Graphics, gone to hell? Options

[Gypsy Eyes]

Sorry if I sound like a broken record but what is happening to the graphics? The quality is decreasing and it looks like some of the mods (not saying any names) aren't reading the submission rules or guidelines. Just looking through the first two pages I can see four of five graphics that are either poor quality or go against the rules. Wasn't the whole point of having a queue to weed out the bad graphics?

[*Duchess of Dork*]

^ Absolutely.

Would you feel really put on the spot if I asked to post some examples? If you're uncomfortable with that, I totally understand and you can PM me.

I know that some of the design related staff has two windows open, one with the submission and the other with the Moderator Guidelines, which is probably a great idea.

[Gypsy Eyes]

That is a good idea. No problem with examples, I just didn't feel like getting b*tched out again.

These are not supposed to be accepted. It's album art.

This is not even remotely in focus and poor quality.

Backgrounds have to be a minimum of 800x600px unless its a repeated one.

This is a jocked image from DA and an extremely well known image. Don't know why no one caught that.

1
2
3

and there's much more. That was just the first two or three pages.

[*digital.fragrance*]

I was about to add one, but I just realized that that's #1 in your post...

I hope whoever accpeted these doesn't hate me for the rest of my life...

1
are we accepting photos of posters?
...I have a strong feeling they just copied and pasted
Credit a maybe too large?
I think this is too simple

[stay infinite]

Jackie, at least your bringing it to their attention, you in no way sound like a broken record.

I completely agree, the newer staff I hate to say it are the ones accepting a lot of the on the lower side of the scale graphics, I've noticed it for some time. And it doesn't matter how many times you say it almost, its never going to end. No matter how many house cleanings the design staff do theres always going to be bad graphics when new people get hired and even the ones that are already hired and don't know what to accept or their just too nice and accept everything.


^You on xanga staff Rachael, if you knew this was happening and stuff why didn't you even bring it up with staff and ask them. I know theres plenty of design related threads backstage and I'm pretty positive you can check who accepted those and perhaps contact them about it as well Sorry if that came out rude or anything, no intention for it to sound that way


http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29062
yea that one does look like it was copy and pasted although some people could use them as image stamps for photoshop and make brushes out of them perhaps if they wanted. Perhaps think about adding a new part in graphics for image stamps?

http://graphics.cbimg8.com/57/28886c.gif
Credit is way to big, I remember seeing a discussion about this some time ago about how a lot of people were complaining why their graphics were rejected only because of the credit, and I'm pretty positive everyone on the staff has seen it and its even in the moderator guidlines at accepted graphics so the newly hired design staff (kristina) should know whats on it, so I highly doubt it could have been her.

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=28779
I agree this is really simple, but if you look at a lot of the backgrounds a lot of them the people didn't even make like Kimmetree, she submitted a whole bunch of victorian style backgrounds that she in no way created and they were accepted. Also I mean its a background image, if it looks fine when set as one I don't see why it should need to be rejected?


http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29136

I don't know if you've noticed but this has been going on for a really long time. Some user use to submit photos of her little drawings and words on notebook paper all the time. And once one is accepted there is no reason in rejecting all the others like it because then people would start to question and think its a personal issue. Also if you look around in the graphics there are some that are pictures of paintings and such as well

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29172

what is this one for exactly? If this one were to get rejected then almost ALL of the photos submitted to createblog and were accepted need to go and get rejected as well.



Hate to do that to you Rachael, but I just find it weird that your confronting this with the staff on the community part and didn't think of bringing it up backstage first were the real problem lies (or well starts there with staff)



From Jackie,

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29225
Seriously, why was this accepted. I really think you guys should just eliminate all personal pictures accepted unless there is a real reason for keeping them. Which is found rarely.



How about all these too?
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=28676
- I'm pretty positive that goes under icon collages, which then again I don't think were supposed to be accepted, since their pretty tacky anyways and more than likely they didn't make any of the icons or images off of the collages in which their taking credit for.

[Gypsy Eyes]

^

-No personal pictures. Keep in mind these pictures are to be used for graphics. No one is going to want a silly picture of you and your friend. If you want us to see what you look like, you should post the pictures in the Members' Photos threads in the Pictures forum.

A direct quote from the graphics submission rules.

All too small and poor quality
1
2 (and didn't we agree not accept these along with the star hand pictures awhile back?)
3

I think this is too simple

(directly from the rules)
-Repeated backgrounds: try not to make is to simple (ie: just dots/lines) There will be exceptions to this of course, if it is unique.

