JustFrame said:
Seems to me like straight/female art gets way more up votes and stuff around here. Where as I usually end up seeing gay art get at least one or two down votes.
Problem is, most gay art tends to royally suck.
And not in the gay sense.
E: To be more clear, it's likely the downvotes are happening because of poor quality art. Link a few examples?
GreyMaria said:
Problem is, most gay art tends to royally suck.And not in the gay sense.
E: To be more clear, it's likely the downvotes are happening because of poor quality art. Link a few examples?
I agree with this. Most of the straight art is just better in terms of quality than the gay art, so the votes are a bit skewed in favor of the straight.
id:195733
id:197464
Picture perfect example.
I really don't think quality is the issue. I see straight art of equal or subpar quality get upvotes a lot more often than gay does. Lesbian art gets MASSIVE boosts.
I can understand it not getting as many upvotes-- Gay art is theoretically less appealing in general. But the downvotes confuse me.
Granted, I can't actually see if something has been downvoted, or who is doing the down voting. If I saw more general down votes on a picture, and it was consistently the same users, I'd certainly think I was correct.
But I HAVE seen a lot of gay art directly on the front page that gets downvoted pretty rapidly.
I also think the scoring system... Doesn't seem fair because of this. I think it would make more sense if every image had a separate good and bad score, not just one overall one.
Edit: Or you could remove the ability to downvote entirely. Downvoting seems like nothing more than an anonymous way of saying 'fuck you I hate this kind of content!' rather than an actual say on quality-- Quality can be measured purely from upvotes. That's why number of favorites is honestly more telling than an image's score, but only privledged accounts and such can see that.
That's a skewed example right there.
Wolfy-Nail is solid quality art, so that's no excuse.
I don't see too many people downvoting and NOT complaining in the comments about how it's gay - if they're stupid enough to do one, they're stupid enough to do both.
Perhaps lovers of gay tend to be less apt to upvote.
Perhaps folks who love breasts and pussy are more populous than folks who love only cock. (From personal observations, this is statistically wrong; it seems like at least 60% of the fandom -must- be at least male bisexual, yaoi fangirls, or hard gay male, with the majority of it being hard gay male...)
I do think we need an up/down vote count, though. Like Youtube/etc.
E: For future reference, simply type something like "post #197464" to link to an image.
GreyMaria said:
That's a skewed example right there.
I'm not saying I have all the stats. I don't. I just said I don't know exactly how many downvotes there are on any given image. An admin might know, and they might be able to tell us. Or the users can just come out and say they are downvoting gay art intentionally, that's why I asked in the first place.
Hell, the example I cited could indicate that people just don't like edits.
But you don't have the stats either, so it's impossible for you to make an assumption like:
Perhaps lovers of gay tend to be less apt to upvote.
We really have no way of knowing, as yet.
I'll also let you in on a little hint: As the fandom has gotten bigger over time, the supposed majority of gays has decreased vastly. Most polls actually tend to indicate heterosexuals being the norm in recent years.
But I think it's reasonable to assume, alone, given the homophobic nature of the human race, and the anonymity of downvoting... That we have SOME users who are just mass-downvoting gay art because 'god hates fags.'
And in general I don't like this because it gives people the opportunity to skew things based on retarded precedents. I think scores should reflect quality, not content. The reason is because it is statistical feedback, and feedback is mainly used by artists on a site like this to determine the quality of their own work.
The only thing that everyone else uses it for is to measure order:score
And before you mention that the same thing might be happening to straight art-- It really would only reinforce what I'm saying. I would be pissed off if people voted down straight art just because it's straight as well. And I wouldn't be surprised if that happens too.
Maybe some straight people are just dicks :B Whoop, there I go thinking about that again-
In all seriousness, maybe we still haven't gotten past the point of rampant homophobia. And I can honestly say I'm embarrassed when I can provide a very effective "cumulative" example. Coughdemetriathepinkyoshicough.
Who cares.
Some people even downvote just because of who posted it. Trying to pinpoint what makes people vote on what is an utter waste of time.
ippiki_ookami said:
Who cares.
The reason is because it is statistical feedback, and feedback is mainly used by artists on a site like this to determine the quality of their own work.
ippiki_ookami said:
Who cares.
