Weave Admin Position
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> League Business
   
Author Message

Joined: November 25, 2010
Posts: 1718
Submissions: 100
Location: Es-whoy-malth B.C.

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Dec 12, 2015 4:52 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

if you really think about it, any segment that is not documented as a weave is a new weave and ar studies of strung segments are also added as new weaves which i support as it is easier to find these studies than a text article title though an article does seem more appropriate. anyway my point is if someone wants to name a creation that doesnt have a glaringly close facsimile and put it in the weave section is it truly problematic enough having it there to merit this ongoing debate.

Joined: May 26, 2010
Posts: 236
Submissions: 30

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:05 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

djgm wrote:
if you really think about it, any segment that is not documented as a weave is a new weave and ar studies of strung segments are also added as new weaves which i support as it is easier to find these studies than a text article title though an article does seem more appropriate. anyway my point is if someone wants to name a creation that doesnt have a glaringly close facsimile and put it in the weave section is it truly problematic enough having it there to merit this ongoing debate.


Can you sober up and rephrase that?

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 691
Submissions: 390
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Dec 12, 2015 1:20 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

to address the scientific debate:

to define something is to set perimeters, rules, and guidelines and it is a scientific process itself. once "weave" is defined, then submissions either adhere to it or they do not. every time a subjective decision is made, the definition of weave changes slightly. if a weave is in the database, then it falls under the definition of weave.

what is upsetting to me, is that when a weave is rejected, we are told many reasons why it's not a weave. these reasons are not subjective. if we were told something like "it just doesn't feel like a new weave to me," then at least i would know that this is a subjective process where a person has an opinion about what a new weave is. but that's not what happens. the weave admin defines "modification," "alteration," "connection," etc. we are told scientific reasons why our submission will be accepted or not. then when we disagree with the scientific findings, the admin all go and hide behind "this is a subjective process." you can't have it both ways. well, you can, but you alienate people and make them upset. you either have a juried art website or a scientific one. i'm not saying that there is no gray area. of course there is. there will never be a perfect way of organizing the library or defining what a weave is. you can only strive to make it better. bit by bit, we can start nailing down what a weave is scientifically. we can make rules and definitions. when something doesn't fit, then the definitions need to change. we don't have to play the subjective card every time something doesn't fit.

*i'm not entering the weave admin race anymore. i just wanted to make a point.



Joined: August 10, 2005
Posts: 7095
Submissions: 337
Location: UK

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Dec 12, 2015 8:12 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Subjective seems to be the way all decisions are made here now. There's even a discussion in Weaves about removing old submissions because they are 'ugly'!
It's becoming more and more like a ghost town.
Have you noticed that the admins don't seem to be communicating with the members much at all and the members aren't posting much of anything either.


Maille Code
V2.0 T7.3 R5.4 Ep Feur MAg/Cu Wm$ Cbjpw$ G0.5/3.0 I1.5/12.0 N322.150 Pajs Dacdjsw Xa7g631p4t24w64 S88 Hipsu

Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 4610
Submissions: 106
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Dec 12, 2015 11:51 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Slagr wrote:
djgm wrote:
if you really think about it, any segment that is not documented as a weave is a new weave and ar studies of strung segments are also added as new weaves which i support as it is easier to find these studies than a text article title though an article does seem more appropriate. anyway my point is if someone wants to name a creation that doesnt have a glaringly close facsimile and put it in the weave section is it truly problematic enough having it there to merit this ongoing debate.


Can you sober up and rephrase that?

That is entirely uncalled for. If you don't understand what someone says, then please be polite when asking for clarification? If you can't do that, you are simply being a troll.

I sometimes have trouble understand what djgm is saying. That doesn't mean I have a right to be an a-hole to him...


"I am a leaf on the wind." ~ Wash
Lorraine's Chains
Gallery Submission Guidelines

Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 4610
Submissions: 106
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 12:04 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

mithrilweaver wrote:
to address the scientific debate:

to define something is to set perimeters, rules, and guidelines and it is a scientific process itself. once "weave" is defined, then submissions either adhere to it or they do not. every time a subjective decision is made, the definition of weave changes slightly. if a weave is in the database, then it falls under the definition of weave.

what is upsetting to me, is that when a weave is rejected, we are told many reasons why it's not a weave. these reasons are not subjective. if we were told something like "it just doesn't feel like a new weave to me," then at least i would know that this is a subjective process where a person has an opinion about what a new weave is. but that's not what happens. the weave admin defines "modification," "alteration," "connection," etc. we are told scientific reasons why our submission will be accepted or not. then when we disagree with the scientific findings, the admin all go and hide behind "this is a subjective process." you can't have it both ways. well, you can, but you alienate people and make them upset. you either have a juried art website or a scientific one. i'm not saying that there is no gray area. of course there is. there will never be a perfect way of organizing the library or defining what a weave is. you can only strive to make it better. bit by bit, we can start nailing down what a weave is scientifically. we can make rules and definitions. when something doesn't fit, then the definitions need to change. we don't have to play the subjective card every time something doesn't fit.