Please please please. I had brought this up several times backstage. Read both the rules and guidelines.

[stay infinite]

^Thank you

I was working my way there


Star hands, heart hands, whatever

-If there are already too many that are similar, it won't be accepted. (ie: no more heart hands, hands spelling out love, eyes, stop/danger/road signs, etc). Check around before you submit.
-No time stamps; they're highly unprofessional.
-No more hand/shoe/feet pictures.

About those times stamps, I have seen some floating around. I remember once someone said that if their not in the picture to much then its fine but seriously I don't think they should be accepted at all. From what is said above, their really unprofessional and its really easy to change those settings on the camera if they want their photo up here.

[*digital.fragrance*]

^You on xanga staff Rachael, if you knew this was happening and stuff why didn't you even bring it up with staff and ask them. I know theres plenty of design related threads backstage and I'm pretty positive you can check who accepted those and perhaps contact them about it as well Sorry if that came out rude or anything, no intention for it to sound that way

It's been brought up already... Just not by me. I just think the entire community needs to weigh in on this.

It'll probably get a lot stricter, and then people are gonna get upset... but oh well.

And for the record I can't see who's accepting what, just to let you know

[Gypsy Eyes]

^yes you can. it says "last edited by..."

[moorepocket]

i keep a look out for these when accepting.

[stay infinite]

^wow, yea its been like that forever. And usually most people don't go back and edit it so its pretty precise.


Also on this persons submissions:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=285884
I know she confessed that she didn't take any of the pictures but still that would be under copyrighted images?

[Gypsy Eyes]

^x2
yeah you always have

Wait she didn't take them? I can't tell you how many times I verbally warned that girl. They shouldn't be up there at all.

[*digital.fragrance*]

^yes you can. it says "last edited by..."

Seriously?? I never noticed that.
Edit: whoa, I feel stupid

[stay infinite]

^ You've been on staff for how long Rachael? I thought there was something said about it from someone else?

[*digital.fragrance*]

... About... 1 1/2 month blip, and then counting now... so for about a year. I just never noticed that one line of to the side. I just concentrated on the graphic.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Also on this persons submissions:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=285884
I know she confessed that she didn't take any of the pictures but still that would be under copyrighted images?

Are these going to be removed?

[stay infinite]

^I would hope so, I suppose we should give them some time though.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Oh it wasn't meant to sound like that. sorry.

[stay infinite]

No need for apologizing, I just took it the wrong way.

[*My Cinderella.*]

*twitch* Oh man, I see what you mean. I only caught a few good ones. I think we need to look over the accepted ones. Some of the graphics are bad quality.

[radhikaeatsraman]

http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php...=146495&hl=

I was told almost a year ago that this topic would be addressed and it still hasn't. We need to make the design staff realize this fact. I say if too many bad graphics get through certain queues, we penalize the mods responsible for those queues.

[freeflow]

Are these going to be removed?

I'll be going through it in a second. Even though she edited them, the photos still shouldn't have been accepted (as photos) in the first place since she didn't take them.

http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php...=146495&hl=

I was told almost a year ago that this topic would be addressed and it still hasn't. We need to make the design staff realize this fact. I say if too many bad graphics get through certain queues, we penalize the mods responsible for those queues.

So basically you want which ever mod is accepting bad graphics to not be able to accept graphics for a certain period of time? That wouldn't really work out too well. How exactly would that particular person learn from that experience. Its one thing to point out who accepted it and then possibly explain why it shouldn't have been accepted , but if your goal was to prohibit them from accepting , then why are they really on staff. Yes being on staff requires for you to spend some time in the forums, etc, but also being apart of the acceptance/rejection process is too. So I don't really understand what you mean by penalize them?

[demolished]

Had we not discussed this already?

Did moderator not followed the better/higher standard of graphic especially cB's House Cleanup?

[radhikaeatsraman]

I'll be going through it in a second. Even though she edited them, the photos still shouldn't have been accepted (as photos) in the first place since she didn't take them.
So basically you want which ever mod is accepting bad graphics to not be able to accept graphics for a certain period of time? That wouldn't really work out too well. How exactly would that particular person learn from that experience. Its one thing to point out who accepted it and then possibly explain why it shouldn't have been accepted , but if your goal was to prohibit them from accepting , then why are they really on staff. Yes being on staff requires for you to spend some time in the forums, etc, but also being apart of the acceptance/rejection process is too. So I don't really understand what you mean by penalize them?