Some people even downvote just because of who posted it. Trying to pinpoint what makes people vote on what is an utter waste of time.
He's just jaded because he's had one too many dickwads get buttmad at him and downvote the many, many pictures he's posted in a weirdo vain effort to spite him.
It always seemed to me that furry community is a lot more open to gay/bi art, so I wouldn't know about that...
..oh wait, it's already resolved? *slowpoke
Oooh, I'll be sure to start randomly downvoting gay images more often. :3
JustFrame said:
The reason is because it is statistical feedback, and feedback is mainly used by artists on a site like this to determine the quality of their own work.
Well, that's a pretty bad metric if they're looking to gauge their own technical quality. If they want feedback on technique, they should ask fellow artists or specifically solicit critiques.
It's only a slightly less bad metric if they're looking for gauge the popularity of their work within any given niche they're looking at.
My understanding is that vote data isn't even kept, so there's no way to generate a report of who's voting for what. By that same limitation, there's nothing stopping a person from voting multiple times on a post, skewing the results.
The moral of the story is: Don't use upvotes to determine technical merit or skill. Don't even use them to determine what your audience likes. If you want to know what your audience likes, then ask them directly.
ikdind said:
there's nothing stopping a person from voting multiple times on a post, skewing the results.
I'm sure you can only vote on an image once now.
Raiden_Gekkou said:
I'm sure you can only vote on an image once now.
Huh. So it would appear. I stand corrected. I still think votes are a bad metric for skill, though.
Edit: To answer the original question, no. I don't downvote stuff because of the content. I have a rather extensive blacklist for that purpose.
ikdind said:
Huh. So it would appear. I stand corrected. I still think votes are a bad metric for skill, though.
They are, as people downvote fetishes or shows/games that they don't like. Remember Lupine Assassin anyone?
Or dear. You had to actually say it. Quick! You can still edit your post before the firestorm starts up again! :P
Some of the artists he commissioned made some good pictures, but people downvoted because fuckwad.
ikdind said:words
Although you can perform a search that shows what posts were upvoted/downvoted by a user, the comments section is the best place to ask for an honest critique on your art.
Also you can use this search (order:score) to see what has the most upvotes. Notice how there are gay pics mixed in. I'd say given that most users prefer searching for females, this search shows it's about even how much gay art is upvoted as well.
One last thing to think about. People are incredibly biased (myself included) and often only hit that vote button if it's really well made/within their kink group or it utterly disgusts/horrifies them.
ikdind said:
The moral of the story is: Don't use upvotes to determine technical merit or skill. Don't even use them to determine what your audience likes. If you want to know what your audience likes, then ask them directly.
Believe it or not, people barely ever are willing to give crits or feedback. If they do they're frequently useless as dust, and it comes in such small doses it's hardly anything to gauge off of.
Stuff like score numbers is pretty useful for artists because it lets them gauge general interest. And for some reason the audience seems more willing to give it to you. I think it's because if an artist asks for crit, their audience feels like they have no reason to give it to you if they get nothing in return, or they just feel like they don't have the knowledge to crit. It also requires more thought to give crit than a simple thing like 'yes i like this' or 'no i dont'
Yes, it's not perfect. But it works in the same way that youtubers and others like using scoring systems. And it's something.
Comments on this site are rarely about the technical skill of the artwork presented. If they are it's usually just senseless bashing that gets downvoted.
What I don't get is if the scoring system is so useless, why do we have it? If it's good for nothing than we could literally change it in any way and it has no chance of making it worse than it already is.
Hell, you can't even see number of favorites with a standard account. When an artist posts something and can't see that they've had 30+ people favorite it, but it only has a score of 2, they get confused. They assume people don't like their work, or that no one noticed it. And they decide to not post here any more.
I think I've completely veered off my original point here, and am just getting in a rant about the scoring system in general. But I think it's pretty broken.
JustFrame said:
Look at forum #34399. If you ask for an in-depth critique, people will give it, mixed with a little bashing, mind you because we are on the Internet. I think the bashing was also rightly distributed because the user started a thread on it and was being an "attention whore" so I'd say leave it in the comments.
