I just have to know...

[gotegenks]

It's interesting that he kinda criticized editors and, just like in his example, people lost their shit and tried to make him see our way (kiiiiindalikeintheexample)

As a lot of people have said, the Org is the minority now, and we seem to believe that everyone on youtube, the new majority, is unable to take criticism. It's almost as if we're the outliers now like bashar said. SO what the op might have been thinking (within reason), how most, if not all, editors are unable to take criticism might just be true.

Also, what people have been saying about the lack of harshness on here as of late being the result of people moving to youtube out of their inability to take crit also strengthens the assertion that most editors can't take crit. "The bad ones that can't take crit go to youtube to get praise, and the good ones try their luck here to get more valuable praise," is what it's sounding like. Either way, we can't take crit.

Our intentions could be like that of the editor that op had his quarrel with. By posting here, knowing the reputation of this site, we all ask for crit, but do we really want it? If the video's good, even here, you're likely to get more compliments than not, and when you do in fact get criticism, if you're active on this site, then you've been conditioned to keep your cool and act like you're accepting it. But we put a lot of thought and sometimes Time into our videos, so when people find fault with it, it's easier to brush it off than to "accept it," especially when it's already announced and uploaded and finalized and there's virtually no way of going back. I don't know if i ever really consciously took anything from the negative comments on videos since i started coming here. Most of the improvement comes from beta testing. I always know some faults with my videos, but i have defense mechanisms in place to let me both accept and brush off those comments at the same time. But when i see negative comments that i don't agree with, i still get urges to lose my shit, i haven't had a popular announcement thread in a while so i still might still do it.

IDK though, i see a lot of humble newcomers in the announcement threads, so i could be wrong. I also love crit as long as it's before i upload or a while after i upload, and i do enjoy crit inbetween some times, just a lot less.

[Leader Desslock]

I didn't mean to let this sit for so long, but it's been a hell of a week for me...

I did laugh aloud at the overt fanfic author bashing. My own impression of that community's work is that maybe 1 in 100 is worth investigating, and that only a small fraction of that is worth a reader's time. If 1 in 1,000 fanfics is well-written, that'd pretty much meet my expectations. I've read some that were as good as canon, but it took hours of searching to find any one of those decent stories floating among the vast seas of meaningless drek out there..

I posted this topic (or a link to it) over an AnimeNation as well, and I was finally blessed with a response that made me think a little bit. The highlights are here:

Entertaining read...

Honestly, I don't think that Desslock's generalization of AMV creators is all that inaccurate; but that admission comes with one caveat.

... Desslock, as someone who has taught writing to others, don't you ever remember telling aspiring writers how absurd their egos must be to imagine their words worth reading?

... So, you ask why creators submit their work and fear negative responses? Simple. Because they're not good enough yet and a little part of them knows that. And the sad bit is that until they learn to step down and listen, they'll never be good enough.

I suspect you know this, though. Which is why I'm curious now.

I never thought about it that way, because I've never taught writing that way, and I was never taught to write that way. But... I can't just dismiss it, either. The more I tossed it over in my mind, the more I thought, "You know, that's almost a valid approach". I taught something comparable, of course, but... more along the lines of assuring the class that their perspective wasn't any less significant than those of great authors, i.e.: "Samuel Clemens? Just a pundit who grew up on the river. You're living in an information age beyond his wildest imagination. Write about that." or "Hemingway? An alcoholic expatriot asshole. He wrote about what he knew in a style he believed to be the most effective; you should do the same."

But... I think he has a point. When you're teaching any form of creativity, you have to teach self-confidence in one's expression. But ... can it really hurt to teach arrogance as well? I don't know. I guess that so long as one also teaches the arrogance of "you can take any criticism", then it couldn't hurt, but... I still think it's an interesting perspective.

Thoughts along those lines, anyone?

Also: Ha, thought people might jump on the chance to critique my posted writing (in the link). I don't care either way (I was personally happy with most of the piece), but I expected to get beat up a bit. Haha.

[Warlike Swans]

I liked your Grinch parody. Main thing that clashed with my sensibilities was when you stuck to the metre at points when when Seuss did not, it messed with my inner Boris Karloff.

Critiques may be more difficult over the internet than they are in person. Being reduced to purely verbal communication (and removed from real time) may make it a lot more difficult to execute both gracefully and effectively. I am also much more inclined to articulating something difficult (i.e. vague) in person than I am in text.

