Remember, rules or guidelines are as useful as the people that abide by them. The members share the responsibility in maintaining the integrity of the community, so make this YOUR site and help meet us in the middle.

The rules and guidelines seem pretty clear. Hopefully they will serve to avoid any misunderstandings!!

Would it be useful to include that an artist can only post 6 works a month?
Carlos

Very good point. I'll do that.

Yeah Carlos, 6 work per month max. Agree with that!

so far so good - seems pretty clear to me

Yep, agree with Madanapale. I´m ever remember this to the new membres, and all members they thank for the information... well, not all, some until have insulted to me for this, but i´m haven´t troubles, it´s just a rules that it was not clarified.
Ok, all this will help to improve to gfx.

Looks clear to me.

Thanks for taking the time and effort to re-examine these policies.

The new version is much more concise and helpful to new submitters such as myself, and I think it also indicates a flexibility that, while probably present in practice before, wasn't apparent in the previous version.

Good work!

This looks clear to me, thanks to the GFX-guys for listening to the community

Looks like I can finally post my paintings again without having to also post, eh, hmmm ....private.... looking pictures of my gf ;-)

Also, good that you mention that the members should post the reference picture if possible, or if it's too close to the reference material. I'll for sure do this as long as there are pictures I'm feeling comfertable with putting online.

^^ Yay! ^^

This sounds great Martin, it's great to have an art community that actually listens to the artists; Many artists who stopped posting because of the rules are now coming back, so that's a good sign.

This is, bar none, the best online art community.

Great job on the revised rules! Hopefully it helps!

I would suggest adding a section here (or somewhere) about the moderators and their roles:

• Who are the current moderators?
• What exactly is the role of a moderator?
• Should a moderator be specialized into a certain category (painting but not photography for example?)
• For how long are you a moderator? (rotation?)
• What is the process to become a moderator?
• If you disagree with a ruling by a moderator who should you "complain" to?
• How can we encourage more members to become moderators?

@Martin: The revised rules and guidelines as such seem easy to follow. Good job!

PS Spelling error on section 2.1 in FAQ: Sumbit => Submit

Much better.

Much clearer, although I'm surprised that paintovers aren't mentioned in the Rules (unless I missed that bit). Paintovers have nothing to do with reproductions or refererences, they're cheating plain and simple and should not be allowed. One way to identify them (other than simply looking, which is normally enough) would be to insist that at least 5 WIPs are posted on referenced images.

Simon, you know how easy it is to reverse engineer a WIP to try and pass a paintover as legit. Of course those who try normally expose themselves further with exaggerated steps. Other sites such as CGTalk don't seem as strict on paintovers and they are doing ok. Trying to expose such frauds is what led to all of this drama in the first place in terms of questioning artist's integrity.

@Moser
Martin has drafted a new set of guidelines for both veteran and newbie mods as to how he wants us to deal with certain scenarios. I would imagine that it would be expected for the member with the disagreement to do the same as mods have been directed to do so above and use the pm system.

Encouraging members to become mods....you all already are. An instinctive love for artistic growth and the welfare of this community should be enough for members to look out for one another and this site as a whole.

I'll copy/paste your concerns in the mod thread to ensure Martin see's them, as I've been clamoring for a 'mod team' bio page for members to reference for quite some time

The trouble with paintovers is that you'd want to make rules that address the used methods. That's exactly one of those areas we don't have information about. If we demand WIPs we'd be back where we started, chasing 'innocent' artists around to get WIP shots and booting art of people that don't have them.

For now we'll handle paintovers like reproductions. Permission to reproduce must be given and the original must be posted with the work. If it turns up after the fact, you're in trouble. We don't care much about catching paintovers that no longer look anything like the original material.

And don't forget, if you suspect that someone's posted a paintover, by all means ask the artist for WIP shots to take away your doubts.

It´s good idea know the Mod, i just know you Wysi and Mephistozor , and in a time was Pam and Juro i think, but i don´t know other. Publish the actual Mod it´s good idea.

@ DAYKAN

ADMIN  Martin
ADMIN  Martijn
ADMIN  Colin
MODS  Wysiwyg  MePhIstoZoR
MOD but he mostly is the news guy  TheNeverman
FORUM MODs  TJVerhagen  Raphael  JordanRoots
also see - http://www.gfxartist.com/about/FAQ/12581/
and - http://www.gfxartist.com/about/team_gfx

THANKS KITTY!!! I MISS YOU SO MUCH!