We shouldn't have to complain multiple times in order for something to get done. If not letting them accept/reject graphics for a period of time will get them to realize that they need to step it up, then okay. And if it continues to happen? Demote them. cB members are looking for accountability from the mods.

[*mzkandi*]

I've often thought about what disciplinary action should take place for repeat offenders that continue to accept below standard work. I think some kind of system should be in place where we communicate with those mods as to address what they are accepting and what they should be accepting. I know some of our opinions vary on what should and should not be accepted but a person can train their eye for good design. For example, when I first became Head Staff I was accepting things that met my standards, if I liked it it was in, even if in hindsight some of what I was accepting was below standards. Usually it was because I liked the colors or quote or something. Then Jusun contacted and reminded me of quality over quantity. It made me think I'm not accepting for myself, I'm accepting for cB so I really need to up it up. This requires becoming more objective to each submitted work that is in the queue. Don't merely glance at it, decide you like it, and accept. Actually look at it. What do you like it? What works? What doesn't work? How does it compare with other great graphics and layouts in it's category that have been accepted? Don't go with thinking, "Hmm..meh, I'll accept it and if it isn't up to standards it'll simply be rid of when house cleaning comes around".

[radhikaeatsraman]

^But that's exactly the attitude some cB design mods have. Maybe if we eliminate the process of house cleaning altogether and find some way to make the design mods step it up, then we won't have to go through it (house cleaning, that is).
A sample consequence system could go as follows:

-If a mod is found to have accepted five or more graphics that don't meet or exceed each standard, a warning goes out to them via PM to remove those items from their queue. If they do not remove the items, the next level of action is taken.
-Ten or more items, their accept/reject privileges are revoked for a period of time. (One week?)
-If the offenses repeat after this, they are demodded and do not get to re-apply during the next hiring session.

Members or other mods could report these offenses via PM to Head Staff or Admin or post in the Feedback section, but they must cite the posted graphics standards in order for the graphic to be considered for removal. "This looks soooo bad" should not be a good reason for removal.

Also, if a mod wants to challenge the warnings/suspensions, they may do so by citing the graphics standards and showing how each substandard graphic is, in fact, not so. If they cannot prove that the said graphics are at or above cB standards, the consequences will stand.

[Mulder]

I think thats unnecessary.

We were modded because the admins/heads trust our judgement when choosing graphics. While we all have different standards, we deserve respect when it comes to the skills we were modded for. If a mod is found to be accepting graphics that are substandard, another mod can confront them on the issue. This has happened before, and they began accepting good graphics. I don't see why this needs to be an issue with the community...

[radhikaeatsraman]

I think thats unnecessary.

We were modded because the admins/heads trust our judgement when choosing graphics. While we all have different standards, we deserve respect when it comes to the skills we were modded for. If a mod is found to be accepting graphics that are substandard, another mod can confront them on the issue. This has happened before, and they began accepting good graphics. I don't see why this needs to be an issue with the community...

I agree with you to an extent. But what happens when the trust is violated? Moderators who do so must be held accountable for their actions. Plus, what one person thinks is great might be what another person thinks is horrible, and that's why we have set out the graphics standards.

Also, if a moderator is confronted the first time, I trust that they will step it up. But if it continues to happen, (and it has for quite a while now) then we must have consequences for that.

And this is very much the community's business, for we are the ones who use these graphics. We deserve graphics at or above the standards set out.

[Mulder]

while I agree that moderators should be... punished if they dont "step it up" I dont think there should be set "warnings" or levels. Trust the other mods and heads/admins to decide what's best, not turn it to the community, or automatically follow some pre-planned rule. besides, if some mod keeps accepting substandard graphics, they probably would stop going into the queue at all.

And I meant that confronting the mods in question should be done backstage.

[radhikaeatsraman]

^Hm. Well, maybe instead of making a topic saying, "OH this mod is doing this and that," members could simply stick to PMs.
And I personally like the idea of having a rule to keep mods in line.

[*mzkandi*]

while I agree that moderators should be... punished if they dont "step it up" I dont think there should be set "warnings" or levels. Trust the other mods and heads/admins to decide what's best, not turn it to the community, or automatically follow some pre-planned rule. besides, if some mod keeps accepting substandard graphics, they probably would stop going into the queue at all.

