckoning, But when everyone says it's all lies and that there is nothing wrong on this site, I think let's address all here and now and move on.

I still think it's just unfair to all the artist who has shirts between 15 and 20 on the Reckoning list on a Monday morning. I'm not an artist, but i feel for them, But when victims themselves have so much love for that person, who am i to care?

megsck wrote:being a fan of some of the artist here on facebook, usually before a design of theirs is reckoned they send out a "last chance to own!" link to everyone...im sure that their fans want to keep their shirt alive and could easily be responsible for why shirts are quickly saved. not to mention that if my mom thought my shirt was about to dissappear she would probably order ten and give them as presents, because thats what mothers do ;)

I'm really not trying to be snarky or mean here. But do you really think your mother will do that every week for a year?

midgerock wrote:Dear wooters,
I am not posting this for attention as some may feel. I am not posting this because I am being threatened or held at gun point. I am however deeply and regretfully sorry for posting a design slandering another artist. I was under misinformation regarding this artist. I was fueled with anger for losing because I was under the mindset this artist was a cheater and was playing the system to bolster votes and cheat the derby. I was wrong. So this is my way to publically apologize for being a jerk and an ass. I am truly sorry. You don't deserve the hate brought towards you and I just added to it with my design and comments. I however want to congratulate you on placing 2nd this last week. That's what I should have done instead of posting the design.

With all sincerity,
midgerock

Way to go. It takes a lot of guts to do this; it's not fun, but it is liberating.

chennai8 wrote:I'm really not trying to be snarky or mean here. But do you really think your mother will do that every week for a year?

The reckoning is a strange business. I cannot fathom how a certain shirt has stayed in the top half of the reckoning for three years--it just doesn't make sense to me. But do I think that there's some dedicated group of people buying many copies of the same shirt every single week to keep it afloat, absolutely not. And to me, it's easier to understand shirts barely surviving for ~50 weeks rather than thriving for ~150.

While I'm sure that most (all?) artists have bought multiple copies of their designs at some point for various legitimate reasons, the reason that I think very popular shirts (and if you go through the reckoning history, it's not just shirts from a certain artist) seem to float out of the reckoning at key times each week is that it's easy to forget how many people check woot every week (a lot) and how few shirts it takes to pull out of the danger zone (~1-5). Keep in mind that this is all just conjecture, but given what I just said, it could take quite a while before every person and their individual fickle buying habits are satisfied--knowing that there's a lot of interest in the shirt in the first place. I know this is all very hand-wavy and vague, but it's enough to convince me that while the reckoning can be extremely frustrating and weird and glitchy, everything is above board.

Mavyn wrote:Now...there's no doubt that last minute purchases have been made to certain tees to keep them on the Reckoning. However, there isn't anything dishonest about that. Any artist here can buy 10 of their own shirts a week and do a lot to keep the shirt on the list.

Just wanted to back this up. I had a shirt in Reckoning for a long time (Cake is a Liar), and there were a couple of weeks in the middle there where my own last minute purchases might have saved it. I don't think buying at the last minute is wrong. But if we're considering that "cheating," then I think a whooooole lot of artists would be equally guilty of it.

As before, I'd say the onus is on woot to either put up or shut up (as many like to say). There are several facts as many can attest to.

1. You can have multiple accounts on the same credit card. This is done in part so that families can make their own purchases. However, there's nothing says that my wife, my grandma, me two nieces and six kids who all live in the same household even exist.

2. You don't even have to pretend that the alternate accounts are for legitimate reasons. I have multiple voting accounts. Many others I know have multiple voting accounts. Woot knows and doesn't care.

3. You can vote with as many accounts as you want. I've done so. Others have done so. It's nothing new. You can make one purchase, change the credit card info. Use that same credit card to set up another account, etc ad nauseum if you so chose.

4. Many many derbies have been decided by less than 20 votes. Many of those have been by less than 5. It matters.

5. I have very little doubt woot told midge that said designer isn't cheating the system. He isn't by their standards because they don't consider making multiple accounts cheating. Make as many as you want. They won't stop you.

geekfactor12 wrote:Just wanted to back this up. I had a shirt in Reckoning for a long time (Cake is a Liar), and there were a couple of weeks in the middle there where my own last minute purchases might have saved it. I don't think buying at the last minute is wrong. But if we're considering that "cheating," then I think a whooooole lot of artists would be equally guilty of it.

It's been painfully obvious that this has been going on for a long time. I can't say for a fact but it appears to be relatively new and mostly by artists who never would have done so in the past because they got tired of their work reckoning because ramy has the cash to buy his shirts back in as often as he wants.

There's nothing illegal about it and as it stands woot doesn't really care since a sale is a sale. What is troubling is when you then turn around and sell those shirts on conventions as some have reported. Woot is essentially paying you to create your merchandise (if you charge $13 or more). That in and of itself isn't illegal either but it flies directly in the face of what the reckoning is actually supposed to be.

Johndis5 wrote:Do it next week. Ruin the derby. Seriously, if it's possible, do it, expose the flaw. It will only garner attention if you can change the outcome of a derby. Then the flaw can be fixed. Do it.

