|
Post by Harkovast on Aug 16, 2016 23:58:14 GMT
Okay don't go trolling or replying on this forum thread I am going to send you to (seriously, you are just meant to go peak and come back!), but I was looking at what places link to me and I found people talking about harkovast on the penny arcade forum a while back. Here is someone reading a page of my comic and thinking its transphobic- I am problematic as fuck.The next couple of posts basically explain why the intial poster is talking nonsense, but I just thought it was funny that someone went to the trouble of reposting a page they find ofensive without actually bothering to read it properly. Other people worked out the context from the same page!
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Aug 17, 2016 0:20:38 GMT
Context tends to be important.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Aug 17, 2016 21:34:41 GMT
Also the guy implies that using forcibly changin someones gender as a threat is offensive. How is that offensive? That's not a possible thing! That's not what the chracters are saying, obviously, but if they were its still not offensive. There is no real equivilant to that!
|
|
|
Post by Pendrake on Aug 28, 2017 11:23:59 GMT
pretty much reminds me of what i just did to the Bad Webcomics Wiki. I blanked pretty much every page that used the same logic as that person for bashing various things. humourously, one of your reviews is still on there, Hark, and it's actually one i left up, because it actually IS about a bad webcomic and gives, you know, actual viable reasons and arguements as to why it sucks.
I know they can just re-put up backup pages of what i blanked, but the entire point i started doing it in the first place was to annoy the hell out of them anyways. That, and leave the odd note about what "Constructive Criticism" actually means.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Aug 28, 2017 11:57:02 GMT
There is a whole funny saga about me and Bad Webcomic Wiki. Me and a friend posted bad reviews of each others comics on there as a joke.
His review of Harkovast got changed to a really crappy review that was trying to be funny (stuff about a guy getting bored and going to get breakfast while reading it) so I changed it back. They blocked me from editting (which was a bit disappointing. It was a bit more of clique than I expected) and then deleted the whole review as they said the comic wasn't really that bad and they kinda thought there was something fishy going on.
Years later someone found the original review by my friend on here and reposted it, now with a message explaining that it was written by me (technically my friend, but you get what they mean.) I was pleased that this validated my original point that my friends review was better than the crap one that replaced it...though the fact the review now requires an explanation along with it seems to deny the point a bit!
Bad Webcomics Wiki will never be as good as the blog that spawned it (your webcomic is bad and you should feel bad), but even so...you probably shouldn't mass delete loads of pages! Not everyone is a talented reviewer and its better to offer constructive feed back or editing than just getting rid of all the pages that aren't very good.
|
|
|
Post by Pendrake on Aug 28, 2017 12:23:16 GMT
well, in fairness, I actually took the time to look at every page i wiped. I didn't wipe every page either. but in all honesty, every one i did wipe was completely full of bias towards what the comic was about, or bashing the Artist's style, and etc.
any webcomic that DESERVES to be there (like that webcomic you wrote a review on with the Author who thought Rape was funny), or was locked i left alone.
i also occasionally replaced some of the shittiest biased reviews with the definition of what "Constructive Criticism" means. big hint! insulting someone's work is a great way to make them not want to listen to you. ever!
think the funniest one i ran into, the reviewer didn't even finish the page. they literally had just done one paragraph bashing the webcomic and had left the template sections up.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Aug 28, 2017 12:56:26 GMT
I think the problem with that site is there is an endless need for new content, but a finite number of webcomics. So after a while you run into a need for more content but nothing that's really bad to have a go at. Originally Harkovast was taken off because, while they didnt think it was that great, it wasn't really tremendously bad. Now I am pretty sure you could go on there and basically find a snark review on every webcomic there is. I find the sites goals muddled as well.
Personally I wouldnt bother trying to be constructive, I would aim for being funny. Its not like someone who writes a comic is goign to read your review and go "well shit, I better change my bad ways!" ITs all ust there for entertainment value. Now the criticism should be valid, but only becuase otherwise the humour doesn't work.
But yeah don't blank pages, that just comes across like you are wrecking things. Much like the author reading the snark review, they wont take that as construtive, they will jsut think you are trashing things. People have fun running that site and it doesnt hurt anyone. Obviously I would run things differently, but its their project not mine.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Aug 28, 2017 14:21:55 GMT
Clearly they need to diversify, maybe branch out into print comics, or product reviews, God knows there's plenty of awful products out there, like shrimp-flavoured crack.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Aug 28, 2017 19:17:51 GMT
I didn't know it came in different flavours! I've been sat smoking the same old vanilla crack all these years.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Aug 28, 2017 20:11:40 GMT
An amateur mistake. I bet you're such a cheapskate that you shred your own child meat rather than buying it pre-shredded. It's been a while since you've gotten a crap review or someone telling you you're fucking things up, hasn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Aug 28, 2017 20:26:53 GMT
Yeah I dunno if I get as much exposure as I used to. I need to do more self promotion, see if I can drum up any more interest. Part of the problem is the increidbly shakey update schedule lately.
|
|
|
Post by StyxD on Aug 28, 2017 20:49:43 GMT
Yeah I dunno if I get as much exposure as I used to. I need to do more self promotion, see if I can drum up any more interest. Yeah, remember when Hark was known as the great shameless self-promotor? I guess you'd have to join some kind of webcomic / furry community… Part of the problem is the increidbly shakey update schedule lately. True. To be honest, I'd say Harkovast kind of reverted back to being primarely an RPG setting and a comic second. @pendrake I have to say, complaining that Bad Webcomic Wiki doesn't offer constructive criticism reminds me of my friend who complained that the Nostalgia Critic makes nonsensical nitpicky points and shrieks like an idiot. In both cases the main point is being funny. I mean, no one goes for constructive criticism to Bad Webcomic Wiki. Humour is subjective, but blanking whole pages because you think they're unfairly bashing things is just assholish.
|
|
|
Post by Pendrake on Aug 28, 2017 20:51:34 GMT
okay, see, THAT is quality humor that was posted here. those guys assumed swearing and insulting work without any substance to it is funny. it's funny if you're, you know, thirteen.
|
|
|
Post by StyxD on Aug 28, 2017 20:56:58 GMT
I suspect most of the contributors there are teenagers with too much free time on their hands, so that's probably not far off the mark. Not that vandalizing is any more mature…
|
|
|
Post by PEndrake on Aug 28, 2017 21:05:32 GMT
oh, also, when i was blanking, and i'm aware it was assholish, the ones i did contained bigotry, racism, sexism, and homophobia. which is decidedly NOT funny. the sad thing is the fact I actually had to blank roughly two hundred entrees.
the entire point i did it in the first place was to annoy them and give them a little taste of karma. place has gone even further downhill than i hear it used to be. Mean, hell, most of the furry webcomics on there have reviews that's pretty much "RAH I HATE FURRIES SO MUCH" for about ten paragraphs with no actual humor in them, and a few comics that try to actually give out some morals (like Strong Female Protagonist, which i've read at length) are obviously "CRUSADING SJWS! RAH!" Been my experience that people who use the acronym SJW tend to believe they have a god-given right to be allowed to treat people like shit, and label anyone who says "maybe you should be nice to people sometimes" as one.
|
|