And I meant that confronting the mods in question should be done backstage.

The thing is, those in question shouldn't have to simply stop going into the queue because they accept sub-standard work. That isn't what you're hired for. The queue, as you know, builds up fast and everyone should be doing their part to clear it. I support there being more communication for such violations as continuing to accept substandard work. Right now, demotion sounds harsh to me. I believe more communication would help solve this. As I stated before, yes, our tastes are different, but one can train their eye for good design by being objective with each submitted work.

[*Duchess of Dork*]

Demotion does seem harsh, at first glance. However, if a moderator continues to accept substandard work, then it could very well be a last resort. It's important that all of us are held accountable. However, like Kiera said, those in a position to review/accept/reject in the queue should communicate when they have a question about a specific graphic. It never hurts to ask for another eye if you think that for some reason your eye is off, or because the subject matter which the graphic or layout is based on is something you particularly appreciate or enjoy that would affect objectivity.

We very much care about what the Community and visitors utilizing resources here think. This isn't AT ALL meant to replace the feedback here, but Dee posted a thread in the Designers' Cafe regarding specific standards you (collective "you" in the Community) have. I'm really interested in what people say there.

[Gypsy Eyes]

I think a demotion might be harsh, maybe suspended powers for like a week or something? Before any of that happens though, a detailed set of standards should be written.

When I was still a mod there were a few people I openly questioned and by the looks of it nothing changed

[*digital.fragrance*]

^ We've began disuccsing specific standards, and soon, a getter set of guidelines will come together.

[radhikaeatsraman]

^How soon? In a week? In a month? A year? Never? Also, where will you post those standards? Will you allow members to help out?

And....*breathes in and out*

Please, please, please read my post about consequences. Demotion is a last resort, and in no way do I advocate demoting a design mod for accepting one bad graphic into the queue because they weren't looking hard enough for one second.

[*digital.fragrance*]

^ They won't be posted generally - they will probably be added to the Moderator's Guide For Critiquing Graphics, or the Graphics Requirements. Basically, we are establishing standards among the moderating group.

[*Duchess of Dork*]

^How soon? In a week? In a month? A year? Never? Also, where will you post those standards? Will you allow members to help out?

And....*breathes in and out*

Please, please, please read my post about consequences. Demotion is a last resort, and in no way do I advocate demoting a design mod for accepting one bad graphic into the queue because they weren't looking hard enough for one second.

Regarding the last comment, I didn't interpret that you were suggesting demotion at all. It just came up as a discussion, so no worries. :]

The thread I linked above (in the Designers' Cafe) is asking for member input. I just came back from there and some of the things people are pointing are really great. I know that you have a good sense for these things as well as genuinely caring about what's happening in the queue. I would love to see some input from you there (in that thread) as well.

I so wish I could give you an exact timeline and you are absolutely right. Everyone (in Design related positions) worked really hard last house cleaning and it's a shame that instead of maintaining a quality queue, there has to be another cleaning.

I imagine that the standards will be posted in all of the main Resource Center SubForums but I'm wondering if a finalized and definitive submission guideline thread should be posted (perhaps pinned) in the Announcement Forum as well.

[Gypsy Eyes]

There has been a major improvement in quality

But still be careful with things like this. They aren't supposed to be approved.

wait a few more:

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29324 - not even remotely crisp
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29328 - a fairly common picture
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29331 - poor quality

[*Intercourse.*]

Well I don't know if anyone ever noticed but graphics have a pretty big part in layouts and if the graphics aren't good then the layout won't be good considering that divs are more common now. I think that staff should use the graphic rules just as equally as they use the layout rules when accepting/rejecting rules.

I'm sure people have noticed this one:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=175886
The word is mis-spelled and I remember there being a fuss over that a while back and that the spelling in graphics need to correct. Its something pretty simple to be fixed if they still have a psd file so I think it just needs to be rejected and ask them to simply fix and resubmit it.


Anyway a simple mistake though, but I think the staff need to watch out for little things like this

[*StanleyThePanda*]

^ I was a little iffy about rejecting it (I'm not the one who accepted it, but I just wasnt sure, dont ask why).
Anyways, its been removed.

I also added "Correct spelling/incorrect spelling" to the Graphics requirement and "Submit a Myspace skin!"

[*Intercourse.*]

Thanks Kara.