@ Daykan: Pam hasn't left GFX; she's just not a mod anymore. Relax!

yeahhh, she told me this. *breathing*

You are aware of the fact, that with rule 1.2 you can - being in a bad mood - depublish simply each and every work that is in the galleries? Each of these terms has its own potential, but I love especially "tasteless". According to whose taste? And could you describe this taste in plain, simple words, please?
And I'm also a lil bit concerned about item 2.9. Maybe you could rephrase it?

1.2 is about rejecting work that is of a strictly adult nature. All descriptions in there including horrific and offensive will have to be determined using common sense by moderators. If anyone can rephrase this rule to be less subjective I am all ears.

How would you want 2.9 to be rephrased? Remember that this is a guideline and that moderators will not step in unless people start getting upset by an overdoses of silliness by a member.

Thorsten I will give you an example for the adult one. 1.2
*when I was a mod* a while ago someone posted a 'hot hot sketch', the girl alone *in the post* was acceptable, but there was something else to the right, *really big* can you guess what that was? or do I have to spell it out Moderators decide if its suitable for adults and kids who surf here if its acceptable to be posted.. get my drift?
bow chicka bow wow.
the 2.9 if I may... could be a funny manip. ill take a stab at this one.. example I guess if someone photo maniped cookie monster and hasselhoff... I guess what Martin is saying yah sure post something silly but dont get out of hand with it. post it in the forums. if you wanna get nutz. *im guessing about this one. 2.9*
PS.. I have not seen any moderating since I left

Doesn't mean it isn't happening pam I'm bery bery sneaky sir

C'mon Pam you know how 90% of the mod stuff isn't always in ya face

Well I agree that the rules shouldn't be clear just for moderators, but it's quite hard to describe in detail what would and would not be considered as horrific, offensive or distasteful. Still any input on putting it into more clear words are welcome.

Oh and to add to that, Brett already pointed out that some of the examples I mocked up would be great to illustrate the rules. Right now they're for mod's eyes only as I used images from around the web, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to support each rules with a few visual examples of what would be alright and what we reject.

1.2 is about rejecting work that is of a strictly adult nature.
Only a very tiny part of this rule is about that.
http://www.gfxartist.com/about/FAQ/10155/ still allows "work of adult nature", the line is drawn at pornography. I'd say 1.2 is how to handle stuff, that is (or better: could be seen as) offensive.

to be determined using common sense by moderators
There's the failure in your system: There is no common sense. Regarding e.g. the sight of naked womens' breasts as unsuitable and disturbing for kids may be a GFX rule, but it has surely nothing to do with common sense. Children do not need to be protected from these breasts, they have seen and enjoyed them before. The GFX rule may be regarded as common sense in some cultures, but in others it is not.
Once again: There is no common sense. We all live in different places, different cultures and with a different point of view of the world. To swear to the common sense simply opens the door to arbitrariness.

This is not about pornography. I couldn't care less. I'm more concerned about some "freedom of speech".

Let's imagine this: I do a caricature which cynically reflects the actions of the Bush regime - okay, it's hard to be more cynical than the reality, but for caricaturists that's an old problem. Some hypothetical mods take a look at it. The first mod is dutch (just like you - it's a small world after all) and says: "Wow, cool." The second one is an US-American. He giggles. The third one, once again an US-American (there are lots of those) feels heavily offended and shuts the picture down. Now what?

And this could happen to every work with a statement. Men are so easily shocked and offended! Critique is unwanted, social, political and especially religious. Hey, I thought you want to go with GFX into serious art now!

Which brings me directly to:
How would you want 2.9 to be rephrased?
Certainly not with a perfect description of my work which is declassified as "silliness" with the very next sentence - accompanied with the good advice to better do some less "light entertainment" to fill my gallery.
So what kind of serious art did you have in mind? The cute girl with pointed ears and empty face? Sorry, not my field of expertise.

The term pornography is a subjective term as well Thorsten. Seriously, this aspect of the explicit warnings has never really been an issue and I don't see why it's getting analyzed so much. Just b/c one member has a high tolerance for even partial nudity doesn't mean we should subjugate those who have none by not having the artist check a little box.

Any source of conflict is handled in the mod threads with multiple mods discussing the proper course of action, and via pm the member.

Your caricature analogy is also a little far reaching. The reason why Martin chooses the Mods he does is because they are entrusted sit back and view work objectively. Just last week I had to intervene b/c the members were bashing the message of a design submission, and I had to remind them that they should be concentrating on the design itself, and how well it portrays that message.

Any source of conflict is handled in the mod threads with multiple mods discussing the proper course of action, and via pm the member.

Silliness...again this is an aspect of the guidelines that has always been there, and never been a source of confusion. A photochop that you would find more suitable for the forums (ala Self Show) is the genre of work we are referring to.