[Tailmon]

II never thought about it that way, because I've never taught writing that way, and I was never taught to write that way. But... I can't just dismiss it, either. The more I tossed it over in my mind, the more I thought, "You know, that's almost a valid approach". I taught something comparable, of course, but... more along the lines of assuring the class that their perspective wasn't any less significant than those of great authors, i.e.: "Samuel Clemens? Just a pundit who grew up on the river. You're living in an information age beyond his wildest imagination. Write about that." or "Hemingway? An alcoholic expatriot asshole. He wrote about what he knew in a style he believed to be the most effective; you should do the same."

But... I think he has a point. When you're teaching any form of creativity, you have to teach self-confidence in one's expression. But ... can it really hurt to teach arrogance as well? I don't know. I guess that so long as one also teaches the arrogance of "you can take any criticism", then it couldn't hurt, but... I still think it's an interesting perspective.

Thoughts along those lines, anyone?

One of the big things that people do is criticize others when they do something. Critics criticizes others because they lack the creativity to do something on their own. They are often jealous of the creativity of others. Great writers are not ordinary run of the mill people. Had they listened to the critics like Desslock we would be missing on great classics and modern books that most of us buy and love to read. It's one thing to show someone how to make great grammar. Hell computers help now. But its just grammar its not "Style." It's not the way critics like." To be truthful we all have our ways of doing things and if others love to read it. "To hell with the critics!" Because they are often wrong about it.

If you spend all the time to create an AMV and put your heart and soul into it. And everyone likes it except a critic then your the winner. It's one thing to take this person under your wing if your another AMV person and show a trick or two about things that are wrong or technical issues that can be improved and fixed. People respond better to that type of help and teaching than someone saying "Your AMV sucks because you made ????? amount of mistakes and it you did this wrong and your clueless about ????

(Oh, and Desslock you need to check your spelling its bad. Just a non Grammar Nazi pointing it out for ya!)

[Leader Desslock]

I liked your Grinch parody. Main thing that clashed with my sensibilities was when you stuck to the metre at points when when Seuss did not...

My parody came in ... I forget now... about 1/3 longer than Seuss' original poem, and it was more accurate to the rhyme and meter. There were places where Seuss intentionally diverged from the meter (the extended rhyme at the end, for example), which I mirrored.

I'm glad you enjoyed it, though! Thanks for reading it.

Critics criticizes others because they lack the creativity to do something on their own. They are often jealous of the creativity of others.

Please read Samuel Clemens' review of James Fenimore Cooper for a complete rebuttal of this sentiment, which is ridiculous and smacks of rationalization.

Great writers are not ordinary run of the mill people.

Actually, the fact that most artists are ordinary people is their greatest strength as a writer/composer/artist.

Had they listened to the critics like Desslock we would be missing on great classics and modern books that most of us buy and love to read.

That sentiment is predicated on an assumption that the great classics and modern books were written by people who never received harsh feedback and took it to heart to improve as writers. That's just as ridiculous as the sentiment you expressed above, of course.

(Oh, and Desslock you need to check your spelling its bad.

ITT: Irony.

[Leader Desslock]

A couple of points I think I missed earlier...

I like how you chased them down just to tell them their video was "eh..."

The chasing down part is pretty messed up.

Again, I didn't chase them down to give any opinion on their work whatsoever, as it had become apparent by that time that the author would not accept criticism. And... it's really not like any work goes into 'chasing' someone when there's a link to their work right in your browsing history from the day before, is it?

The flow of events was:

[AUTHOR, ON AN] "Hey, here's my video! Tell me what you think!"
[ME, ON AN] "Are you sure you want us to do that? We tend to be honest in these parts, and our feedback might not be what you want to hear."
[AUTHOR, ON AN] "Yep! Honest is good! I can take it!"
[ME, ON AN] "Well, I thought it was 'eh.'"
<Author deletes thread>
[ME, ON YOUTUBE PAGE] "Next time, please don't ask for honest feedback if you're not willing to accept it. -LD"
[ME, ON a-m-v.org] "I just have to know..."

There's not a whole lot of drama there, I don't think. Nothing creepy , trollish or stalkeresque. Just an admonishment for deleting the feedback he requested, and about which he was warned in advance.

Now, if I'd posted a huge and negative review on their youtube page, left my comments anonymous - stuff like that - I think that'd be "chasing someone down to troll/force my opinion on them." But a quick and identifiable note saying, "Not cool, dude." isn't a big deal.

[lloyd9988]

A couple of points I think I missed earlier...