This user -
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=480407

Recent 3 submissions need to be resized. Its a bit weird that all their other photos are resized but the recent ones aren't.
They just need to be resized to a decent size

-Decent size. Not too big (over 1024x768) and not too small (under 350x350).

[kimmytree]

Yeah, the photography section has really declined.

I mean, no offense to the people who submit these, but why are photo's like this even being accepted?

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29172
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29169
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29136
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=28577
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=28524
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29108

It's just a shame to see such beautiful photos mixed in with stuff that doesnt even belong.

[*Intercourse.*]

^Yea, I've noticed it as well. Also theres a backgrounds being submitted that the members didn't even make which I really have never though should be allowed.

[Spirited Away]

No punishment needed.

How about a panel of judges. Maybe an automated system of anonymous staff "yay's/nay's" of a graphic. If two out of three says it's bad, then it's bad and should be rejected.

[*Intercourse.*]

^thats kind of like the idea Jusun had a while back but it just seemed to much trouble to do. It was something like you had these points and you could see all the stuff that needed to be rejected or accepted and everyone that had these points could vote of the thing. Once the item had 10 votes for being accepted it would automatically be accepted. Although with one negative it would be automatically rejected. Also the staff still had all the power to accept and reject graphics as well.

And of course I don't think any punishment should be due. A lot of people just don't look over the rules but of course the staff should look over the rules and perhaps leave a tab open of the rules so they can look back and see if it is up to the rules standards and requirements.

[Spirited Away]

That sounds complicated. I think only staff should have voting power since there were put into that position, and three should be the maximum. Also, if two staff (out of three) think the graphic is good, then it should be good. Right? 10 is... wow.

You know, many companies train their employees into the position that they were hired for. So, if a staff isn't doing well in judging which is a good graphic... Counsel... whatever. If that doesn't work... the hiring process should be adjusted to look for those who can recognize good/poor graphics.

[*Intercourse.*]

Yea it was really complicated thats why it was kind of 'thrown out' per say.

Yea I think for the design position they should do something like that and it almost seems like they do somewhat. Although they don't give them graphics and tell them which ones should be rejected or accepted and write a rejection letter for the ones that need to be rejected. That would be something good to do. At least not in the actual application but in the interview.

[iDecay]

^ I thought they do write letters explaining the reason why it was rejected? I've only had one rejection and got a PM, so I wouldn't really know, though. It can get tiring having to send them out. But of course, would be really helpful. It is part of their job anyways.

[*Intercourse.*]

^nah I think they just ask you if you had to write a rejection letter say for this one thing what would you say?

I think it would be better to just give them about 5 graphics and ask them which ones need to be accepted or rejected and then ones that need to be rejected write a letter for. It would show what their standards were.

[iDecay]

Were you referring to the interviews or the current mods? Because I'm a bit confused..

[*Intercourse.*]

No when there is a hiring session and when you get interviewed thats what they do.

[iDecay]

Ah, okay.

I think they should do that now with the current staff. Obviously, the graphics aren't up to par..

[Gypsy Eyes]

Holly that's a really good idea, thought ten might be a better number. Have some that are good graphics, but break the rules.

edit: Wow this is the worst quality I've seen in awhile
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29993

Please please please view full size before accepting!

[*Intercourse.*]

^Oh man, that is really bad!

I think that really needs to be pointed out that when accepting/rejecting graphics always view the full view.


Doing that with the staff now would be fine too.


Need to be resized and perhaps be resubmitted:
users:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=413203 - both of their submissions
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=489763 - I think its possibly all their submissions
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=513729

Single submissions:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30069
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=480407 - first three
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29898
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29770 - possibly rejected completely the quality is really bad.
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29752


Isn't the quality kind of low on this?
- http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29293 - or possibly on quite of few of her submissions?



Layout wise,

Is it just me or is the image quality on this layout horrible?
http://www.createblog.com/layouts/preview.php?id=17622

[misoshiru]

Is it just me or is the image quality on this layout horrible?
http://www.createblog.com/layouts/preview.php?id=17622

Not to mention that they didn't code it themselves.

[kimmytree]

No punishment needed.

How about a panel of judges. Maybe an automated system of anonymous staff "yay's/nay's" of a graphic. If two out of three says it's bad, then it's bad and should be rejected.

Maybe we could have a graphics/layout staff that would be in charge of accepting/rejecting things? Not that any of the other staff members aren't capable of doing it, but that way they could stick to modding the forums.

[freeflow]

^Oh man, that is really bad!

