Forum restructuring - discussion

Ranger M · Post by **Ranger M** » March 4th, 2006, 7:27 pm

Eleazar wrote:It was abrupt, but what would a warning have accomplished?

probably just a mad rush of posters in art development.

however it would just be nice to be told, even after it has been done, as then you don't spend a couple of moments wandering why you can't post, but ivanovic's post in the announcment thread does this, so I should shut up now.

Post by **turin** » March 4th, 2006, 7:40 pm

db0 wrote:I don't understand. Isn't the point of being a regular member/trusted user that you are trusted to make insightful comments on threads?

Yes, but if you don't know anything about art, you cannot possibly make insightful comments in a thread - even if you have shown yourself a very mature, insightful person. It is like programming. No one who is not a coder would be able to comment insightfully on a discussion of programming, except on very rare occasions. The same is true for art. However, most people do not realize this. Almost everything thinks that their comments on art are insightful, even if they have no idea what they're talking about. This is why posting in art threads is now limited to those who understand art, while posting in coding threads is not limited only to coders. In other words: if there was a problem with people who don't know how to program posting in the code development forum, that forum would be restricted. There is not such a problem there. However, there is such a problem in the art forum - so the art forum was restricted in this way.

-> What i might be working on · Post by **Eleazar** » March 4th, 2006, 7:40 pm

db0 wrote:...Isn't the point of being a regular member/trusted user that you are trusted to make insightful comments on threads?

many users are insightful in one area and not another.

db0 · Post by **db0** » March 4th, 2006, 7:51 pm

*cough* *cough*

turin wrote:It is like programming. No one who is not a coder would be able to comment insightfully on a discussion of programming, except on very rare occasions. The same is true for art...
...This is why posting in art threads is now limited to those who understand art,

Eleazar wrote: many users are insightful in one area and not another.

ivanovic wrote:Another change has just been made. From now on only members of the groups "Code and WML Contributors"and "Art Contributors" are allowed to post in the restricted Art Development forum.

Ok, ok, I'll stop now. I just found that ironic.

Don't kill me

Ranger M · Post by **Ranger M** » March 4th, 2006, 7:56 pm

db0 wrote:
ivanovic wrote:Another change has just been made. From now on only members of the groups "Code and WML Contributors"and "Art Contributors" are allowed to post in the restricted Art Development forum.

If I had to guess then I would think that that is to do with WML and Code people being able to discuss changes/additions to mainline Wesnoth in realated threads in Art development.

something like saying:

Coder wrote:I have now changed the mainline with a patch so that this unit can extend outside of the Hex

in the thread about that unit

Of course my view isn't the developers view, but that would be my guess.

ps that was just an example, I don't really expect that to happen.

Post by **ivanovic** » March 4th, 2006, 8:04 pm

Ranger M wrote:
db0 wrote:
If I had to guess then I would think that that is to do with WML and Code people being able to discuss changes/additions to mainline Wesnoth in realated threads in Art development.

Yes, it is something like this. The mainthing was that there was almost no noise by contributors. And if contributors comment it is (hopefully) more usefull as if "forum-only" people comment that actually do not contribute in a way different from discussing and commenting.
If code contributors are not able to behave nicely we will of course restrict it further.

Post by **Thrawn** » March 4th, 2006, 10:19 pm

No offence, but there are trusted users who know somethings about art, (I'm not trying just to glorify me, there are others) who are not "Art Contributers." I think it somewhat unfair to deny them the privelige (not the Right, I agree there) to give their advice. There are also those who are not "Art Contributers" who are trying to become them (again, I'm saying this solely for myself), who used to believe that the sole purpose of the other thread was to have art developed where less uninformed people could contribute. Now they are stuck in the open section, and must now sort through.

1. I don't care, I think I've posted 3-4 times in that section, and am content to remain in other thread, but it seems that one of the main purposes for puttingit there is now gone.
2. I'm not suggesting that the people I reference above should be made "Art Contributers"--I recognize that I'm not suited to be called such, and that to be one you have to show results, just posting a concern
3. It's the Art devs themselve you have to watch out for--That Neo's a suspicious character

-> What i might be working on · Post by **Eleazar** » March 4th, 2006, 11:54 pm

Thrawn wrote:No offence, but there are trusted users who know somethings about art . . . who are not "Art Contributers." I think it somewhat unfair to deny them the privelige (not the Right, I agree there) to give their advice.

Advice from the less-skilled to the more-skilled often benefits neither party. We are eager to add people to the "art contributors" list as they show they have the neccesary sense and skill. Some current members IMO will cross that line in the foreseeable future. But as we were discussing this change, i looked throught the "forum regular" list and honestly asked myself if there was anyone there who's absence in the art-dev forum would hurt our work. I couldn't find anyone who wasn't already on the art-contributor list.

Thrawn wrote:There are also those who are not "Art Contributers" who are trying to become them (again, I'm saying this solely for myself), who used to believe that the sole purpose of the other thread was to have art developed where less uninformed people could contribute. Now they are stuck in the open section, and must now sort through.

