17 vote(s)
LSK
5
'abd Allh alfazari
5
Joshua A. Norton
5
Myrna Minx
5
GYØ Ben
5
teucer
5
Malaysian Eddy
5
Burn Unit
5
JTony Loves Brains
5
Bex.
5
Jellybean of Thark
5
Zoo Babies Pet Animals
5
Kyle Hamilton
5
anna one
5
help im a bear
5
KristinawithaK
3
Lank
Favorite of:
Terms
(none yet)52 comment(s)
it looks like you found this on google, im not saying you are a liar but more would be nice, to prove that this was actually you.
What matters is that, if it is an act of photoshop and no real clocks were harmed in the creation the task has not been completed and this'll get the big old red X.
And what's with the negative comment vote on my note above? I'm just asking the question. I didn't flag, or anything (though I probably will shortly if more information isn't forthcoming).
Ah... didn't realizie who this was before... didn't recognize the playa pictia!
why didn't anyone negative vote this comment? I feel left out...
And I share the wealth back at ya. I gueess when you get to -5 it is considered "bad content" and it gets hidden. Funny, that.
I gave you a comment vote to show it again. I'm an indefatigable fighter against censorship!
Join me!
Let's commentvote all bad-content-comments!
I'm totally with you, babe hawaii! Down with hiding "bad" comments!
I feel like I should vote or flag these comments, but I don't know which way would be helping or hindering your position. I also think it's a bit early to be breaking the meaning of these comment votes for ourselves. But hey, it's fun.
Jeez, you'd think minimalism was a crime around here.
Of course it's real.
1 - The photo was taken yesterday night with a camera model we know the guy owns from past praxis, or else he went to some trouble to make it look that way.
2 - It would take way more effort to photoshop a cracked watch than to just crack the damned watch in the first place.
3 - Mr. Farewelcome wouldn't bother to cheat in such an uncreative way.
But also, you can bet that we're being set up to flag and harass a fake n00b, for reasons that I hope are sound.
I'm inclined to agree that we're being set up to flag for no good reason. Which is reason enough to play along and flag, but also reason enough to vote. So I have done both.
Not that Blue, of all people, is very convincing of a n00b...
Why the hell did Norton vote? Norton should have better standards of voting, because, I'm sorry BLUE, this completion is less than delightful.
He's an emperor. He does as he will.
"Ah... didn't realizie who this was before... didn't recognize the playa pictia!" - regardless of who it was, your feedback is accepted. Even the most veteran players still have the OPTION to cheat. I mean, 99% of them wouldn't, but still... you shouldn't go and judge a task on whether it's done by a really awesome person, or a relative newbie. Coolness can stem from many sources.
"But also, you can bet that we're being set up to flag and harass a fake n00b, for reasons that I hope are sound"
You gotta be kidding. Can't get much more evidence than that. You must be starting to bore yourselves.
And hiding negative comments? On an open source site?
yeah. also not a fan of hiding "negative" comments.
Well, they are only sort of "hidden" (you just click a button and it is revealed), but it is labled as "bad".
It is a weirdly shunning/shaming gesture, like saying "bad, comment... no cookie for you."
I do want to say that, in spite of my "perceived" criticism, I do think the images are rather strikingly gorgeous (pun half intended). I mean I really like them a lot.
I just don't think you can kill a clock with photoshop
you effers wanted comment voting and I warned you it would be onerous.
I don't know that I'd say onerous. My first comment up at the top now is at just a -twonerous, and yours I'm responding to is at a +threenerous!
I Like the comment voting!
And I love the idea of "Voting for Apathy" like you have to take action to show how little you care. You have to be passionate about not caring.
Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin Rubin
Get it?
-Someone
"But also, you can bet that we're being set up to flag and harass a fake n00b, for reasons that I hope are sound"
You gotta be kidding. Can't get much more evidence than that. You must be starting to bore yourselves.
And hiding negative comments? On an open source site?
I like how you had to repeat that because it got hidden the first time, and this time you;ve got a positive comment vote!
That's the sockpuppet Scienceguru who repeats everything the real scienceguru says.
For whatever reason.
Damn! I got suckered! I forgot to check.
I actually wrote to the sockpuppet sg once. Got no response. You'd think that sockpuppets, being fictional, would have double the reason to respond when told politely to stop being such assholds.
the sockpuppet scienceguru is only there to further convince us that the original scienceguru is real.
Why the heck has this got 6 flags?
*sighs*
This just goes to show that B L U E should never change his name, it only leads to controversy.
Ben, it has 6 flags because no proof has been offered that any clock was damaged. No dead clock=failed task. There's no controversy. If B L U E offered more proof there'd be more votes and less flags.
Or simply that people don't play favorites when flagging borderline tasks. Or that they do and don't care for BLUE. Or something unrelated. You never know.
ok wow!!! All of these bad comments are super disheartening. Granted it's been a while since I've had time to task, but when did SFØ add absolute rules to how you complete a task? I was under the impression that SFØ and it's players encouraged those who were willing to think outside the box and create some awesome art. This seriously makes me want to quit this game completely by all of this negative behavior over something extremely creative and quite lovely.....and if you were familiar with Blue's style of photography you would know it's not photoshoped, it's actually ORIGNIAL art....
Agreed with everything you said there Eddy. Everything.
Hey Eddy, I don't think the comments are intended to be negative... at least not in the beginning... and I am sorry if they disheartened you. Actually, I'm surprised and taken aback at the strength of your reaction, and feel badly about that.