I think that really needs to be pointed out that when accepting/rejecting graphics always view the full view.
Doing that with the staff now would be fine too.
Need to be resized and perhaps be resubmitted:
users:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=413203 - both of their submissions
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=489763 - I think its possibly all their submissions
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=513729

Single submissions:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30069
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/index.p...uthor_id=480407 - first three
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29898
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29770 - possibly rejected completely the quality is really bad.
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29752
Isn't the quality kind of low on this?
- http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29293 - or possibly on quite of few of her submissions?
Layout wise,

Is it just me or is the image quality on this layout horrible?
http://www.createblog.com/layouts/preview.php?id=17622

Because they were already accepting I'm don't really think we should reject them for being too big. (Plus they are still usable) I know we have rules and obviously they were not followed, but since they are not actually horrible (not all) I don't think the size issue is a good enough reason for them to be removed. Even if the rule was violated. The images that are low quality though , I will go through as soon as I can.

The icon - Those cartoon type-images are usually kind of low but I think the texture helps give it that "misty" look but I'd say it looks fine.

Maybe we could have a graphics/layout staff that would be in charge of accepting/rejecting things? Not that any of the other staff members aren't capable of doing it, but that way they could stick to modding the forums.

In my opinion thats a little too much. Just doing some type of punishment would work out better. Having a whole other group just to do the accepting/rejecting seems "out there" just a little bit. Plus part of being on the job anyway is accepting and rejecting graphics not just moderating the forums. So yea. Thats just my opinion I don't think a whole nother group of staff is needed.

[technicolour]

Maybe we could have a graphics/layout staff that would be in charge of accepting/rejecting things? Not that any of the other staff members aren't capable of doing it, but that way they could stick to modding the forums.

But even then you'd still have the difference in standards.

[kimmytree]

^ That's true, but the group of staff could be picked by the talent they've showed in the graphics they've submitted. Ehhh idk.

[*Intercourse.*]

Maybe we could have a graphics/layout staff that would be in charge of accepting/rejecting things? Not that any of the other staff members aren't capable of doing it, but that way they could stick to modding the forums.

That was brought up once. But as Toya said, its just going way to far with it all.

[technicolour]

A committee would be pretty senseless. Sorry, I just got a chance to read the whole thread. There would be a longer wait to see if your graphic passed in the queue, and the longer wait means more build up. Plus, not everyone is on at the time, and its hard trying to get everyone together. Whoever is a part of this committee would have to be someone who isn't busy. And, well, chances of finding that is, well, slim.

We need to make a limit on who can submit graphics. Yes, the whole "You-need-X-posts-to-submit-graphics". I think by doing this you will knock out some of the stupid jockers who steal from DevArt and various other places, and sort of make people work for the right to submit their graphics. I seriously think this will eliminate A LOT of the, well, horrible graphics that are in plentiful in the queue.

Also, uh, I really feel weird stating this, but as I have realized from work, if you don't say anything at all, then nothing can be improved. Honestly, I think too many people have access to the queue with, like, minimal design experience and don't quite understand the ideas behind the standards. Now, I'm definately not going to name names because a) I dont want to sound like a bitch and b) my head would go rolling out the window. I think that ANYONE who has access to the queue should have a better understanding behind these rules/guidelines before they can accept/reject shtuff.




Whew. That was fun.

[radhikaeatsraman]

I don't think anyone has brought this up, but when is the design staff going to remove the bad graphics that were posted in here?

[technicolour]

They have been removed. You can still view them though. They're just not viewable through the graphics tab thingie up top. The graphics stay in the system, for, like, ever.

[radhikaeatsraman]

Ohh, okay.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Also, uh, I really feel weird stating this, but as I have realized from work, if you don't say anything at all, then nothing can be improved. Honestly, I think too many people have access to the queue with, like, minimal design experience and don't quite understand the ideas behind the standards. Now, I'm definately not going to name names because a) I dont want to sound like a bitch and b) my head would go rolling out the window. I think that ANYONE who has access to the queue should have a better understanding behind these rules/guidelines before they can accept/reject shtuff.
Whew. That was fun.

Exactly. Just because you are active and know what you're talking about with help and such doesn't mean you can judge a good graphic.

[*Intercourse.*]

Or are you saying the staff isn't hiring qualified people in design positions?

i think its that =X

[Gypsy Eyes]

Not so much that, they might be qualified as far as giving help and such but with accepting graphics. I can think of a few people like that.

