The March 2010 FArt Battle

Seriously, guys? Maybe its because I just woke up and am heading to class and I've had no caffeine and am NOT a morning person but.... really? As Pyro said, I explained my view on the rule through PM, so I don't know why it was brought up again here.

Yeah, the rule is very VERY loose. Its only there as an extra bit of seasoning that people can either play with and have fun, or pretty damn easily satisfy by throwing anything female in there. As I said in PM, I find most chicks pretty hot. Its a joke!!! Why do we have to have gigantic discussions about it?!

If its going to be such a freaking problem, I'll just forget about it for next month. Jeez.

I like ( o Y o )...even if they look like this ( o Y . ) ...so please keep this in the rules!

Rules have to be stated clearly and enforced clearly, or else there's a murky area of favoritism and opinion that can ruin any competition. If people don't know what the boundaries are, then how are they supposed to stay within them? Also, it's unfair to the people who limit themselves artificially in order to try and stay well within the undefined limit.

It's essentially like trying to play Four-Square with the playground monitor saying that Jimmy is out, but Sarah is in, when there's no lines on the blacktop. Everyone is going to question the decision, no matter how biased or fair it might be.

The moment you subject people to rules, you're responsible for their enforcement. Don't get mad at the players for their confusion. From the outside perspective, this could seem entirely unfair. This responsibility falls upon the rule-maker solely.

You said you'd enforce the rules carefully to avoid last year's dramah. You put in the 'Hot Chicks Rule' in the official rules. I wouldn't blame anyone for calling you out on it, because you want to enforce it so lackadaisically. If it was never a requirement, then you should have not added it in the first place.

I'm a big believer that rules should be enforced and that even the appearance of bias or impropriety should be avoided...

I also believe that, for the most part, this drama was fully covered back before the deadline for January.

As I recall, the drama that month centered around Shia and his Mako swimming piece. There originally appeared to be no female at all in the piece and it's validity was questioned. He seemed to hem and haw for a bit and eventually modified the art to have Mako in a bikini...

His entry was only then deemed valid by Wassy. I believe it was at this point that the Hot Chick rule was pretty much defined as a tongue in cheek rule intended to add fun and spice to the competition. That piece being allowed proved the "chick" certainly did not need to meet the typical definition of "hotness" to qualify...

I believe it was also about this time that Wassy explained that she was more interested in the artists intention to meet the rule than the actual execution of it... Basically, if the artist intended a part of their piece to satisfy the rule, even if in a cheesy, cheeky, play on words type way (my baby chick on fire) or some other sneaky way (Mako in drag) then all was good - They were having fun with the rule which is what it's intent was.

So far I think Wassy has been doing great with it...

As for this month, I do believe there could he a couple questionable pieces but by looking alone I don't see a single piece without someone or something the artist could have intended to have meet the Hot Chick rule...

In a few of the pieces it seems Alice is the intended qualifier. This may be a bit pervy since Alice is generally thought of as not of legal age but then again I am sure I'm not the only perv around here...

In at least ohe piece Alice is a bit nutty and scary looking... But some people are into that kind of thing. Face it, some Goth chicks are hot. X

Anyway, we could ask each artist what their intended qualifier for the hot chick rule is but, as I mentioned, I believe each piece has something that could qualify under the "intention" clause of the rule. The only piece I can definitively say the artist does not have an element they intended to satisfy the rule is my own... I plum forgot, really.

As for every other submitted piece, unless the artist wants to admit they did not include a hot chick, or at least some element the intended to satisfy that rule, I think they all squeek by. Sure it wasn't the T&A or cheesecake of earlier months but *shrug*


Wassy - personally I think you are doing a fine job and I hope you don't let the continued hassle over this rule force you to give it the ax. I think most everyone knows it is intended for fun and whimsy and not as a clear cut and dry rule...

It's kind of like comparing the out of bounds rule in football to the roughing rule. There is a clearly marked line the separates in bounds from out - cross it and the play is dead. As for roughing, it's a rough sport and roughing could be called on someone pretty much every play... But that isn't the intent if the rule and people know it. Roughing is ill defined and rightly so... The more you defined it the more controversy there would be due to something being called that, strictly speaking, didn't fit the letter of the law.

