RE: [CR] "Goddess ATHENA"
If and as I mentioned in the comment of previous posts that I made the jaguar did not know the rules of plagiarism had a year in steemit and never informed me because you have the reason I have no problem giving credit to the original artist what what happens is that I did not know the rules as of January 5 of this year I was informed by the curator veryspider in a comment that I had to add the reference images from that moment I started to follow the rules I do not understand why the jaguar continues with its personal attack towards my person and if I add the sources now that I know in the old post the same jaguar says that the source was added later and the saddest thing of all is that in the platform and many artists who incur this error I do not know their motives but the mine was the ignorance but I hope that what is happening to my others who have not placed source of the reference images learn and it does not happen to them that It's happening to me that they did not send me a bot like they do now. With me only attacks me
@akarantain As mentioned earlier somewhere else you don't have to apologize or even to listen to these idiots. This work is not plagiarism, and even if it's inspired by this drawing it's different enough to be seen as your own creation. These ridiculous "rules" set by some overeager and ignorant snobs are meaningless. Artist get inspired by other artists all the time, they re-interpret, transform, modify all sort of inputs. Of course you can make a statement and list all of your influences on each and every artwork, but if you don't it doesn't make you dishonest or your art plagiarism. The reason these people are reporting and denouncing other artists and enthusiasts for plagiarism is their own inability to create anything meaningful. It's jealousy, ignorance, viciousness and utter stupidity!
This whole stupidity started with the introduction of artisteem (now called nTOPAZ) - and I am sorry that at the time I had recommended it to my artist friends.
But banned or not, it seems now this vindictive troll is in particular trolling nTOPAZ posts, back to the very start of it half a year ago. Him(her)self is only on Stemmit for 3 months and is causing a lot of damage here. My recommendation, particularly to those that have some SP clout: flag this useless fool into oblivion!I raised the concern about jaguar on the nTOPAZ abuse reports channel and got this message back from veryspider:
As I don't want to restate, ask that you please have a look at my comment to @gric.
I agree that Jaguar's approach would have benefited well from being seasoned with a bit more grace.
Still yet, despite the poor presentation, I cannot say the concerns he brings about are completely devoid of merit.
It's a nuanced issue and we need to be mature to address it properly.
Also, reminder that the flag is NOT the "I disagree with you" button. It is the I disagree about the rewards of the content. (I say this in your response to just blanket flag everything from J.F.)
Even if I disagree with something idealogically I would still upvote it if I perceive it possesses quality. The relationship between veracity and quality is another discussion though.
It is sad that people who have no idea about art and artists become self-appointed art-police. We were hoping to get away from what goes on Facebook in that regard.
Maybe my latest blog could be of educational use to you - including the comments made on it.
https://steemit.com/artzone/@thermoplastic/good-artists-copy-great-artists-steal-quote-attributed-to-picasso
As for downvotes/flags: seems this is done quite frequently by some whales. Has happened to a few comments of mine that pertained to the analogy of thought police, art police and Facebook vs. Steemit. Maybe direct your comments about flagging to those whales who use it, but then, hey, you get flagged!
That is uncalled for, @gric. I've tried to be very civil and hopefully mediate between the two parties. My position is there is validity in both sides.
There are some circumstances where is is appropriate to include the source of inspiration and other instances such as fan art or something that possesses numerous inspirations that may not make inclusion feasibly. I think most reasonable people would understand the omission under those circumstances.
In other instances when a majority of the design of the inspired work is derived from another, it is reasonable to indicate it as such. This would apply to a trace jobs for instance.
The second issue is the possibility of some artists employing deception to give their work a more favorable impression than it would have otherwise. To assume that nobody would employ such a tactic is naive but the question is how to respond.
Perhaps, jaguar goes overboard in their approach. If it were up to you, I would imagine nothing would be done. My position is finding an acceptable solution somewhere in the middle but I think both parties will need to give a little ground for that to be achieved.
I would recommend you first drop the ad hominem if you really care about this issue being resolved. Name calling is not the path to compromise.
Posted using Partiko Android