Just got to say, you've definitely earned distinction as an MTGS hero
Quote from Stardust »
Because he's the hero MTGS deserves, and the one it needs right now. So we'll global him. Because he can take it. Because he's not just our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. An expired rascal.
Quote from LuckNorris »
ExpiredRascals you sir are a god-like hero.
Quote from Lanxal »
ER is a masterful god who cannot be beaten in any endeavour.
Personally, while I have no mad skillz with the animation, I think that there should be a limit on the avatar file size even for those who do. I'm not sure what this forum enforces off hand, but I think we should use that number. (25KB? 30KB? Like I said, I'm not sure off-hand...) With this rule in place, it would be a contest of avatars, not a mini-movie contest shrunk to 100x100px. (Don't get me wrong; I think the 'tog's sumbissions are really cool, but they can't be used as avatars, so I don't think they should be a part of a contest for avatars.
600x100 minimum banner size. I've been over this plenty already, so I'll just say it hinders the creativity of the artists. Also, I would advocate a smaller minimum size than Watza was suggesting, something more like 200x50.
Avatars have no file size limit. This is absurdly biased towards people who have flash and lots of time. Avatars, like banners, should be of a usable size (40 KB). FPM covered my concerns nicely.
Rules I Somewhat Take Issue With
Once you posted an entry, you cannot change it. While I understand the reasoning behind this rule, I don't really believe copying would happen particularly often, nor would it be particularly harmful. If something has gone overboard in copying someone else, the voters will punish them for it. And if someone is really worried about this happening, they can PM the entry to you.
Avatars have to 100x100, not smaller or bigger. Similar to the issue about banners, smaller allowed avatars opens up more room for creativity. In addition, many still avatars simply don't reach one or more of the bounds.
By that general law, someone could complain about how people with photoshop have more advantage than them and that all entries should be made with paint. People should be allowed to use what is at their disposal.
Very true! I couldn't agree more! Let those with flash make avatars as well as the tools they have allow, but set a size limit on it so that cinimatic squares are not entered in lieu of usable avatars. If people want to make little flash movies, more power to 'em. But there should be a seperate contest for it. This is a contest for banners, the occasional wallpaper, and forum avatars. If people can't use them for their avatar, I don't think they should be allowed as entries into a competition for who can make the best forum extras.
I respect your reasoning on the matter I bolded, but that shouldn't be the reason we should limit avatars. By that general law, someone could complain about how people with photoshop have more advantage than them and that all entries should be made with paint. People should be allowed to use what is at their disposal. If they have flash, good for them, you don't? sorry man, better luck next time (note I do not have flash and for av's I use the good ole imageready)
Good point. It's worth pointing out that sheer effort and programmatical availability are much more useful in creating a good avatar of unlimited size than they are a good banner, but the point I made wasn't very good. Nevertheless, I still remain opposed to the lack of a filesize maximum, because as FPM has pointed out, it results in the creation of movies, not avatars, and that's not what we want. In addition, with a 40KB maximum, the animated avatars will be relatively limited in their complexity so that still avatars may have a chance to compete against them.
Yeah this is known by all presumably. But I was just stating that what you said was the right thing but for the wrong reasons. I agree a limit should be set and, same as with the banners, have some special themes where the limit is enchanced slightly...
Just to put in my 2 cents, I completely agree with the proposed rules changes here. I really have nothing to say on the avatar side, but the arguments for instituting a file size limit (probably the 40kb that the forum uses) are good enough for me. As for ILA's suggestions of making some contests without size limits, I would like to reference to FPM on this one and say that those really just end up being mini-movie contests and not avatar contests. So, if we put in a file size cap on the avatars, we should have it hold for all avatar contests.
As for the sigs, I see no reason why they shouldn't be required to be 100 pix tall. If they're shorter than that, chances are they're not 600 pix wide, so you can just blow the thing up to be that tall. However, you should definitely be allowed to make them less than 600 pix wide. I'd say probably 400 pix min, though. So basically, I'm suggesting a size range of 400x100 to 600x100.
Ah, one thing I forgot to mention. I would be very pleased to see a "No voting for yourself" rule enstated. Otherwise, there's rampant voting going on for reasons other than artistic merit.
Props to all the rules changes suggested above. Since this is a forum contest, the way I see it submissions should adhere to the forum rules. Id est: banners can not be larger than 600x100 but may be smaller, and avatars may exceed neither 100x100 dimensions nor the 40 kB maximum file size.
I can also see where Nex3 is going with his proposed "contestants can't vote for themselves" rule, it's pretty standard fare in other competitions anyway. Since I don't have the skills (nor the time or patience to acquire them) to enter the contest I don't really care either way, but it wouldn't be a bad addition to the rules imo.
I rarely vote for myself anyway based on the fact that I rarely think my submission was in the top three, but there does seem to be an awful lot of people voting for themself whether or not they think (from an objective standpoint) they have one of the top three entries.
Basically, I support the "no voting for yourself" proposition.
De Banaan, where the Hell are you? I see you online, but not a single peep from you regarding Week 31. Do you need a replacement or an assistant, or are you going to fix this inactivity problem?
So, since DeBanaan doesn't seem to be paying attention and no one seems to have any arguments, why not just make these changes official rules and no-longer-rules as of Week 32?
A rule I'd would love to see:
The winner of a contest can choose the next theme, instead of the same person over and over.
I know it's impossible that the winner of week 35 (vote starts first day of week 36), to think of a subject for week 36. But hey, you can move it one week.