Well, I had a much longer post which offered far more support for my position that the scoring system is near-useless for an artist's purposes. I decided to trim it down because I didn't want a wall of text, and I wasn't aware that the scoring system had been changed to remove multiple-voting (which I felt was it's greatest weakness).
A person can still stuff that ballot with multiple accounts, but that's at least trivially harder and probably limited to the real nutters who are going to draw the ire of the admins and get banned before they can cause too much harm.
People aren't actively solicited for votes, either, so it's only capturing people who both find it and care to use it.
The population of people who do care include nutters, religious fanatics, homophobes, pony-haters, fur-haters, trolls who downvote everything, trolls who downvote everything with a positive score, trolls who downvote everything with a given tag, and real-life honest-to-God trolls from Sweden, or Skyrim, or wherever. Plus some unknown population of reasonable people; we have no idea if they're the majority but it makes us feel better when we assume such.
But I don't know if E6 would be a better place if we nagged people for votes or worked harder to establish a person's identity to prevent ballot-stuffing.
I do think E6 would be a better community for connecting artists and their fans if there were a way to favorite an artist account, the way FA allows someone to "watch" an account. Maybe that's on its way in some fashion. Or maybe a way to send a blip to someone from their profile page, that shows up on their profile page, like shouts on FA. Or generally more community-oriented, connection-making, people-exchanging-words features in general.
Of course, none of that was the original purpose behind E6, from what I recall. But times change, administrations change, and as long as we can maintain a well-tagged stream of quality work, I'm all for adding more stuff to the site that caters towards community building.
When you put @username: blip goes here, as your blip, it'll show up on their profile page under blips. Also,
These help shrink walls of text so you don't have to condense your argument
Rainbow_Slash said:
Look at forum #34399. If you ask for an in-depth critique, people will give it, mixed with a little bashing, mind you because we are on the Internet. I think the bashing was also rightly distributed because the user started a thread on it and was being an "attention whore" so I'd say leave it in the comments.
I honestly have asked for crit in comments and never gotten it, so maybe I'm bias but I don't buy that.
As for your forum post, that guy got an awful reception for the most part, whether he deserved it or not. It's a terrible example and shows me that artists should definitely NOT be asking for crit here.
Crit only goes so far anyway. I'm a semi-competent artist and I found that the better I got, the less crit became helpful. Most art crit on the internet is just basic tips. The real techniques are learned by constant practice and one's personal style development, which no one can teach you via crit. But that doesn't mean I never need -feedback-
Sometimes people just want to know if people liked their stuff or not. The only thing I find useful for that on this site is fav count. Everything else is pretty much useless.
I don't think a dangerous precedent is set by improving the feedback system for artists here. It will make them want to post more, and it will drive traffic to the site.
So that's about all I have left to say. Time for a nap.
Not if it aint terribly or inanatomically drawn.
AbsebaroKoon said:
Does anybody remember UltravioletMoonRay?
He/she asked for critic and gets the boot because he/she got butthurt because of the harsh criticism given. Though the art shows no sexual contact, the down votes comes shortly but not that much.
That's why he bitched?
I think you're giving him too much credit, and actually giving his whining some validation.
No
It was like Ippiki had said at the beginning, they either get showered in compliments or lash out at criticism. I think they banned him because he was garnering attention and telling people to f off if they wouldn't play his game. Also the pure flame bait topics he made were getting people to fight.
Rainbow_Slash said:
It was like Ippiki had said at the beginning, they either get showered in compliments or lash out at criticism. I think they banned him because he was garnering attention and telling people to f off if they wouldn't play his game. Also the pure flame bait topics he made were getting people to fight.
He also made retard threads and seemed drunk half the time.
JustFrame said:
Seems to me like straight/female art gets way more up votes and stuff around here. Where as I usually end up seeing gay art get at least one or two down votes.
i don't discriminate. I downvote em all equally.
I tend to avoid downvoting things unless I think they're especially bad.
JustFrame
Privileged12 months ago
Do you downvote gay art just because it isn't straight?
In category: General
Seems to me like straight/female art gets way more up votes and stuff around here. Where as I usually end up seeing gay art get at least one or two down votes.