Just do it.

I would, but I don't have that kind of money, it would cost thousands... granted, if I won two times, I'm sure I could do it.

chennai8 wrote:I'm really not trying to be snarky or mean here. But do you really think your mother will do that every week for a year?

i was mostly making a joke about my mom...but in all honesty, yes...yes my mother would do that, actually it would probably be my dad, when i had my first movie credit, he bought out all the seats in the local theatre and gave them to people so he could brag about his daughter. he's very proud of me =)

sonofsevenless wrote:It's been painfully obvious that this has been going on for a long time. I can't say for a fact but it appears to be relatively new and mostly by artists who never would have done so in the past because they got tired of their work reckoning because ramy has the cash to buy his shirts back in as often as he wants.

As someone who's been around since Shirt.Woot launched, I can attest that people were making last minute buys long before Ramy showed up. It's been a known thing pretty much since the Reckoning started. You can dislike how it works, but to blame Ramy for that isn't very accurate. Most artists want to see their designs sell for as long as possible (for the money, yeah, but also because they love the pieces they've created), and they'd act to save those works if they could regardless of whose designs they're up against.

sonofsevenless wrote:As before, I'd say the onus is on woot to either put up or shut up (as many like to say). There are several facts as many can attest to.

1. You can have multiple accounts on the same credit card. This is done in part so that families can make their own purchases. However, there's nothing says that my wife, my grandma, me two nieces and six kids who all live in the same household even exist.

2. You don't even have to pretend that the alternate accounts are for legitimate reasons. I have multiple voting accounts. Many others I know have multiple voting accounts. Woot knows and doesn't care.

3. You can vote with as many accounts as you want. I've done so. Others have done so. It's nothing new. You can make one purchase, change the credit card info. Use that same credit card to set up another account, etc ad nauseum if you so chose.

4. Many many derbies have been decided by less than 20 votes. Many of those have been by less than 5. It matters.

5. I have very little doubt woot told midge that said designer isn't cheating the system. He isn't by their standards because they don't consider making multiple accounts cheating. Make as many as you want. They won't stop you.

im pretty sure the point is that woot did put up. someone at woot has made the statement that he isnt cheating. what do they have to do? show you his credit card purchases? im pretty sure they can tell if different credit cards with different names have been buying stuff, and dont start saying that he has multiple credit cards now...the prize money for this derby isnt worth that kind of commiment to cheating and fraud.

it seems to me no matter what anyone says, woot or otherwise, someone will alway make an excuse to hate on ramyb for some reason. that kind of hate, is scary and i dont understand it.

Yes people have [access to] multiple accounts. I would wager that well over half of the popular artists and regular posters who have been here for any length of time fit in this category. (I am one).

Yes people have bought shirts at the last minute largely to save a shirt. I would wager that at least two thirds of the popular artists and regular posters who have been here for any length of time fit in this category. (I am one).

Woot does not think these two things in and of themselves are particularly wrong. I don't really disagree with them.

Neither of these facts mean that anyone is actively cheating. Woot has made statements that they have examined the votes that particular entries have received, and that multiple accounts were not used for voting when examined.

Does this mean nothing at all funny goes on? Of course not. Does it mean that it's impossible to cheat? Of course not. But it definitely means that the artists that have any suspicion surrounding them are highly unlikely to be doing any cheating.

Nobody (who cares) in my family uses the internet...and none of them like art..or tshirts... :{

U people with moms and dads who Woot are poopoo heads! XP

;_;

I know I've felt a bit despondent about the way the reckoning can work in those last few minutes on a Monday, but yeah, that's a separate issue and there's nothing in the rules about buying your own shirt. I can see that it's not dishonest. Once your shirt is gone you'll never have the chance to get more, so if you're an artist who sells art and tees and stuff at conventions, I guess it makes business sense to stock up?

(There aren't really convention circuits where I live)

As for the main issue, vote rigging, I wholewheartedly agree with Geekfactor12 about how rumors can snowball into facts.

That's partly due to the way different styles seem to be received by the voters, and which may not make sense to everyone. That would maybe make for an interesting conversation in a different thread?

megsck wrote:im pretty sure the point is that woot did put up. someone at woot has made the statement that he isnt cheating. what do they have to do? show you his credit card purchases? im pretty sure they can tell if different credit cards with different names have been buying stuff, and dont start saying that he has multiple credit cards now...the prize money for this derby isnt worth that kind of commiment to cheating and fraud.

it seems to me no matter what anyone says, woot or otherwise, someone will alway make an excuse to hate on ramyb for some reason. that kind of hate, is scary and i dont understand it.

This is commonly thrown around that it really isn't that much money or it would take way more than artists here could possibly make. It's false pure and simple.

Right around a year after ramy came here I figured I'd sit down and actually look and see what kind of money he actually had to throw around. At that point, without taking into account all of his shirts post first day sales, a very conservative estimate of his earnings was around $130,000 for the year.

With the massive increase in sales of reckoned shirts I am quite positive he's over $300,000 now. The $1000 prize is chump change. It's a drop in the bucket if you can stay on the reckoning.