I'm not clear what you are saying you thought the purpose was.
Here's how i would describe the purpose of the art-dev forum:

To create and get art into the game as efficiently as possible

Training is important, but is not the goal of the art-dev forum.

Post by **Thrawn** » March 5th, 2006, 1:42 am

Eleazar wrote:
Thrawn wrote:No offence, but there are trusted users who know somethings about art . . . who are not "Art Contributers." I think it somewhat unfair to deny them the privelige (not the Right, I agree there) to give their advice.
Advice from the less-skilled to the more-skilled often benefits neither party. We are eager to add people to the "art contributors" list as they show they have the neccesary sense and skill. Some current members IMO will cross that line in the foreseeable future. But as we were discussing this change, i looked throught the "forum regular" list and honestly asked myself if there was anyone there who's absence in the art-dev forum would hurt our work. I couldn't find anyone who wasn't already on the art-contributor list.

True, if you look at it that way.

Eleazar wrote:
Thrawn wrote:There are also those who are not "Art Contributers" who are trying to become them (again, I'm saying this solely for myself), who used to believe that the sole purpose of the other thread was to have art developed where less uninformed people could contribute. Now they are stuck in the open section, and must now sort through.
I'm not clear what you are saying you thought the purpose was.
Here's how i would describe the purpose of the art-dev forum:
To create and get art into the game as efficiently as possible
Training is important, but is not the goal of the art-dev forum.

My though was that is was a reduced noise section for art with promise.
Given your reason for its existance, I again concede.

Sorry for the fuss
--Thrawn

Post by **irrevenant** » March 5th, 2006, 8:45 am

Eleazar wrote:Advice from the less-skilled to the more-skilled [artist] often benefits neither party."

I still maintain that there's one key area where advice from the less (or non!) skilled benefits the skilled artist. Only a non-skilled artist can say how an artwork looks to a non-skilled artist. Since probably 95% of people playing the game are non-skilled artists, that's pretty valuable! By virtue of their experience, artists don't necessarily see art in the same naive way that a non-artist does.

As you pointed out last time this issue came up, there's a problem with non-artists communicating their concerns; they don't have the artistic vocabulary to do so. But I think it's a mistake to jump from there to assuming that they don't have a valid perspective.

Few of us are experienced artists, but all of us have a lifetime's experience of using our eyes.

Tux2B · Post by **Tux2B** » March 5th, 2006, 10:07 am

irrevenant wrote:
Eleazar wrote:Advice from the less-skilled to the more-skilled [artist] often benefits neither party."
I still maintain that there's one key area where advice from the less (or non!) skilled benefits the skilled artist. Only a non-skilled artist can say how an artwork looks to a non-skilled artist. Since probably 95% of people playing the game are non-skilled artists, that's pretty valuable! By virtue of their experience, artists don't necessarily see art in the same naive way that a non-artist does.

As you pointed out last time this issue came up, there's a problem with non-artists communicating their concerns; they don't have the artistic vocabulary to do so. But I think it's a mistake to jump from there to assuming that they don't have a valid perspective.

Few of us are experienced artists, but all of us have a lifetime's experience of using our eyes.

I think this is the main reason why the forum could have remained open.
The graphics there are destinated to all the users, not only those who are art devs.

Concerning what Thrawn said, there are some newcomers (call them newbs if you want) who can contribute to art. And some who are participating to other projects as art devs but who aren't here (Ranger M for an example).

In the art thread, you have been asking whether we could have more "insightful" comments. Personnaly, that's what I've been trying to do, but on the art dev, there is no such thing as "how to post here", or "what we expect you to say in order to have constructive criticism", that would have guided us.

Nerdanel · Post by **Nerdanel** » March 5th, 2006, 10:51 am

There is also the factor that some people may have experience with traditional methods of making art while still struggling with computer art programs. However the ability to use one's eyes can be learned either way and applies to both equally.

Disto · Post by **Disto** » March 5th, 2006, 11:31 am

I seriously prefer the old way, now I can't post comments to other artists.

Post by **irrevenant** » March 5th, 2006, 11:35 am

Tux2B wrote:In the art thread, you have been asking whether we could have more "insightful" comments. Personally, that's what I've been trying to do, but on the art dev, there is no such thing as "how to post here", or "what we expect you to say in order to have constructive criticism", that would have guided us.

That is a really good point.

How about it, Eleazar? Do you think you could create such a document? I think it would be a lot of help...

Post by **Darth Fool** » March 5th, 2006, 11:57 am

To all who are complaining that they can't post on the art dev, remember, you can still read it, and if you think that you have something really insightful to say, you can start a new thread in the open art forum about your really insightful critique of the work in the restricted forum. This still keep spam on the dev thread low, but you get to express your opinions. If it turns out that in the open forum you post useful critiques (as judged by the art devs) and don't start lots of threads with useless comments about the works in the art dev forum, you will undoubtedly be promoted to be able to post your useful comments in the art dev section.[/b]