Remove this ad

avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#21 [url]

Oct 15 16 2:43 AM

oddguy wrote:
nah I've just been super lazy
I really need to end this hibernation and start checking in regularly every day like I used to

Oh, good. 

In all seriousness, I think this site has some serious growth potential and I think it'd be fun to ... well ... grow it (OK, that bit came off as a bit less serious but still, my point still stands).

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#22 [url]

Oct 17 16 9:57 AM

oddguy wrote:
nah I've just been super lazy
I really need to end this hibernation and start checking in regularly every day like I used to

Our esteemed boss says he's going to be back and the site itself goes down for several days in sheer terror.

It's a sign, I tell you.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,969

#23 [url]

Oct 17 16 5:54 PM

oddguy wrote:
nah I've just been super lazy
I really need to end this hibernation and start checking in regularly every day like I used to
Glad you're not dead. I was beginning to wonder.

Last Edited By: SmashLampjaw Oct 17 16 6:15 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

plarblman

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,170

#24 [url]

Oct 17 16 6:09 PM

On the one hand, I don't mind a hands-off approach to adminship when we've got things sorted ourselves. On the other hand, when technical issues like what happened go down, we can't really do anything about it on our end.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#27 [url]

May 14 17 4:35 PM

I forgot I was always planning to make a compilation of discussions about this place on other sites. I think there's good points in all of these to varying degrees about what goes on here. I seem to remember more once upon a time but here's what I found for now.

http://www.smackjeeves.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=3912

http://hankinstein.deviantart.com/journal/Bad-Webcomics-Wiki-431990675

https://dcmadhaus.wordpress.com/2012/10/09/the-bad-webcomics-wiki/

http://z3.invisionfree.com/bogleech/ar/t2908.htm

 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,969

#28 [url]

May 17 17 4:39 AM

You never did get into why you wanted to show us these threads. The only fresh one was on TVTropes, and I didn't get anything of value from it. There were vague complaints about the reviews not coming off as professional criticism (to paraphrase) because those people take themselves too seriously and assume everyone else should. There were also complaints about us highlighting the cancer that is social justice, even though none of those same people complained about us mocking any other delusional hate movement. They also seem oblivious to some of their bitchier tropers who can't resist misusing the word "misogyny" for any depiction of women that's less than ultramodern or resembles reality.

I have a great deal of trouble believing anyone is going to learn something that improves future reviews from their discussion. TVTropes has been on a slow slide from being a site that categorizes tropes to believing they're a defining authority on tropes. That runs contrary to us not taking our site seriously.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Last Edited By: SmashLampjaw May 17 17 4:43 AM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   

#29 [url]

May 17 17 2:57 PM

I think Shan's effort to document the opinion of other forums and wikis regarding the BWW is not wrong but a bit misguided. It is useful to know what others have to say about one's work (feedback is important afterall) but in the end it's up to oneself to improve and evolve for the better, and if we only discuss what others have to say we will never get anything done. I noticed the thread over TVTropes eventually died because the tropers were going around in circles using the same opinions and facts, and we will end the same way if we start discussing what they are doing instead of what we are doing. So if anything, this thread should only be used as an archive where we can store examples of feedback but only if we ever intent on using it to improve what we are doing or initiating a friendly exchange with TVTropes (or any forum interested in discussing what the BWW does). Other than that, there's not much we can do with this information.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#30 [url]

May 18 17 9:10 PM

That's probably the main reason, a repository of all the various comments and reviews (in effect) of this site so that anyone interested in them doesn't need to keep hunting for them as they're all in the one place. I found it interesting that by far, these haven't been even remotely ad hominem and there's often a lot of very good points. Certainly things I've found helpful to think about when I'm thinking of reviewing something.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,969

#31 [url]

May 21 17 6:03 AM

Care to highlight any? Because you promised forthcoming analysis a while ago. I'm also wondering what it is you're planning to start doing as a result of reading what they wrote, given this site has a theme to its reviews which they hate. :P

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   

#32 [url]

May 22 17 6:05 PM

They won't allowAssigned Male on their "So Bad, It's Horrible" page because apparently A: all criticism directed towards it is bigoted in some way and B: It has "too many fans to be on the page." Really. I have never seen any fans of the comic except ironic ones. (I guess those count.)

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#33 [url]

Jun 4 17 3:39 PM

SmashLampjaw wrote:
Care to highlight any? Because you promised forthcoming analysis a while ago. I'm also wondering what it is you're planning to start doing as a result of reading what they wrote, given this site has a theme to its reviews which they hate. :P

Page 11 from post 253 is a good place to start, I think.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,969

#34 [url]

Jun 4 17 9:24 PM

Shan wrote:
SmashLampjaw wrote:
Care to highlight any? Because you promised forthcoming analysis a while ago. I'm also wondering what it is you're planning to start doing as a result of reading what they wrote, given this site has a theme to its reviews which they hate. :P
Page 11 from post 253 is a good place to start, I think.
I meant "quotes and your thoughts on why the quotes were useful."

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#35 [url]

Jun 5 17 7:50 PM

Well, I'll try (inevitably, this is going to turn into a multi-post answer as I always miss something, if not several somethings, so why fight it?).