I like how you chased them down just to tell them their video was "eh..."

The chasing down part is pretty messed up.

Again, I didn't chase them down to give any opinion on their work whatsoever, as it had become apparent by that time that the author would not accept criticism. And... it's really not like any work goes into 'chasing' someone when there's a link to their work right in your browsing history from the day before, is it?

From the first post:

Could I have been a lot more harsh? Sure. But these were the basic "if I had to recommend fixing something in your next attempt, these are the areas I'd work on" suggestions. They were fair suggestions, too.

The response was that the thread was deleted by the USER (I verified this). So I posted on the user's youtube site "next time, either ask for praise or accept the honest feedback for which you've asked." Nothing more. I didn't criticize the work again (no point). I left it at that, signed my name, and was done with it.

I don't see why your trying to prove to be right. If its just one AMV editor who can't accept opinions, just let it go. Its her/his own way of doing things, and, if he or she asks you for your opinion again, just refuse her/him. You shouldn't feel bad for giving an honest opinion and they don't have the right to make you feel bad when they ask for one. Arguably, it was wrong chasing an editor down in the first place, no matter what the reason may be. (IMO)

[JaddziaDax]

lloyd the guy is nitpicking semantics, he's said he didn't chase the guy down TO FORCE HIS OPINION ON HIM MORE. He did "chase him down" to continue interweb dramas though.

[Pwolf]

lloyd the guy is nitpicking semantics, he's said he didn't chase the guy down TO FORCE HIS OPINION ON HIM MORE. He did "chase him down" to continue interweb dramas though.

There's a clear difference here between forcing one's opinion on someone and pointing out unacceptable behavior. The OP isn't forcing his (or her?) opinion on anyone. They found out where the person posted their videos on youtube and told them to pretty much accept criticism when you ask for it and don't be immature about it, in a relatively nice way might I add. Some might see that as being helpful. That's hardly "chasing" someone down to "force their opinion". Would I do it? No, i wouldn't waste my time. Was it wrong to do so? No, I really don't think so. At least someone is telling this person that their behavior is bad. We've already argued over that what the guy can't take criticism, so it's a socially accepted opinion. the only opinion that was "forced" on the editor was one that everyone agrees on.

[lloyd9988]

lloyd the guy is nitpicking semantics, he's said he didn't chase the guy down TO FORCE HIS OPINION ON HIM MORE. He did "chase him down" to continue interweb dramas though.

There's a clear difference here between forcing one's opinion on someone and pointing out unacceptable behavior. The OP isn't forcing his (or her?) opinion on anyone. They found out where the person posted their videos on youtube and told them to pretty much accept criticism when you ask for it and don't be immature about it, in a relatively nice way might I add. Some might see that as being helpful. That's hardly "chasing" someone down to "force their opinion". Would I do it? No, i wouldn't waste my time. Was it wrong to do so? No, I really don't think so. At least someone is telling this person that their behavior is bad. We've already argued over that what the guy can't take criticism, so it's a socially accepted opinion. the only opinion that was "forced" on the editor was one that everyone agrees on.

Your right, I can agree with that fully. There's nothing wrong with saying that one's own behavior is unacceptable to another's own standards.

Spoiler :

Thoughts-out-loud: I guess I'm just curious why he would post this thread here at the state of mind he was in at the time. Not to mention that his writing in the first post seems to enforce his own behavior while demeaning the other person's behavior. Not to mention there's also something in his first post that makes me wonder whether he was attempting to calm his mind about this situation... Or if he was just trying to start internet drama here:

There is one group of artists that (as a group, from what I've seen on AN) has... I don't even know how to word it. They seem singularly unable to take even the tiniest bit of critical feedback. And that is the tiny group of artists posting on AN that produces AMVs.

YES, I KNOW THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE. YES, THERE ARE AMV CREATORS THAT TAKE CRITICAL FEEDBACK IN THE SPIRIT IN WHICH IT'S INTENDED. I AM NOT WHITEWASHING THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY BECAUSE OF A SUBSET OF INDIVIDUALS. DON'T EVEN BOTHER TAKING THAT TACK WITH ME.

Why would he assume that we were going to say anything about how there are some editors who take critical feedback when he already pointed out that he knows of some editors that can take critical feedback?? I don't know, I'm just typing my thoughts out lout to understand his reasoning as to why he would post here. Was it really to understand an answer to his question or was it to validate his own point to make himself feel more right than the other person??