Oh by the way the bad graphics have NOT been removed

edit: and again
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30176
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30086
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30085
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30082
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30081
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29491
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29438
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29378
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29374
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29365
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29360
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29331
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=29328

[*Intercourse.*]

I hate to say this and get in the middle of everything but I agree with this:

Not so much that, they might be qualified as far as giving help and such but with accepting graphics.

Its really true, there are just some people out there that are completely qualified to give out help and perhaps be on staff but to go in the queue and help accept or reject things just isn't for them. Of course they want to help but perhaps its better if they don't. =X

[Gypsy Eyes]

Sorry about being a pain in the ass

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30265
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30254
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30240

Bright contrast does not make a good photo, in fact it takes away from the image

these aren't allowed:
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=6262
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=7184

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=6331

[*kryogenix*]

Yeah, cB is really going down the drain.

[Gypsy Eyes]

^haha that was an expected comment.

Why is everything except the one graphic that was jocked from DA still there?

[*Intercourse.*]

^I don't think their going to bother deleting stuff once its been accepted now.

I don't think they really want to go through a new house cleaning because it almost puts a bad name on the staff in that their incapable to accepted/rejecting the right graphics the first time around that they have to do a massive new house cleaning again.

I hate to say that.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Eh, whatever. It's just going to lead to a giant house cleaning anyway. Wouldn't it make sense to just do it in smaller sections?

[freeflow]

^I don't think their going to bother deleting stuff once its been accepted now.

I don't think they really want to go through a new house cleaning because it almost puts a bad name on the staff in that their incapable to accepted/rejecting the right graphics the first time around that they have to do a massive new house cleaning again.

I hate to say that.

Actually we do. Its been spoken about but whether or not it will be done for sure hasn't been decided yet. Its pretty noticeable that it needs to be done, so personally I would say we leave the ones Jackie mentioned till we do it. (If its going to be a while , then I'll go through them now) At least that way its part of the process. I'm going to bring it up again to see if we can start the process soon.

[radhikaeatsraman]

I think as much as it would reflect poorly on the design staff, another house cleaning is needed. But after this, house cleaning should be banned, and bad graphics should be COMPLETELY removed from the database.

[*Intercourse.*]

^yea although to sadly say it. Its never going to be that easy. Some of the people on positions in the design areas are still going to be on staff and their still going to keep accepting the bad graphics.

To keep the graphics completely up to the standards someones going to have to go back and check through the accepted to graphics.

[*StanleyThePanda*]

^ Yes, its going to be the same staff. But after the house cleaning, hopefully all of the staff will keep their standards high when going through the queue.

I'm sooo excited for this house cleaning+raising the standards.

Holly, a few pages back you posted a link to a user whos pictures were too large; They've been removed.
I left everything else (low quality/poorly taken picture) for the house cleaning. Since we are having one, There is no need for me to go through and reject a ton of stuff just yet.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Wasn't that the point of the first house cleaning, to make sure it wouldn't been done again? The same people are just going to go on accepting poor graphics. It didn't stop them last time.

[*Intercourse.*]

Alright well I agree with Jackie but its nice to hear you guys are agreeing to doing another house cleaning. I remember I brought it up a while ago and everyone was against it.


If you guys need any help feel free to ask

[Gypsy Eyes]

Sorry that last post wasn't supposed to come out as mean as it did

Same here^

[freeflow]

Wasn't that the point of the first house cleaning, to make sure it wouldn't been done again? The same people are just going to go on accepting poor graphics. It didn't stop them last time.

Yea , thats true but really it won't hurt. There are graphics that you and others are pointing out and if any of us go throw a few months back I'm sure we'd find more. So overall it wouldn't hurt. Personally I think some of the graphics are getting better (as I mentioned before but not here) there are still a few that just shouldn't be there, but a House cleaning is just going to help. I don't see a problem with the process.

I mentioned this to Holly earlier, and you both have been pointing out graphics which I agree should not be there as well, which is why I mentioned to her that this time around , if possible, it be good to allow members to point out some of the bad graphics. This is a really unorganized idea but I was thinking about us having a thread that people could post the links to bad graphics. (Personally I think it'd be better if it was posted toward the end of the process so if things were missed , they can be removed, if its thought they should be since we can't delete everything someone says should be deleted, if it isn't that good of a reason for it to be.) There could be other ways to do it . That was just my idea.

