Anybody who wants follows this badly HAS GOT THE LURGY!

To get rid of the lurgy, they have to go outside and step on 2 MILLION BLADES OF GRASS!!!!

Good luck 🤞

We think your art quality should improve to get rescouted.

I think OnixDark’s reply was perfectly reasonable, including getting some feedback on your work from the art community.

… nah.

This is just some character from a show, and you didn’t draw it.

If you can’t be bothered to share what you think is “WhaT’s WrOnG wItH tHiS ChARacTeR DeSiGn”, why should anyone else.

This character has already had its own dedicated thread back in November and a thread in the supporter forum at the start of December.

I think all of the juice has been squeezed out of this lemon-shaped drawing - let’s do something new.

The content would be associated with the description that is supposedly intended for a more mature audience.

Here’s the wiki about the history of the site.

To keep things simple, I would associate it with the phrase “breaking new ground”, I.e. the production and sharing of fresh, original content.

Thanks

https://www.newgrounds.com/wiki/help-information/terms-of-use/art-guidelines

It’s mainly the bit of photography. It’s not really a collage since it’s just an album cover - somebody else’s painting - with the blank faces switched out.

This is going to have to be taken down from the art portal since it’s your face photoshopped on an album cover.

I’m posting because I don’t see how this is to do with the uncanny valley, either. You’re

using a photo of your own face, not something that closely resembles your face.

I think with follower-based sites ANY scoring system (0-5, like/dislike) isn’t representative of the quality of the work.

Most of the people who vote on submissions will also follow the artist - unsurprisingly, they are probably going to like the piece and would vote 4-5 on it.

I think you do have to treat scores with a grain of salt - you’re not putting your pieces through the same panel of judges time-after-time. I was looking through the OPs pics and I think most of the issue with their irregular scoring was down to receiving limited views on their content.

———

In terms of other replies to this thread, I don’t think Blam and Protect would work on the art portal - submissions receive high scores from followers, and similar to the movie portal, I don’t think people are incentivised to look at shitty art enough to prevent something from passing.

I don’t think people are not inclined to give bad reviews for retaliation, since the voting system is anonymous. However, I’m also one of those people who give only criticism to people who request it, as it’s polite.

I’m wary about people who say the voting system is attributed to bullying, as more often or not they’re sensitive souls who make art for themselves and are coping that others don’t share the same affinity for their work. The person in this thread who is getting “bullied” has some questionable sexual views on minor-related artwork, and have had pieces taken down.

I’m not able to answer your appeal query, but the Wiki Audio Guidelines says you should only upload stuff you make, not something you like or something your friend made. You’ve good intentions, but the appeal is unlikely to go your way.

I don’t know what you’re missing.

The art portal’s never had a blam system, and the one in the movie/game portal still exists.

As per what Vinity and Rerstuf said, adult-content relates to genitals, including breasts, and sexual related acts.

If your content is like this, basically a similar level of nakedness as an Avatar character, it’s ok to rate it “Teen”.

The rating will have to be considered to be raised if you start defining nipples and the crotch area.

Nobody’s answered the original question, which sucks even more.

Nothing’s worse than trying to find a solution to an issue, only to find it filled with nothing but “me too!” responses.

Congrats on your new art thread, hope you enjoy it.

Strangely enough, I’m only uncivil to spineless twerps who get their threads locked over a year ago and whine about me every chance they get.

You’ve already posted a similar post in the EGB thread and it’s got snubbed.

Report it if you’ve got a problem with it - don’t start another brigading clown-fest.

@PrinceMiniMod, are you ok to manage the argument on the past few pages

It’s not “common knowledge”, it’s a perception issue.

As per this thread, there was a degree of acceptability with content, but it’s trying to understand

a) where to draw the line, and

b) whether the vocal members of the community were happy with that line.

In your view, it sounds like it’s zero-tolerance.

Those reviews you left are basically “there’s AI in this, therefore I vote 0”. That’s your choice, just like it’s your choice to write a simplistic review …

… but it’s unlikely to lead to a domino effect. It doesn’t sound like you’re engaging with the content at all.

People do care about how rapidly people pump out content - I refer back to the Foamy cartoons.

It does sound like you don’t like Gen AI being used in anyway whatsoever and that he’s ethically in the wrong for even touching it. That’s your opinion, but I wouldn’t second guess other people’s motivations.

1) I don’t have an issue with the ironic use of AI to make a message about AI, as it makes the message more effective.

