Let me repost this here because what truly matters is where the post is made and not the contents of the post of course. Thank you Nuck for showing us all the light of our sniveling.
So I think these two statements summarize the problems people are having quite nicely.
Let's suspend reality for a minute and ignore the logical inconsistency of the first sentence I quoted.
I'm a media guy, I don't think I've ever touched photoshop. Some of the stuff I see around here blows my mind with how good it is.
Your stuff, on the other hand, when compared to Bengals or 701, is utter shit.
So now the problem becomes, how do we compare your shit graphics to their really great graphics? And what makes YOU qualified to judge a superior artists work?
Nobody knows the criteria by which they are being judged because it is so subjective. When your gutter graphics get higher scores then 701's professional quality work because "you grade on ability level" then that's where the disconnect is.
You have a lead grader admitting to grading superior artists more tough because they ARE so good when he ISN'T qualified to do so. And more then that - he hasn't provided a non-arbitrary grading system to shield against matters of opinion.
So here we are. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but is this not a "fun" league? The correct answer to this situation is give auto grades for submissions. If you can't tell who is mailing in their graphics then you should get someone like 701 to teach you what to look for.
And by God if someone manages to sneak a graphic in there without trying as hard as YOU think they should based on your OPINION then...and I know I'm about to sound crazy so bear with me....WHO CARES. The integrity of the league will not be compromised because someone didn't try hard enough for imaginary points to use on a fake player, in a league that isn't real.
Oh and sorry for my 'fucking sniveling' but you seem a little lazy too. How hard is it to throw up graphics of the week like the media guys have? Take you what, ten minutes?
So I think these two statements summarize the problems people are having quite nicely.
Let's suspend reality for a minute and ignore the logical inconsistency of the first sentence I quoted.
I'm a media guy, I don't think I've ever touched photoshop. Some of the stuff I see around here blows my mind with how good it is.
Your stuff, on the other hand, when compared to Bengals or 701, is utter shit.
So now the problem becomes, how do we compare your shit graphics to their really great graphics? And what makes YOU qualified to judge a superior artists work?
Nobody knows the criteria by which they are being judged because it is so subjective. When your gutter graphics get higher scores then 701's professional quality work because "you grade on ability level" then that's where the disconnect is.
You have a lead grader admitting to grading superior artists more tough because they ARE so good when he ISN'T qualified to do so. And more then that - he hasn't provided a non-arbitrary grading system to shield against matters of opinion.
So here we are. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but is this not a "fun" league? The correct answer to this situation is give auto grades for submissions. If you can't tell who is mailing in their graphics then you should get someone like 701 to teach you what to look for.
And by God if someone manages to sneak a graphic in there without trying as hard as YOU think they should based on your OPINION then...and I know I'm about to sound crazy so bear with me....WHO CARES. The integrity of the league will not be compromised because someone didn't try hard enough for imaginary points to use on a fake player, in a league that isn't real.
Oh and sorry for my 'fucking sniveling' but you seem a little lazy too. How hard is it to throw up graphics of the week like the media guys have? Take you what, ten minutes?
[div align=\"center\"]![[Image: HqcYqrC.png]](http://imgur.com/HqcYqrC.png)
[/div][div align=center][/divalign]
[/div][div align=center][/divalign]