Personally I think it would be great if both of you helped out especially. The thread was more for "overall" anyone else that wanted to post their opinions on some.


Dang I hope that made some sense.

[Gypsy Eyes]

What I don't understand is if you are not rejecting the graphics that are obviously below the standard why did I just get 6 pms saying layouts have been rejected when I know quite well they are better than a lot of the stuff still there? It would be no problem if stuff like this and this were being rejected too.

[freeflow]

Why not PM and ask the person that rejected it ? I mean this time around we are having it so (well in most sections and blogger is one of them) that the Blogger staff reject the blogger layouts. Myspace -> Myspace. So yea. The process also isn't over and to my knowledge I don't think blogger is done, at least it wasn't reported to be so if you really want to know I'd say just ask. Or wait to the end then make your statements about those.

[gelionie]

This graphic should be rejected:

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/download.php?id=30253

[technicolour]

Why?

[*Azarel*]

So on a whim, I clicked on avatars/icons and I have to say that these two accepted graphics confuse the shit out of me (as to why they were accepted?):

http://www.createblog.com/graphics/graphic.php?id=30618
http://www.createblog.com/graphics/graphic.php?id=30624

[gelionie]

Kristina: Well... I just don't think that photo was taken well. There's a garbage bag in the background. :|

[technicolour]

No offense, but thats not a real good reason. It's a beautiful photo. It shows the relationship between the dog & cat really well. Just because there is a trashbag in the background doesn't really mean much.

Once again, no offense.

[gelionie]

^ it's okay. Just my opinion.

[immavietgirl]

i think its okay too.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Yeah um what?

http://www.createblog.com/layouts/code.php?id=18111
http://www.createblog.com/layouts/code.php?id=17777

HORRIBLE image quality.

[*superstitious*]

Thing is, Jackie, that although the first one looks like it's been through a gaussian blur blizzard, some people might like that. I think that's why it was accepted.

I don't personally think that the second one's image is all that lacking in quality. I wouldn't particularly go for all the textures/brushes/patterns or what not that was used, but again, that doesn't mean that someone might not really appreciate that layout and use it.

It's important to remember that when the reviewers look through layouts (especially in light of this), they weigh in both a sense of quality and a sense of what a general audience might like and use, not just what highly skilled designers would use.

Just trying to bring in some perspective is all, I totally respect your opinion(s). Perhaps you should/could voice some of your concerns there as well? I know that Jusun looks at that thread (or at least he was, since he created it).

[*digitalfragrance*]

Thing is, Jackie, that although the first one looks like it's been through a gaussian blur blizzard, some people might like that. I think that's why it was accepted.

Yep, that's why I accepted it. My first gut reaction was "what?" when I saw it, but when I clicked on the preview, I saw it was meant to be blurred and that it looked good with the rest of the design. I think the designer was after a "dream-like" sense.

The second one... I had rejected previously... and someone else went back and approved it.

[Gypsy Eyes]

^it's not even the gaussian blur. It's the actual image quality. It's blurred grain, which looks a million times worse than regular blur.

[*digitalfragrance*]

^ But if you look at the text quality of the banner, it isn't blurred. So the blur that they applied on the image was meant to happen. I thought this was a cool take on a "dreamy" layout ... like a "school girl crush" one.

[*SinfullySweet*]

Well, in this layout

http://www.createblog.com/layouts/preview.php?id=18373

everything looks really sloppy,
the headers are hard to read
and the images are really low quality
why was that layout accepted?

[falsetigerlimbs]

Well, in this layout

http://www.createblog.com/layouts/preview.php?id=18373

everything looks really sloppy,
the headers are hard to read
and the images are really low quality
why was that layout accepted?

agreed. =/
it reminds me of geocities.

maybe because we need more masculine layouts? idk

[*SayBloodyMary*]

^ Well as far as needing more of a certain type of layout, there really isn't much we can do about that, because we can only accept what people submit.

[*SinfullySweet*]

^ Well as far as needing more of a certain type of layout, there really isn't much we can do about that, because we can only accept what people submit.

Wait, so you're saying that layout was accepted onlybecause we need more of those types of layouts?

[*mzkandi*]

Although, it doesn't suit my taste, the layout is not that bad. While it may not suit your taste or standards, that doesn't mean it won't appeal to someone else. And lastly, I would like to refer to you to this topic. I'm thinking all of the above was going through the mind of whomever accepted it.