Any source of conflict is handled in the mod threads with multiple mods discussing the proper course of action, and via pm the member.

You can 'what if' this all day, there is no absolute answer. Each case will be treated separately between the mod team and the member.

I agree with brett  Thorsten, i don't understand why the explicit warnings is getting analyzed so much. It isn't really that much of a big deal, it's just taking some form of initiative to filter content - not block it - but filter it so that people are aware that the content may not be something they want to be exposed to (in a more graphic way).

And as brett pointed out in regard to your "caricature" example, i'm sure that it WOULD be accepted as long as it didn't go against any of the guidelines, and the focus of it is well designed etc. I know the submission brett refers to, and that exact submission was controversial, and was spoken about in length in the mod forum before we addressed it. It remains online.

Based on Thorsten's feedback I just rephrased guideline 2.9. Instead of 'less serious works' I actually meant 'works with little artistic merit' as it is aimed at images that have little to do with art and more with getting a few laughs.

As for rule 1.2, I can see that it is probably the most subjective rule in there. However this rule targets work that, despite the artistic merit, goes beyond being controversial into the area of the shocking and disgusting. The rule exists in its subjective form because it marks the border of what GFXartist will allow its audience of all ages to be exposed to.

_quote:

---

 moserArtist
* Who are the current moderators?
* What exactly is the role of a moderator?
* Should a moderator be specialized into a certain category (painting but not photography for example?)
* For how long are you a moderator? (rotation?)
* What is the process to become a moderator?
* If you disagree with a ruling by a moderator who should you "complain" to?
* How can we encourage more members to become moderators?

---

This has been asked for plenty of times now and in spite of point 1 there was never given a clear answer to it for whatever reason....

Just my two cents.... no reason to hit on me I'm gone already again, bye and have fun

I have mentioned this before also and been ignored ! I am crying writing this, but what is the point of 2 or 10 mods discussing the merits of a section that at best they know a little about...

WHAT DO WE WANT !
Photographers modding Photography.

WHEN DO WE WANT IT !
now


Seriously though, While I can only discuss this from a photographic point of view I would assume the same applies for other sections.. They dont have to be full mods or even have a different jacket but even people in each section you could call on or listen to their advice !

Hey Az I've asked for it plenty of times too...and I am a mod

Aren't the mods volunteers?

Moser, Azurelle: I'm on that, it's just that all that doesn't just write itself in a day. I see now that Brett's reply to Moser wasn't really a confirmation, so.. I confirm it will be done!

A-H: I got ya and I will be looking for new mods with that in mind.

Moderators are indeed volunteers, but not everyone that volunteers makes a good mod.

my personal opinion and im sticking to it
Photography doesn't need a moderator when I was a mod there was very little time it needed any moderation
mostly the post was in the wrong category and every now and then a post needed to be moved to 'my profile only'
cause the quality was very poor.
and the ONLY person who helped me with that category was 'Madanapale' so martin if you are looking for someone maybe ask him.
he is here every day and thats his category.. im being very truthful here..
any hoot my personal opinion the biggest part that needs moderation is painting section.. but now that guidelines have softened up... I think just having a good hand full of mods is cool.
im also so sick of hearing that moderator's are not qualified to do such work if you are not happy with things here go jump off a bridge I say..
MARTIN has bent over backwards trying to make you all happy gives you a FREE site to post up your work and communicate with others..
||||||||||start showing some love back|||||||||||
or like I said go jump off a bridge. seriously stop complaining and asking things that are none of your BIZ!
im sorry I had to get that off my chest.

Master Madanapale have my vote! Madanapale Mod!

pam....diplomatic as ever *rolls eyes*

hey deano so can you tell me some things you have done around here to help others or to support the site?
yah thats what I thought.
stop rolling your eyes they will roll right in back of your head.

you're right, I'm worthless...but the fact remains, you're people skills need some improvement

Alright, let's not start pushing each others buttons here, nothing good will come from that.

When it comes down to it, it's more important for me to have mods capable of doing the job, rather than mods that have experience with a certain type of art. It sure narrows down the options, but I think that by now that should be very clear to everyone.

I find it a bit ignorant to say that photography is fine as is and needs no moderation.

Maybe that is the reason why a photographer should be made mod for this category in the first place which Al-H and a few more are trying to state...

I am sure Madanapale will be a great mod btw.