For example. The Binge won $1000. It's made over $70,000 since then. This is big money and big business. If you don't print you can't see that cash. Anyone who tries to push the money aside and pretend like an extra $150k a year isn't a big deal either shouldn't be shopping at woot or is lying to themself.

bassanimation wrote:Nobody (who cares) in my family uses the internet...and none of them like art..or tshirts... :{

U people with moms and dads who Woot are poopoo heads! XP

;_;

I don't know, the only one in my family that has an account here is my mom, and she has told may on multiple accounts that she does not like my art... well most of it ( She did buy "The Tag Along"), and rarely votes for my designs.

***Don't misjudge my mother though. She is very supportive of my art and my line of work (if I personally asked her to vote, she would). She is just honest and likes to voice her opinion.***

You still jealous of me and my poopy head?

bassanimation wrote:Nobody (who cares) in my family uses the internet...and none of them like art..or tshirts... :{

U people with moms and dads who Woot are poopoo heads! XP

;_;

since i probably wont have anything printed my mom will buy your shirts.

sonofsevenless, I don't know whether the technical side of what you're saying about user accounts is true, I would imagine Woot is much more aware of voting security than that. I respect that you're trying to approach this situation from an engineers' point of view, taking a cold, clinical look for flaws in the system.

However it seems to me that your analytical approach breaks down when it comes to any specific artist. You're assuming too much to think that just because something might be possible, that a particular person is doing that or has any reason to need to. We see week after week, Ramy's shirts selling extraordinarily well. People pay good money all year round to buy Ramy shirts (quite aside from the reckoning shenanigans). Why is it stretch to see that reflected in the voting? That's what I don't get.

Ramy makes popular shirts. He's going to get a lot of votes in a popularity contest.

I can see why plenty of people don't recognise the value in his cartoon animal style, but clearly a large number of other people do too. Even without Woot's assurances on the matter I wonder why it ever became a mystery where the votes come from.

Spiritgreen wrote:sonofsevenless, I don't know whether the technical side of what you're saying about user accounts is true, I would imagine Woot is much more aware of voting security than that. I respect that you're trying to approach this situation from an engineers' point of view, taking a cold, clinical look for flaws in the system.

However it seems to me that your analytical approach breaks down when it comes to any specific artist. You're assuming too much to think that just because something might be possible, that a particular person is doing that or has any reason to need to. We see week after week, Ramy's shirts selling extraordinarily well. People pay good money all year round to buy Ramy shirts (quite aside from the reckoning shenanigans). Why is it stretch to see that reflected in the voting? That's what I don't get.

Ramy makes popular shirts. He's going to get a lot of votes in a popularity contest.

I can see why plenty of people don't recognise the value in his cartoon animal style, but clearly a large number of other people do too. Even without Woot's assurances on the matter I wonder why it ever became a mystery where the votes come from.

I suspect that's more from the myopia of a forum posting regular. People seem to think that most of the people who vote also comment, and since very few commentators (other than those who defend and get in the 'iz gud art cuz i like it' arguments) rave his work, people presume 'real' members aren't voting.

Simple truth from most of the wooters I know...they don't post in the forums. They don't read the comments. They just vote and go on their merry way.

Spiritgreen wrote:sonofsevenless, I don't know whether the technical side of what you're saying about user accounts is true, I would imagine Woot is much more aware of voting security than that. I respect that you're trying to approach this situation from an engineers' point of view, taking a cold, clinical look for flaws in the system.

However it seems to me that your analytical approach breaks down when it comes to any specific artist. You're assuming too much to think that just because something might be possible, that a particular person is doing that or has any reason to need to. We see week after week, Ramy's shirts selling extraordinarily well. People pay good money all year round to buy Ramy shirts (quite aside from the reckoning shenanigans). Why is it stretch to see that reflected in the voting? That's what I don't get.

Ramy makes popular shirts. He's going to get a lot of votes in a popularity contest.

I can see why plenty of people don't recognise the value in his cartoon animal style, but clearly a large number of other people do too. Even without Woot's assurances on the matter I wonder why it ever became a mystery where the votes come from.

its because a lot of people think that their opinion is the majority...that happens a lot on this site...but thats only my opinion, which is obviously a minority =P

sonofsevenless wrote:...a very conservative estimate of his earnings was around $130,000 for the year...

If your numbers are accurate, it more likely supports that cheating is not happening. We know woot looks into these things, and noone would risk that losing that kind of money regardless of ethics.

I'm not going to remark on whether or not he's cheating, but one thing I think is important is that winning by not cheating isn't that hard either if you know how to market yourself.

2,000 votes is not a lot of people. If you take time to build a network of fans by doing things like running a Twitter account, creating a Facebook fan page, and even pandering by finding ways to legally bribe people into liking your work (or what have you), you can easily build up a voting block that would catapult good art up the latter.

I've even considered offering this type of service before with my own work. Rallying people behind a design isn't too tough if you're willing to look at it from a business perspective. So while he may or may not be cheating, there are avenues that I don't think enough artists are taking advantage of to give themselves a similar shot.