2) If you think he is riding the anti-AI train and unironically using AI to help him pump out videos, you should say as such in your reviews.

Most people are going to be watching the video in isolation, so if you have an opinion about their submission history you should say so in the reviews.

I think it’s better handled as a community like the Foamy cartoons (pre AI) so it’s a common voice rather than reporting.

I don’t think he’s pumping these out - there’s about 2-months gap between the last 3 AI animations.

I’ve seen your reviews on these movies - the conprehensive message you’ve posted in this thread just doesn’t come across at all - it looks like you don’t like the content because the ironic AI cartoon contains AI.

I kinda wish that this thread has a frank look at the application of AI-tools and come to a consensus about what would be considered “acceptable” or what is a majority use.

The discussion about portal score thresholds is a bit of a pit to fall down and I don’t think raising the score threshold would have prevented this 4th place movie from passing.

The content in this movie is just bad - bile yellow cartoons, limited animation, no lip sync and robotic voices. While the author doesn’t have bad intentions, this shouldn’t be the bar to set how far AI content is acceptable.

Collaboration is becoming a last art and I think we should be better at enforcing that, rather than relying on AI.

If you want to challenge the decision to take down the movie, you can raise it to Tom - to bring the thread back to reality, bear in mind it’s a privately website owned by an individual.

If you think the rule regarding is not specific enough, you can raise a suggestion in the WiHT forum.

IMO

1) looking at Crockett’s earlier reply, I think it has strong grounds of being removed for being “mostly AI” since most the content is AI, but Tom may have a different view.

2) Given that media can have differing forms and content, that rule is never going to give quantitative advice and flagged/moderated based on rationalised decisions. I think having a heavily detailed rules are more frustrating for everybody as large blocks of text are straight-up inaccessible.

Ok I think we’ve hammered home the message, now.

Welcome to DeviantArt

I remember a time when we took the piss out of this content. Then the Tumblr crowd took themselves far too seriously and fobbing off this stuff as a “sexual awakening”.

If you’re going to post an anti- message in a community that is pro- , it’s not surprising you’re going to get backlash.

If you’ve left DevArt, that’s your (wise) choice. But we know they like AI.

It’s still eligible for you to suggest for the front page suggestion thread - it’s ok to suggest things that may have been overlooked, just not your own stuff.

https://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/1522839/1

Locked on request.

You can’t keep repeating the same points over and over. It’s tedious.

This thread isn’t locked, so the conversation isn’t restricted. I do think the original topic has run its course since page 2 and has started to devolve into a generic AI thread.

The whole topic has been done to death and it is repeating old chestnuts over and over.

Shadowval’s post at the top of is this thread is just a rant. The topic is about identifying AI, yet there’s only paragraph that’s on topic. The rest is about “Megacorps”, scraping, death of creative industry, environment …

It’s like somebody has a set of flashcards about the topic of AI and has to mention them, regardless of the content in the opening post.

We need to stop praising people for repeating the same old topics - it’s not relevant and it encourages an echo chamber.

This is the art forum - I am talking from a perspective of using an art forum, as it is more capable of showing reciprocation than the art portal which just presents art.

It is capable of hosting activities, criticism and feedback, themed threads, talking about the art portal and discussions about art.

I feel that posts that are repeatedly hand-wringing about AI is not helpful, as it’s just a negative topic (and like I said, done to death). Particularly since most of the individuals here are hobbyists and it’s their individual choice to not use AI.

I don’t like AI art, but I don’t want to be continuously immersed in that negativity.

As I mentioned, I think there are some individuals who offer nothing to the art forum beyond saying “AI is bad!” and high-fiving each other. I don’t think they offer anything beneficial beyond that.

Similarly (as I mentioned in the opening post) I don’t want the topic of AI to be a conversation starter or a device to gain easy respect. It’s just lame.

Just glossing over the last few pages of this thread, it’s just endless streams of worthless venting.

That’s what I have a problem with.

It’s so valueless; it’s line-upon-line of non-impactful crap and offers nothing compared to actually doing the art that you’re supposedly looking to champion.

I’m not surprised this individual

—didn’t understand that my post was not associated with complainers, only people who flock onto AI threads to drill home the “AI is bad” message.

—I’m a moderator, so by nature I’m anti-AI.

—Opted to block me, not confront my post directly and misquotes it to show they didn’t understand the content. I hope they enjoy their fantasy living in their head.