If the Hot Chick rule was a hard and fast definitive thing then we'd be having people DQ'd just due to artistic skill (me) or because the judges definition of hit wasn't the same as the artists...

So it's a fun little aside and I have no problem with it or how Wassy has handled it...

Caemgen, I see no problem at all with your entry qualifying per the 'Hot Chick' rule. None.

And where's April's theme??

Less drama and more arts, I say! I wanna get cracking!

(hmmm, will the theme center on April Fools? Easter? Bunnies? Zombies??)

My

@ Caemgen: Haha no way are you getting off that easy.
Almost every entrant used Alice as their hot chick... the only clear exceptions that I see is Pyro with The Queen of Hearts/Countess and possibly Happy Dan (depending on how he interprets the scene) so we would all be out on that technicality... Nice try but you my friend are still in it... suckah!

@ Pyro: Nonsense buddy! You have the right to voice an opinion same as anyone... and what's this non-artist baloney?

Are you participating in an Art contest?

Then you are by definition an Artist for the duration... and if you think that's a technicality and you have no "real skill" I'd say your last entry or two would beg to differ with you.

@ Wassy: I <3 my FArt Mistress! ...but yeah you did leave the door open on this.
This is not anything new going on as this same kind of thing happened in both prior years contests so it should not come as a surprise and you shouldn't blame people for questioning something that is stated as a rule but is not strictly adhered to.

That said I am willing to abide by your rulings... if you say the piece is accepted then it is... end of story. People can still ask for clarification, voice opinions or suggest a better solution going forward (like the pick 3 rule I suggested) but the call for this month has been made.

I for one am in favor of keeping the Hot chick rule as a rule and am enjoying seeing how people use it creatively or poke fun at it. If they go too far or fail to meet muster well that's no big deal, they can change/fix (as has happened successfully already) it and the contest goes on.

@Jk: "I like ( o Y o )...even if they look like this ( o Y . )"
On this we agree... variety is the spice of cleavage... or something.

@ Suichiro: Darn you for making sense and using logical arguments I agree with! ...where's the fun in that?
Yeah I agree with much of what you just typed, go figure.

One --> Artz Giveaway <-- To Rule Them ALL!

I will settle this. ORANGE FTW! - Ex Libris

Yeah, that's the thing. My answers on this rule have been the same since before January. Nobody has asked for any NEW clarification, quite honestly, and I've been giving the same response many many many manymanymany times.

And as I stated, THIS time it wasn't the question being raised again. It was the fact that I answered the question through PM, the same way I HAVE been answering the question, pointing back to the past examples as to why its the same call, but then it was still brought up here regardless of the fact that I explained my call.

The rule is pretty open-ended, but I haven't changed how I've judged it since the get-go. I'm not judging it lackadaisically at all. I'm holding to the same standard as I have the entire time. I don't know what better examples people really need beyond what was hashed out in January... because that covered all the bases possible.

I'll keep the rule in for April... but really, if there's another huge essay-fest, then its done. There's no point to it if its only a cause for debate and not the extra parameter to be creative with that I intended.

It's not an extra parameter, Wassy. It's an extra restriction. Perhaps that is why some people might feel frustration towards it. You've artificially limited the artists further, driving them into a narrow field simply to satisfy your own likes. It very much smacks of backpedaling from your original stance, when the threat of losing artists to some arbitrary rule that should have never been included.

You want to keep as many artists in as possible, but also eliminate artists at the same time to make it a competition. Those two don't work together. Choose one and stick with it. I would have respected you much more if you actually enforced your 'Hot Chicks' rule more strictly, rather than calling it a hard rule and then waffling around it like it was a suggestion. That's exactly the situation that existed before you took over, and that was what you seemed like you wanted to avoid. Looks like it didn't turn out that way at all.

I for one approve of the hot chick rule. But i'm not the one drawing... just oogling

for the record: I wholeheartedly support Wassy's position on this, and her consistent ruling on it. I see no problem with it as it stands.

(puts on flam-suit)

I think Shia still has me on a restraining order for this month since we are working on fic stuff , but I think i'll be free and clear to give my oponion next month .