*i'm not entering the weave admin race anymore. i just wanted to make a point.

Your comments suggest to me that you don't understand the scientific process. Maille is not scientific. It will never meet "scientific standards". Rules do not equal science. Rules are subject to change from person to person and situation to situation. Scientific principles hold up despite other's trying to poke holes in them. That does not apply to maille, which is and will continue to be subjective.


"I am a leaf on the wind." ~ Wash
Lorraine's Chains
Gallery Submission Guidelines

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 1:30 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Corvus wrote:
It's becoming more and more like a ghost town.
Have you noticed that the admins don't seem to be communicating with the members much at all and the members aren't posting much of anything either.


Without getting drawn into a protracted discussion, the bandwidth we go through isn't "Ghost Town" quantity...
Given that the Discussion Board is a minor (REALLY minor, given the wealth of other Social Media available to us, in recent years) portion of the site, I hardly think that 5-10 new posts a day is ghost town worthy, either...
By that metric, MWW is also a Ghost Town, and you and I both know that that simply isn't true.

We average half a dozen or more new members daily. You're right, a lot of people don't post threads, or add things to their gallery... They use the Library, which is (arguably) exactly what we're here for.
Participation is encouraged, welcomed, but certainly not mandatory.

I'm sorry that you feel we're not communicating effectively, have you considered bringing this up in its own separate topic?



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:22 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

My topic is not based on ugly. It is based on undefined/unrecognisable/wrong.

Two weaves are not even maille.
Certain other are duplicates and wrongly tagged.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: November 25, 2010
Posts: 1718
Submissions: 100
Location: Es-whoy-malth B.C.

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 3:24 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

karpeth do you want to make these unrecognizable weaves to determine if the AR info is accurate? what is the problem exactly? there is a great deal of misinformation on the internet, you just have to try things out for yourself, if we could just follow exact instructions all the time imo it would rob us of that certain sense of satisfaction that comes with our free will.

Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 4610
Submissions: 106
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 3:53 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
My topic is not based on ugly. It is based on undefined/unrecognisable/wrong.

Two weaves are not even maille.
Certain other are duplicates and wrongly tagged.

Be specific about the weaves you are talking about. If the current admin don't agree, then be a grown-ass person and stop griping about it. Or... you can bring it up in PM with the new weaves admin in the future. If that also goes south, please stop griping about it? SRSLY!


"I am a leaf on the wind." ~ Wash
Lorraine's Chains
Gallery Submission Guidelines

Joined: August 05, 2010
Posts: 600
Submissions: 28
Location: Bar Harbor, ME, USA

Re: Weave Admin Position
Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:46 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Sigh...
Reminder:
Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Just to be clear, this is not:
{snip}
An invitation to argue -- Let's keep it civil, please.



while(!project.isFinished())
project.addRing();
// Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Eo.n Fper MFe.s Wsm Caws G0.8-1.6 I2.4-8.0 Pn Dcdejst Xw1 S07

Joined: November 25, 2010
Posts: 1718
Submissions: 100
Location: Es-whoy-malth B.C.

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 6:27 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

just to break the other rule from what ive seen of trench guy would make a more than competent weave admin, i dont think Lorraine really wants the aggravation.

Joined: May 26, 2010
Posts: 236
Submissions: 30

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 8:01 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

lorraine wrote:
Slagr wrote:
djgm wrote:
if you really think about it, any segment that is not documented as a weave is a new weave and ar studies of strung segments are also added as new weaves which i support as it is easier to find these studies than a text article title though an article does seem more appropriate. anyway my point is if someone wants to name a creation that doesnt have a glaringly close facsimile and put it in the weave section is it truly problematic enough having it there to merit this ongoing debate.


Can you sober up and rephrase that?

That is entirely uncalled for. If you don't understand what someone says, then please be polite when asking for clarification? If you can't do that, you are simply being a troll.

I sometimes have trouble understand what djgm is saying. That doesn't mean I have a right to be an a-hole to him...


It was supposed to be a joke, that's why I greyed it out like that. I don't like following joke posts with a winky face but apparently I'll have to start doing that. I have a lot of respect for dgjm, especially for creating Moorish Rose which is one of my favorite weaves.

Joined: November 25, 2010
Posts: 1718
Submissions: 100
Location: Es-whoy-malth B.C.

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 10:53 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

its cool dude, i have been drunk for about two weeks now, back to the OP

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2015 11:44 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

lorraine wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
My topic is not based on ugly. It is based on undefined/unrecognisable/wrong.

Two weaves are not even maille.
Certain other are duplicates and wrongly tagged.

Be specific about the weaves you are talking about. If the current admin don't agree, then be a grown-ass person and stop griping about it. Or... you can bring it up in PM with the new weaves admin in the future. If that also goes south, please stop griping about it? SRSLY!


Look, I am not interested in an argument with you. Narrinna is so seldom here that this topic was created. Furthermore, discussion is more interesting than ranting. The only gripe is from you. I responded because I felt accused.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 3 of 6. Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Sep 16, 2019 9:14 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> League Business
Display posts from previous: