"Useless" Galleries

Kirada · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 4:52 pm

This is a teensy (HA) something that has bothered me for quite some time...

A lot of people will make an account, a gallery, profile, whatever. But, when they send their first fanart (anywhere between 1-20 pictures) they stop all together. Why? Where's the point without a little consistancy?

I mean, sure, I understand that if the circumstances won't allow the person to scan/send art (per say, loss of Internet connection or scanning priviledges). That is understandable.

But when people do it, and it seems like they do it "just to do it", why are the galleries still there? I mean constant inactivity. Wouldn't that be a waste of the site's memory, a problem for other people?

Sure, some of their art is "cool" or "awesome", but if they don't keep us even the tiniest bit of "updated", where's the point in their being here at all?

Take Drop Dead Gorgeous and Pample for example. DDG sends art on a seldom basis, and she tells us that. Pample.... Well, I don't know what the deal is with Pample, but I know that a couple times a year (>_>) she'll send in some new, awesome art. I mean, both are respected and idolized. They have motive to be here, to come here, and to be consistant.

Now, some other people (some of us know who they are, and I shall not name names) will do as I said above. One or two pictures and no more. If you ask me, they should have a splay of time, a warning e-mail sent, and then about a week more before their gallery is deleted to save space.

Opinions?

warriorcat · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 4:56 pm

hey why are you putting certian people's names up? thats really rude and if might hurt their feelings. really WHAT is the piont of this article. they might create really great and cool art to some members. some members might like their art. you cant just REMOVE someones work unless they give permision to. im not a mod but i can tell you that much.

Kirada · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 4:59 pm

warriorcat*ndog wrote:

hey why are you putting certian people's names up? thats really rude and if might hurt their feelings. really WHAT is the piont of this article. they might create really great and cool art to some members. some members might like their art. you cant just REMOVE someones work unless they give permision to. im not a mod but i can tell you that much.

*ahem*

I was not "bashing" them. They were examples of some who are softly inactive but sometimes send one to five pictures in. Please, I took offense to your comment bashing me for a misunderstanding. -_-

SilverFangWolf · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:02 pm

warriorcat*ndog wrote:

hey why are you putting certian people's names up? thats really rude and if might hurt their feelings. really WHAT is the piont of this article. they might create really great and cool art to some members. some members might like their art. you cant just REMOVE someones work unless they give permision to. im not a mod but i can tell you that much.

That makes sense Warrior..But wtih only one or two pics in a gallarey is still not enough for some other viewers.

Kirara----Let me ask you this, are you saying if you don't like somebody else's artwork that you might wanna lock it is that what you are saying?Just out of curiousity. :wink:

Kirada · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:02 pm

True, and I cannot speak for the mods on why they delete her pictures. Possibly, someone reports them as stolen. Who knows, only the mod(s) who delete them.

And notice I also suggested a "Warning E-mail". This will give the gallery owner enough of a chance (in that week left after the e-mail) to revive his/her gallery.

Kirada · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:05 pm

SilverFangWolf wrote:

Kirada----Let me ask you this, are you saying if you don't like somebody else's artwork that you might wanna lock it is that what you are saying?Just out of curiousity. :wink:

Actually, no. I remember (maybe not exactly, but close enough) something about "useless" galleries being a waste of the site's memory (inactivity on the member(s)'s part). So, when I see someone who hasn't sent art say, when they first came to the site (or a couple month's after) who don't post at all anymore, I want to ask them "Why is your gallery still here if you don't use it?"

It's nothing against one individual, just those who seem to like coming, and then avoiding sending any "eye candy" like it's an epidemic.

SilverFangWolf · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:07 pm

Kirada wrote:

True, and I cannot speak for the mods on why they delete her pictures. Possibly, someone reports them as stolen. Who knows, only the mod(s) who delete them.

And notice I also suggested a "Warning E-mail". This will give the gallery owner enough of a chance (in that week left after the e-mail) to revive his/her gallery.

All I know is that I don't steel art.....

Kirada · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:07 pm

yupik wrote:

Kirada wrote:

True, and I cannot speak for the mods on why they delete her pictures. Possibly, someone reports them as stolen. Who knows, only the mod(s) who delete them.

And notice I also suggested a "Warning E-mail". This will give the gallery owner enough of a chance (in that week left after the e-mail) to revive his/her gallery.

That is a great idea. Personally, that would be wonderful. But it wouldn't be fair if we delete other galleries when Steet said himself that Pample's gallery wasn't going. And delete others'.

Another marvelous point by Yupik! What I don't understand is, on DeviantArt, Pample is oddly active. My only question is why she doesn't come here if she can come there, too. I mean, a picture a week or a month would do.

And true, it would be unfair, but someone would stand for their favorite, right? Pample is one of Steet's favorites, and I, as well, do not want to lose her gallery from the site. She is like a legacy here, just about everyone knows who she is. But, I cannot speak for Steet. This is, after all, just a rant with a small suggestion on inactive members.

SilverFangWolf · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:10 pm

Kirada wrote:

SilverFangWolf wrote:

Kirada----Let me ask you this, are you saying if you don't like somebody else's artwork that you might wanna lock it is that what you are saying?Just out of curiousity. :wink:

Actually, no. I remember (maybe not exactly, but close enough) something about "useless" galleries being a waste of the site's memory (inactivity on the member(s)'s part). So, when I see someone who hasn't sent art say, when they first came to the site (or a couple month's after) who don't post at all anymore, I want to ask them "Why is your gallery still here if you don't use it?"

It's nothing against one individual, just those who seem to like coming, and then avoiding sending any "eye candy" like it's an epidemic.

Oh, okay...I got what you meant to say :wink:

SilverFangWolf · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:13 pm

yupik wrote:

Kirada wrote:

yupik wrote:

Kirada wrote:

True, and I cannot speak for the mods on why they delete her pictures. Possibly, someone reports them as stolen. Who knows, only the mod(s) who delete them.

And notice I also suggested a "Warning E-mail". This will give the gallery owner enough of a chance (in that week left after the e-mail) to revive his/her gallery.

That is a great idea. Personally, that would be wonderful. But it wouldn't be fair if we delete other galleries when Steet said himself that Pample's gallery wasn't going. And delete others'.

Another marvelous point by Yupik! What I don't understand is, on DeviantArt, Pample is oddly active. My only question is why she doesn't come here if she can come there, too. I mean, a picture a week or a month would do.

And true, it would be unfair, but someone would stand for their favorite, right? Pample is one of Steet's favorites, and I, as well, do not want to lose her gallery from the site. She is like a legacy here, just about everyone knows who she is. But, I cannot speak for Steet. This is, after all, just a rant with a small suggestion on inactive members.

Well, she probably isn't active much because she has other things to do. Maybe. That is a tough one.

But Katikut (I may have spelt that wrong) is the most favorited on the Lion King source. She rarely sends art as well.

I wandered what happened to her..She is a killer artest!

Kirada · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2007 5:14 pm

True, it could be lack of time. Or, as I said, circumstances. Which is why I brought up the Warning E-mail. X3

Then, the owner of the gallery can say "Yes, I want my gallery deleted." or "No, don't delete my gallery..." and explain why (if desired). I mean, hey, it wouldn't be that hard, would it?

And Yupik, I now think highly of you for proving your point and not offending anyone. The difference between a debate and a discussion is how you and I have gone around in this topic. You have my respect.

Animation Source Forums

"Useless" Galleries