Art Angery but they were already discussing

I apologize as I've already brought this up before in the curator server, and we just got two new updates to how the system rewards art. However, I mainly wanted to see a change in the *way* art was curated. I don't know if my suggestion from before is still being discussed by the staff, but I would like to bring this back up in Trainer Court as I have more ~complaints~ arguments as of now.

My main proposal was allowing artists to specify the type of curation they want to receive.

The current system assumes that *all* submissions *want* suggestions and advice on their piece; which I find unnecessary and makes the work snobby. It's a waste of time for both the curator and artist especially for Cash Submissions, many of which are not the artist's best work, but were submitted just for some extra money. The curator could be giving tips and suggestions that the artist already knows, but was too lazy or lacked the time to implement for the current piece. Not everybody wants advice on *every* artwork; I do not think a scholarly essay is required for *every* curation.

It's busywork that obviously strains curators, makes the job unappealing, and contributes to how slow the art section is.

This is a problem that *can* be solved with having a greater number of curators, but it doesn't need to be solved that way.

Curating does not need to mirror the Grading section. While both art and writing are similar creative activites, the medium is different and should not be treated in the same manner.

I honestly do not see a way out for Graders. The work is inherently time consuming because it involves reading large amounts of text. But just because the writing section is slow does not mean the art section has to be slow.

Cut curator wages if need be, they don't *have* to mirror graders. Referees know about battles, judges know about contests; curators are not writers.

This does not take away from curating pay entirely either; if a person worked hard on an artwork and wants some tips on how to improve, they can request for a full-length curation.

Otherwise, people should be able to ask for brief, bare-bones curations that evaluate what was good or bad about the piece and allow for a quick turnover.

I've been in URPG for 2 months, a very small period of time compared to many of the active members.

However, look at my stats.
15 Pokemon total.
0 Pokemon from captures.

Ask me to describe URPG to a friend,
"Game where you buy mons from Mart."

Is this monopoly or pokemon. Is that what you want new players to experience when you get them into the game? 2 months is short compared to the average amount of time most people active have spent; but do you want the game to be this slow?

The difficulty of obtaining mons via art will not change; the way art is evaluated is not changing. I am simply asking for Art to stop mirroring the Writing section.

Cut wages to match appropriately with shorter curations.

Decrease the workload on curators so people stop hating their jobs; you don't see them same burn out in Refs or Judges.

Increase turnover speed to make the art section attractive so people *want* to do shit and not wait a millennium.

If this is Pokemon, CAPTURING should be a primary means of obtaining new Pokemon, not BUYING FROM THE MART.

If this is game that rewards for time and effort spent (which it does in more instant activities such as battles or contests), I think I have participated adequately in the art section.

I have 6 pieces submitted for curation, zero mons captured. Although 3 are for cash, *none* of my submissions have been graded in 2 months. This not an attack at curators; but on the Art Section and the way the Curator job works.

I think it is absurd that people have to place so much emphasis on auctions for REGULAR POKEMON because getting mons outside the Mart is rare.

And I hope I didn't offend anyone, yes I have some big opinions for someone new to the game; but on the contrary this is what a new player might see when they join.

Slow, broken capture system.
Buy all your mons from the Mart.
Already been said, gonna copy it here. A system similar to the proposed solution is already being discussed by the Art heads. I'm sorry you've had this experience, and I hope your work is curated soon.
I'd love to see an overhaul of our slow sections into something more modern that allows for a more efficient turnover. I don't necessarily know what that would be, but I think your suggestion is a good start.

[Image: 359egdz.jpg]
The sad part is, as being a curator 1/2 way towards legend, my bare-bones curation have been in under extreme fire ever since I started work here. I don't think filler is a good option to go by and when I see posts that I know people are quickly hasing out for cash or a low capture only to get it denied because it didn't meet standards is usually pedantic. I have a degree in painting :^).

At any rate I would like to see this, actually. I'm not a person of any real power, but I am certainly supportive of this. Art section is super dead. I'm working on a few and I'll see if I can get to yours soon but the level of standards I am held, it seems that I do have to give a lot of filler on extreeeemely simple pokemon drawings and the effort I put in usually doesn't match the same as the person making the work.
[Image: grC1OXh]
[Image: grC1OXh]
[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=802&d=1507743197]

Img Made by Morru/Mako
Hey, Ori, thanks for your feedback. You're definitely right; there's an inherent problem with the current system and the lower activity that makes this system not work as well or as efficiently anymore. We're discussing this in a little more of live manner now in the curator server, so will be throwing feedback on the idea there soon with everyone's else discussions, and hopefully it'll be easier for everyone (you included <3) to chime in there.

juliorain Wrote:The sad part is, as being a curator 1/2 way towards legend, my bare-bones curation have been in under extreme fire ever since I started work here. I don't think filler is a good option to go by and when I see posts that I know people are quickly hasing out for cash or a low capture only to get it denied because it didn't meet standards is usually pedantic. I have a degree in painting :^).

Short curations are not, and have never been, inherently bad, and I'm sorry if that's the message that has been communicated to you in some way. This really wasn't something I wanted to be brought up, because I wanted to see you grow, improve, and move on from the feedback that was given to you, and I myself didn't want to linger on your past mistakes. However, I feel that a response is necessary, since there seems to have been some sort of misunderstanding on why we had you redo several curations.

You had great curations in the time you earned that half of a curator legend. The time when your curations were "under fire" was because they were lacking quality, not quantity. You had plenty of quantity, but that quantity was mostly filler, or heavily opinionated. You rarely explained what you were saying and struggled with giving concise suggestions for improvement, which is something that other curators have been critiqued on then and now. You often showed negative bias toward non-naturalistic styles. You also struggled with making your advice sound positive rather than sounding rude. You'd even admitted to us at the time that the reason why your curations had dropped in quality was because you were rushing through them.

Your ability then to acknowledge that you'd made those mistakes and to improve were things that Sou and I had been really relieved about. We had admired that in your growth and it's disappointing to see that there was a misunderstanding of our intentions there. If you're still unsure about why, and where, we were trying to urge improvement in your curations, you can ask your Heads and we'd be happy to discuss it with you.

As a general note, curation has never been about length--it's been about accuracy, tone, and detail. Sometimes, length happens as a byproduct because of the nature of those quality, but it's not necessitated; Axion's curations are one of the best examples of this, in my opinion. It's possible to give concise feedback and still be accurate with it. Oribhel’s are also good reference points for that also.

Either way, apologies for having to deviate from the main conversation, Ori: thank you for your feedback, and apologies if responses have been slow recently. See you in the curator server. <3
Thank you for posting, Ori. I know above they said that deeper discussion is ongoing; I know you were focused on detaching curation from the grading model, but honestly the stories section has similar troubles right now. Your bringing this up catalyzed a couple of suggestions that we graders are discussing now too; solutions may not look the same but they can have a similar spirit.

I'm also heartened that you felt comfortable posting this, even as you admitted you were still quite new. Fresh perspectives are incredibly valuable, especially when addressing something that has stymied those who've been here longer.

I also have liked the changes that have sparked from your other ideas, even though I don't see myself as an artist, they make me want to do more art. So thank you again!

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)