For me, I came in, didn't realize it was Blue, and asked if others thougth the image looked photoshoped, too... indirectly looking for more proof of the completion of the task (I wish I had asked more directly). I returned to find no reply from Farewelcome (still didn't know it was Blue) but a bunch of negative votes on my comment. This got me feeling a bit snarky, as you'd imagine, and I pushed harder to have more proof. Then I figured out who it was, but when the negative comment votes on my relatively bland questions rose higher and there was still no word from Blue, I let my snark out even more in hopes he would come in and make some kind of response other than comment votes. Perhas the snark was not the best path to follow, and I'm sorry for that.
No one is questioning the photo's beauty... it is stunning. No one is questioning Blues skills as a photographer... he is extremely talented (and has been known to experiment, which, even knowing his usual style wouldn't rule out photoshop...just note his current player photo... and when is photoshop not original art anyway?). All that was in question was the veracity of the death of the clock, which is required by the task (this is a game after all and there are some basic rules). And because we question the completion of a task and ask for more information, that doesn't make it "absolute rules".... for instance all I was asking for was some further proof. I didn't get the proof, which is fine (I'll take your word for it), but what's more disheartening is that I didn't even get a response, and you can't expect me to respect the praxis much if the tasker won't back up the task.
Again, sorry for the snarkiness. I'll watch it in the future and I'm sorry if it hurt anyone's feelings...
Honestly I think it's good to not realize who people are. We *ought* to be evaluating the individual task at hand, not our opinion of the person behind it.
That said - in this case, I find it to be both a stunning photograph, and less proof than I want to see. I actually think that this combination of things may have been Blue's intent, though it appears we aren't going to hear from him either way. In any case, it's a combination where my reaction is to respond appropriately and distinctly to the two pieces - which is why I flagged (since I found the documentation lacking) and also not only voted but made it my wallpaper.
You, sir, are clearly a Chrononaut (with a Capital C!) of the First Order. Staving off the rabid minutes of rank boredom and disingenuous cliche while remaining ever... paradoxic... and ephemeral. As you say, the medium is less our concern, as recipients of your artistry and vision; rather, we should reserve our judgment o. so. slightly. until the final hour. Better done than said, at times. Keep tasking, keep on it... let not the rabble of the mob dishearten nary a drop of that blood pumping. May your smoke and mirrors leave us gasping and guffawing 'til the circus leaves town!
What Burn Unit said,
plus I officially remove all questions about this task that i posed above. Clearly masterful art was achieved.
What I really want to know was how he got the hammer guy in there.
And why the hell did this comment get a negative vote?
Eh, I still feel like the task asks for more in the way of a making of - perhaps just one photo of the clock being destroyed.
But yes, masterful art was absolutely achieved.
It looks like that person is wearing both a bandana and tasking pearls!
guys... why does it have to be so black and white? It says destroy a clock. Document. It doesn't say by which means you are to destroy the clock, it's completely open to interpretation.
I think more should vote on this amazing photo.
I totally agree with you Eddy, and the previous praxis in this task shows the wide variety of destruction that has been accepted... Look at Flitworth's psychological destruction of her clock.
After seeing the photo that Farewelcome produced showing the clear damage that had been done, I don't think there is any doubt that this proof meets (and, I believe, due to the sentimental value of the timepiece in question, exceeds) all requirements for the task.
And the second "proof of pain" photo, if you look, is nearly as amazing as the first and worth a vote in and of itself.
I find this new trend among our community here to be a bit disturbing. One of the things about SF0 that makes it so interesting is being able to deconstruct the notion of rules and the subsequental concepts of division. This task is an amazing example of taking a task and bringing it up to a different level. I think we all need to cast aside some of our own preconceived idealistic notions of what proper tasking should and shouldn’t be.
Now on to the task at hand
I love this task completion, it’s different. The use of the projected image on the broken watch face is dramatic and I find it to have an interesting context.
First of all, that's an awesome photo, Mr. Mascarpone.
As for the negative comments and flagging, I can only offer that people are free to react however they choose here, and that freedom is important to the health of the SFØ community.
Art often takes people by surprise, especially when the viewer is not "braced" for the impact of what they are to experience. Both methods of presentation are valid. And clearly, as we see with JTony's evolving comment stream here, at least one viewer was taken on a journey of discovery which only happened because the artwork was not contexturalized. And that, friends, is a gift.
I've mentioned this to Blue in a PM already, but I think I ought to say it here as well:
Yes, sometimes the reaction is a reaction to surprise. I think I would not have flagged if this hadn't been Blue posting it - precisely because I respect him a great deal as a fellow tasker, admire his photography as much as the things he is taking photographs of, and have therefore come to expect more than this from him. Seeing this was a shock, and not a good one, precisely because Blue has set the bar pretty damn high for the amount of documentation I expect to see from his tasks. A result only, on the other hand, left me disappointed - even though the result was beautiful.
This is a maladaptive response which I will now train myself out of.
Thank you all so very much for your votes and comments.
Wow, I am really surprised that 3 pictures caused such a dialogue interspersed with comments.
Very interesting. Extra special thanks to Burn Unit for his inspiring words, JTony for being open to being open minded and all of those who made positive contributions to the conversation.
~Shâlaco
I can't tell for sure, but, man those cracks look fake to me. Anybody else?