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=nn3bdo99oklmotu1y7nma4w3&page=11

I've always taken the view this isn't a troll site and every thread discussion I've seen, be it TV Tropes, Smack Jeeves, Comic Fury and so on go the same way - it's never a hivemind dogpile on how horrible this place is. Some people do take the view that it's at least trying to be objective. Of course, people's opinions vary on how successful that is but I think most people recognise the BWW is not a monolithic entity and hence some efforts are more successful than others. A combination of what I read in these posts and posts in these forums remind me on a regular basis to try and be as analytical and balanced as possible. Sure, my efforts so far ... need a lot of work still but it's a learning curve.

Start of post 256:

"I agree that genuine criticism of any comic is good, in fact, I'd be perfectly fine with having a "this comic is bad page" if it'd have enough valid criticism and -suggestions- to allow me, as an author, to work my way out of the wiki.
The thing is, now it's been a while since I've explicitly read a whole number of articles but I do remember that certain articles are a lot less .. based on helping webcomics and more based on the whole "this sucks let us point it out"-aspect;"

Whether or not that's generally accurate, keep reminding myself to not be that person in the last line. YMMV on how successful I am there but at least I'm thinking about it whenever I try to write something.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Long Tom

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,112

#36 [url]

Jun 6 17 3:19 AM

The author of Demon Battles, though she ultimately agreed that her webcomic needed revising for the reasons I pointed out, complained about the review's snarky tone and the fact that people with a grudge against her came to us to ask for our review.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,969

#37 [url]

Jun 6 17 5:03 PM

Shan wrote:
The thing is, now it's been a while since I've explicitly read a whole number of articles but I do remember that certain articles are a lot less .. based on helping webcomics and more based on the whole "this sucks let us point it out"-aspect;"
Whether or not that's generally accurate, keep reminding myself to not be that person in the last line.
The style of the site is insulting reviews. Personally, I prefer to be factual when I'm doing it, and I give credit where credit's due. People were doing those things before I got here; I wouldn't have bothered jumping in if they weren't. I don't see it as my place to join a site to try to change it.

I participate on this site much more than TVTropes (or a lot of other sites, come to think of it) because BWW is mostly honest. I cannot think of a single review I've seen here where I thought the reviewer just decided to take a dump on something solely because it was popular. Same goes for political motives or just wanting to hate something to fill a quota. If a review got on here it's because people genuinely believed the subject was bad. That wasn't a guess, either. I'd read at least 1/3 of the material on BWW before I participated in it. I originally learned the wikicode by cleaning up the grammar and spelling on the reviews alphabetically.

Anyhow, the issue I take with a lot of collaborative sites is they get very uppity about appearing neutral. I don't just mean maintaining a neutral voice and objectivity. What it amounts to is they get concerned about being seen as an objective authority. You see "professional" thrown around like you're running a college and trying to make sure you don't lose accreditation. What happens when you start worrying about being seen as neutral/objective over actually being it? You pad out parts of what you're writing to maintain appearances. You give too much weight or attention to aspects of your subject because it doesn't look fair enough by volume even if it's entirely accurate. You take complete garbage off your list of complete garbage because its topic is transgenderism and it's important TVTropes doesn't look anti-trans.

I don't want people to read a review of mine and think, "That person was helpful and professional in spite of the material." I want them to think, "He really believed his/her opinions and supported them well" regardless of if they agree with me, and hopefully be entertained in the process. Our medium is not important. By extension, our opinions of it aren't important.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,972

#38 [url]

Jun 6 17 7:40 PM

Insulting reviews are *a* style here but it's not the only style here. Some of Long Tom's reviews for starters. There's the full spectrum here from John Solomon Era Die in a Fire to This is Actually Promising and We'd Like to Help You Do Better Because There's Potential Here and We Know You Can.

I'd say what's notable about this place IMO at least things try to be rigourous with the methodology and the process of making a review.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Long Tom

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,112

#39 [url]

Jun 7 17 3:08 AM

Shan wrote:
Insulting reviews are *a* style here but it's not the only style here. Some of Long Tom's reviews for starters. There's the full spectrum here from John Solomon Era Die in a Fire to This is Actually Promising and We'd Like to Help You Do Better Because There's Potential Here and We Know You Can.

I'd say what's notable about this place IMO at least things try to be rigourous with the methodology and the process of making a review.

There are webcomics authors who are truly irredeemable such as Ivan Henley, and those who produce both good and bad comics such as Dana Simpson.  As for the webcomics themselves, some have potential to be good, but others are hopeless.  The "Define Cynical" Ozy and Millie fansite, when it existed, talked about Ozy and Millie and when it was good or bad, but nobody there liked Rained Dog-me included.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,969

#40 [url]

Jun 7 17 4:12 PM

Shan wrote:
Insulting reviews are *a* style here but it's not the only style here. Some of Long Tom's reviews for starters. There's the full spectrum here from John Solomon Era Die in a Fire to This is Actually Promising and We'd Like to Help You Do Better Because There's Potential Here and We Know You Can.
That's a fair point, though to the best of my knowledge John Soloman not only was never a part of this wiki but publicly condemned it.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help