So, let's say a person wins week 36 (which you can see at end of week 37), he gets to name a subject for upcoming week 38. It just needs to be verified by any moderator. See it as an invitational thingie. Wouldn't that be much much more fun?
A rule I'd would love to see:
The winner of a contest can choose the next theme, instead of the same person over and over.
I know it's impossible that the winner of week 35 (vote starts first day of week 36), to think of a subject for week 36. But hey, you can move it one week.
So, let's say a person wins week 36 (which you can see at end of week 37), he gets to name a subject for upcoming week 38. It just needs to be verified by any moderator. See it as an invitational thingie. Wouldn't that be much much more fun?
I like that idea in theory, but there are lots of issues with timing. I've seen other contests run that way, and the sad truth is that most of the time people just don't log in often enough to post the theme in time. Also, since, say, the winner of Week 34 is only decided at the very beginning of Week 36, there's very little leeway. So the only way to be relatively sure that they'll have enough time is to have them decide the theme for the contest two weeks later. Then we have to find a way to remember who wins what; it just gets really crazy. However, we're not opposed at all to not having to think up themes on our own; if you want, I could set up a suggestion thread.
Or you could just have the people running with a serious chance (due to already visible votes) of winning send you their options and then when the time comes you put it up
That's a good idea. I really like the idea of having the winner of one week choose the theme for two weeks later (as in the week after they find out they won), and that's a good way to aviod the problem Nex3 states.
I like that solution. I don't really think a vote is neccessary... I strongly doubt anyone would actually oppose it. Expect next week's theme to be chosen by Watza, blurrycloud, or Charlie Donaldson. Just for my own sanity and desire to have everything in order, on the Friday before each week I'll PM the top three contestants (or more if it's close, or fewer if it's not) and ask them for their suggestions. If they don't reply, DB or myself can always come up with the theme on our own.
I've got a interesting idea that may or may not be good.
What if, during Avatar and Signature making weeks, the person who made the avatar/signature has to wear it for the duration of that week (Submissions+Poll) or be disqualified. This way, it'd encourage top-notch images even more, while showing off your work and advertising the contest.
I don't really like that idea because it creates the problem that if you want to enter something into the contest, you're then stuck with it for the week. Even if it's an absolutely amazing piece, I would still rather use a more personalized avvy/sig that people can recognize you by. If you are forced to change it every week or not enter the contest, that, in a way, defeats the purpose of the avvy/sig IMO.
Also, it will discourage new shoppers from entering the contest because if they don't like whatever they made they won't want to wear it around for a week, but if they don't enter it, they probably won't get much feedback.
I would appreciate if you would keep the discussions in this thread from now on, and the contest threads for the contests.
ok, now go, and enlighten me with your ideas
(ew, what's that gooy stuff, it makes the thread all Sticky)
OP stolen from De Banaan
Body Count: GRRRUUUUUUUUUUU
إن سرقت إسرق جمل
Level 1 Judge
My Cube for use with 6th ed. Rules
contest based on 1 image, which is given and contestants do their best to pimp it up
Instead of using one image, use either image of Dark Ritual.
( 0.0 )
=O ((U/R)) O=
(")(")
I'm an AI making Magic cards.
http://www.staalmedia.nl/nexus/#generate
..keep your mind open enough and someone is going to throw some crap in..
..cause i'm sick of being treated like i have before
like it's stupid standing for what i'm standing for..
..it's not faith if you're using your eyes..
Portfolio · Evolution = Wrong
..keep your mind open enough and someone is going to throw some crap in..
..cause i'm sick of being treated like i have before
like it's stupid standing for what i'm standing for..
..it's not faith if you're using your eyes..
Portfolio · Evolution = Wrong
As for the sigs, I see no reason why they shouldn't be required to be 100 pix tall. If they're shorter than that, chances are they're not 600 pix wide, so you can just blow the thing up to be that tall. However, you should definitely be allowed to make them less than 600 pix wide. I'd say probably 400 pix min, though. So basically, I'm suggesting a size range of 400x100 to 600x100.
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
I can also see where Nex3 is going with his proposed "contestants can't vote for themselves" rule, it's pretty standard fare in other competitions anyway. Since I don't have the skills (nor the time or patience to acquire them) to enter the contest I don't really care either way, but it wouldn't be a bad addition to the rules imo.
Basically, I support the "no voting for yourself" proposition.
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
if you don't agree, i think you should have your say to everyone and ask for more feedback before changing the rules....
-Blurrycloud-
-Jester-
The winner of a contest can choose the next theme, instead of the same person over and over.
I know it's impossible that the winner of week 35 (vote starts first day of week 36), to think of a subject for week 36. But hey, you can move it one week.
So, let's say a person wins week 36 (which you can see at end of week 37), he gets to name a subject for upcoming week 38. It just needs to be verified by any moderator. See it as an invitational thingie. Wouldn't that be much much more fun?
( 0.0 )
=O ((U/R)) O=
(")(")
I'm an AI making Magic cards.
http://www.staalmedia.nl/nexus/#generate
Anyway, another vote to support this new idea!
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
What if, during Avatar and Signature making weeks, the person who made the avatar/signature has to wear it for the duration of that week (Submissions+Poll) or be disqualified. This way, it'd encourage top-notch images even more, while showing off your work and advertising the contest.
Also, it will discourage new shoppers from entering the contest because if they don't like whatever they made they won't want to wear it around for a week, but if they don't enter it, they probably won't get much feedback.
Anyway, just my two cents.
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
Thanks!
Sig and Avvy by Mr. Stuff
Looking for people to test T2 with me on MWS, Pacific or Mountain time preffered