Lately we have noticed a lot of issues with the competitions that we hold, specifically with regards to the voting, or theme interpretations.

Several of you have commented on the biased voting in the void, and while I do agree there is some bias around here, most of the members are good enough to vote for the piece that they feel should win, but with that, what appeals to them has a large part to play. If I like say Slaves art, and she is in a competition against Fork, who I am not to fond of, art wise, I will most likely vote for Slave. Is that biased? Yes and no. Slaves art appeals to me, and will always get my vote unless Fork does something totally new that peaks my interest. At that point, if I would STILL vote for Slave, then it would be biased, but I don't see that too much here. Certainly not enough for it to skew the voting.

If you want an honest opinion about 2 tags, I will analyze them to the best of my ability, and give you my personal opinion. Just be warned, you may not like my critique, I do go into detail about it.


Now, onto the theme interpretation. I know this might be touchy, but this has to go out there, otherwise it may happen again. The limits we put on the Signature of the Week are more for easy of thread creation, and to follow with our standard rule about tag sizes in your signature space. We try not to limit a persons creativity, unless it borders on nudity, or other subjects that are best left alone. Each week, a winner gets to pick any theme he wants to work with, depending on what s/he picks, and how s/he words it, can put a lot of constraint, or freedom on what you create, but everyone interprets things differently. Some examples, lets say a theme was sports. Most people will pick a fast paced sport they see on TV, like football (american), soccer (football to the crazies here ;]), but someone else might do something about fishing. Even though it isn't the commonly though of sport, it is still a sport, and fits within the theme. Now, as for the 2 themes used, that had a lot of people causing issues with, robots and black and white. For the first theme, the term robot, commonly refers to anything with mechanical workings, commonly pictured as a humanoid shape, with arms, legs and a head. So, stuff like Rosie from the Jetsons, Robot from Lost in Space are for sure allowed, now how about androids? They are robots but more human like, are they allowed? Also, how about human controlled machines like Gundams? All of these that I have listed, I would put under the very loose term of "Robot" And even, using someone in a cardboard box with air ducting on their arms as a child's robot costume. Now, Black and White, most people immediately thought about a mono-coloured tag, and that is within the theme for sure, but unless you maybe make a tag on an old black and white film, they feel off to me. Unless you really play, and get the levels right, desaturating a tag is not the greatest idea. I myself drew an Emperor Penguin, and gave him a wicked bright orange mohawk. My reasoning behind that was, the bird itself is black and white, thus fitting within the theme, but drawing just a penguin isn't the most fun for me, so I used the 1 colour they already have, and made him unique. Yes, I used a colour within the black and white theme, but the penguin encompassed the theme. Another example is an idea Slave told me. She wanted to make a picture of a black man, and a white man, but in true world colours. You understand the theme as black and white, without actually using the shades black and white.

Everyones mind works differently, and will not answer the exact same when you tell them to say the first thing they think off, and start giving them words. So, why are you going to limit people who have abstract thinking just because you didn't think of it? Theme interpretation is wide open, and unless they really have to stretch the theme in order to explain their reasoning, all should be allowed. So, please keep an open mind, if you have any questions about something, feel free to PM a moderator, we are here to help, not babysit.