_quote:

---

Photography doesn't need a moderator when I was a mod there was very little time it needed any moderation

---

I disagree kitty... could be because U aren't as serious about photography compared to other designing sections !
But since long most photographers think a MOD with more photography experience is needed.
Since there are many posts that should be in photomanip section & pass along as photography. An HDR shot of a bird was one such candidate of late.
As for poor quality, there are too many of them. As they are the easiest to make. Yes Carlos, A-h OR even Monjo could be one of the better choices for the job.

dakoo said: I disagree kitty... could be because U aren't as serious about photography compared to other designing sections !
you know nothing about me. who I am or what I do. so don't just take stabs.
when I moderated I 'cared' about every category no matter what.
what im saying is 'its my own personal thoughts'.
The mods GFX has now.. 'know what they are doing' and they can handle it, trust me.
'Madanapale' was the ONLY one who ever helped me when he spotted something that needed fixen in that category... never did I get a PM from anyone else.. for photography. now all of a sudden its a big deal? I dont get it.. if its such a big deal why didnt any of YOU Pm me to tell me you thought something needed to be looked at?? yah..
dakoo said: As for poor quality, there are too many of them
The guidelines have changed so the moderators they have now their job just got ALOT easier
seriously many of you wanted change you wanted less moderation you wanted other kinds of works excepted here so there you go..
again my 2 cents. and im gunna stop there...so dont reply to this..

Holy cow, people! Have you lost your minds? After all that has transpired in the past couple weeks, does anyone seriously think we need more, stricter moderation in any category (well, anyone other than  arenhaus)? How did this discussion take this direction? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

With the 6-post/month limit, I hardly think a few poor photographs or a photo-manip or two in the wrong gallery is an issue demanding urgent attention. if you don't like something, post a comment to that effect, and throw in a big fat +0 to drive your point home, but more moderation...be careful what you wish for.

Also, I'd hate to see how quickly members would be going for the throat of our beloved Carlos the first time he yanked the wrong photo.

Take a deep breath, screw your heads on straight, and go take some pictures.

It was a pleasure to help you Pam!......You were all the time available and willing to listen!!
Carlos

Hey Pam, i am sorry if the whole comment seemed to be against you.
As u said I don't even know you well & hence have nothing against you it was just an opinion on photography section since mods & rules were being discussed.
I don't mean to say U were biased with categories. I am just trying to say that maybe a few more rule modifications & an experienced Photographer from the old school such as Carlos, A-H Or Monjo would help. BTW even Steven could be a good choice.
& Yes, as carlos said U have answered each of my PM very promptly as well.
Put you a P.M.

Alright guys, just step back for a second. Pam, much love, but chill

One thing Pam, Brian has pm'd me about photography stuff before, and i have acted on it, so Madanapale may have been the only one to contact you, but not the only one to help out the mods.

However, Pam is correct. The current mods do know what they are doing.
As for this comment:
" quote:
Photography doesn't need a moderator when I was a mod there was very little time it needed any moderation

I disagree kitty... could be because U aren't as serious about photography compared to other designing sections ! "

I have studied photography at 2 different universities, plus i have been DOING photography for years. Although i may not do it professionally and by no standards am i as good or as knowledgeable as  Madanapale or  moserArtist etc but it does mean that i am capable of moderating a photography section. Now, i don't speak on bretts behalf, but i'm 100% sure he is fully capable too.

Now as for "Photography doesn't need a moderator when I was a mod there was very little time it needed any moderation"... to be honest it's quite true. By "moderation" we are talking filtering photography out from snapshots etc, not critiquing it. It is whether or not the piece of photography goes against any of the guidelines. Again, the mods are capable of doing this.

Now, whether or not  Martin takes this discussion and does create a mod for the photography section i don't know, but i think its "ignorant" (interesting choice of word from above) to say that you have to have a professional photographer to "moderate" the photography section.

"Since there are many posts that should be in photomanip section & pass along as photography. An HDR shot of a bird was one such candidate of late."
--- Well the whole HDR or colour correction or arguments along anything along those lines could and does go on endlessly

"As for poor quality, there are too many of them. As they are the easiest to make"
------Well if you look at the guidelines:
2.7 Snapshots
What: Photographs that have little to no artistic value and that would be taken by any amateur that can point a camera and press a button.
------I would think that a lot of the photography you seem to be claiming as "poor quality" might not be as polished as the pro's here, but more often than not they whole quite a bit of artistic quality, and are open for critiquing if you feel there is something they could dramatically improve on. "Snapshots" as such are unpublished, as stated.

Anyway, in the end what i am saying is a mod specifically in the photography section may be something to look into as a whole, but it is not a necessity. Do you think we would object if a "photography" moderator "moderated" the painting or design section? No. Because they would be accepted into the mod team for their understanding as a whole, not one specific area. As martin stated before:
"A-H: I got ya and I will be looking for new mods with that in mind. Moderators are indeed volunteers, but not everyone that volunteers makes a good mod." - so if you think you can help out on the mod team feel free to ask about a position, let martin decide the rest.
Regards,
Evan

Well said Evan and sdavis,

Also, I will agree in that the Photo section needed less moderation over the last year. There have been far less point/shoot photos, family album photos, pet snapshots this past year than any other. Not everyone sees what we do 24/7, but at the same time there wasn't much to be done. Raising the bar of quality in your own work will help filter (most) poor work as people will be too intimidated.

For those totally lost in photo, we have the forums and MyProfile options so they can still get advice.

I got some 'ego' comments the last time I posted my qualifications, I'll refrain from posting my photo background I am by no means an expert, but I've been around the block a few times.

The moderation of ANY gallery is based on the guidelines put forth. To simply say 'I think we need more moderation' insinuates that someone has a personal distaste for something they saw in the galleries, or it's not to their standard. That kind of bias needs to go if one were to work the green jacket. There are plenty of works here I personally couldn't care for, and wouldn't allow if I had my own gallery/site, but that's it...this isn't my site, and I must work by GFXA's rules.

I find it funny people are asking for more moderation now, after all this debacle of having what was said to be too much moderation

Every time I unpublish a grainy photo of someone with a flashlight or a traffic stop and slow shutter speed I get flamed as everyone rushes into the "I see it for the art it is" argument, yet it easily violates the snapshot guidelines. Even when the artist says something to admit it was an accidental photo.

Hum, strange discussion about members helping this site or not. (this was mentioned farther above somewhere.)
It seems that some people think it is only possible to help this community as long as you are a mod. This is in fact, not true. Eventhough the mods might need some help because of the high amount of submissions, nobody tells you to keep your eyes not open just because you are no mod.

Brett: You say you didn't get an answer to those questions I quoted, too? So you have no clue why you are a mod and Almost Human is not?
Now that is funny.

People, please stay on topic and refrain from taking this to a personal level.

Like I said, I will be looking for mods in the future but their social skills will be the decisive property. I think this discussion here once again proves how much GFXartist moderators will need this.

Azurelle, I wasn't specific enough.

I was referrring that I've been pestering Martin for a 'Who are our moderators' page for quite some time.

As far as criteria for hire that goes that's soley Martin's world and he decides how he does.

I absolutely agree with your stance on that anyone can make an impact to improve/moderate the site, regardless of the colored pixels by your name. I just have the ability to delete double posts

The mod jobs are very time consuming, very thankless, and do require diplomacy, tact, and a certain temperament. Anyone interested should volunteer and those not accepted can still make their presence known and helpful in many ways. We all do what we can and everyone has a limited time to expend here at GFX.
I agree with Steven, Brett, and Evan and their very accurate assessments. I remember the sight before the mods and things are definitely better with them and their contributions. Their purpose is to help the sight improve and the "us against them" mentality really is very far from the truth.

question, I don't see anything in the guidelines about unfinished work or scribbles. 'for the drawing category'
or did I over look this or is this ok to have these sort or works posted in the GFX galleries.

I know what work you are referring to Pam and it was addressed before you left comment on his work or posted here.

Until we see the standard of that individual's work we really can't say if it's a scribble or not.

Do you want to call Jackson Pollock a visionary, or splatter paint? Pretty subjective imo. So until the artist responds we wait and see.

But your right there should be something formally addressed in the FAQ w/reference to the Sketch Thread, EW thread, and MyProfile gallery.

Brett: Yes I can remember that you had requested a "who are the moderators page" sometime back and it wasn't invented - but I forgot why...
anyways what I meant was a guideline or something like that which says what requires you to be a moderator. That would make it easier to find people with time and the "abilities" this site is looking for.

Azurelle i'm not sure how martin is progressing with the whole "new mod" thing, but we are trying to encourage people who would like to, and think they could be a moderator, to volunteer to do so. Martin will make the decision in the long run, that's what we've been saying from the get-go.

im seeing lots of celeb painting / drawings being posted is this excepted now?? cause im reading the GFX new guidelines 1.5 and says you must have permissions.. days have gone by and these posts are still up.

paintings and drawings of celebrities aren't necessarily reproductions unless we come across their originals. That's the whole point of the new rules. If you did come across material that suggests the work is a reproduction of another, do let us know.

Also, works that balance on the edge take a little time to handle. The artwork you most likely referred to was discussed among moderators since it was published.

Good Work !

hi!