Wallpaper moderation gets tougher
Thursday, September 5, 2002 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
But we want to make sure the site stays focused as a skin site first and doesn't end up flooded with wallpaper. So we're starting to become increasingly pickier on what wallpapers end up on the site.
We generally focus on wallpapers that work as wallpapers (as opposed to just being artistically nice). On top of that, unique-ness helps. Using Bryce to create a landscape is very unlikely to make it up on the site for instance.
I just wanted to write this up so that there are no hard feelings on this.
Reply #2 Thursday, September 5, 2002 4:29 PM
So it would be appreciated if authors would use some self control and stay away from that XP Logo

Reply #4 Thursday, September 5, 2002 6:07 PM
To "suggest" what artists incorporate into their walls, or what they don't incorporate is a matter to be deceided by the artist, not the moderator. I can understand suggestions or "requests" made on the part of the end-user, but to discount someones creativity based on the "popular consensus" smells of censorship to me. Granted, it seems this site is narrowing its boundries to skins, next we will be hearing that maybe winamp skins are not the "skin-de-jour". Is this the reason why all the wallpapers are so similiar, because they are what the site likes? I enjoy "abstract" art as well as the next guy, but................ I guess if you want your wallpaper to "pass" give 'em what they want.

Reply #5 Thursday, September 5, 2002 8:55 PM
Thats my 2 cents, and may i mid u i am a wallpaper author

Reply #6 Thursday, September 5, 2002 9:17 PM
, many, many, skins that would not come close to making it "in" today.What I see causing more discontent than anything is not letting in a good wall when there are poor examples still in the library. That will hurt feelings.
Give the membership here an example to aspire to...
Reply #7 Friday, September 6, 2002 2:20 AM
Reply #8 Friday, September 6, 2002 2:21 AM
Reply #9 Friday, September 6, 2002 7:41 AM
Reply #10 Friday, September 6, 2002 10:34 AM
That was about a year ago. Since then the site [and its popularity] has grown, hence the larger wall count at present.
The problem seems to me to be how to 'reject' now something that had already 'made it through', except perhaps to compare dl-counts over time.....500 dl's in a week would clearly be better than only managing 500 dl's in a year, ergo the latter was 'less' of a successful wall.
If you filter your browsing through the walls by 'rating' and/or 'dl-count' [popularity], either way you get quite a high standard of works.
At the other end of the scale, save for a few glitches/anomalies, by and large, the walls are significantly less enticing....

But does 2140-odd walls signify 'culling time'?
Is it warranted?
Reply #11 Friday, September 6, 2002 10:36 AM

Reply #12 Friday, September 6, 2002 10:57 AM
Reply #13 Friday, September 6, 2002 12:35 PM
Reply #14 Friday, September 6, 2002 3:12 PM
Perhaps you could get the assistance of a few more individuals to help with the clean-up process?
Reply #15 Friday, September 6, 2002 7:51 PM
Reply #16 Friday, September 6, 2002 8:17 PM
I think the DL success-rate should be a reasonable criteria.....and that could most likely impact on some works/artists whose work is not normally moderated due to their access level....[yep, I can see mine going, even now]...

Reply #17 Friday, September 6, 2002 9:05 PM

Reply #18 Sunday, September 8, 2002 3:50 PM
If you have to design within boundaries it is not fun. One wants to explore, try new things, so you strike originality too, the more if you want the popular works. Innovative work is per definition not rated high (I have read Frogboy saying he sees less innovative wb skins for instance). Well I think that goes for walls too. People always try to imitate what gets the most popular ratings/downloads. There is a big tension between popularity and innovativity. Between concepts using 'existing' rules, and concepts that somehow seem to violate the 'existing' rules. In short: in my opinion it is impossible to eat from two walls (heh), popular/innovative. Well, I wrote this from the heart without rereading, I hope I haven't hurt anyones feelings.

Reply #19 Monday, September 9, 2002 10:09 AM
Now the ONLY time this analogy 'falls down' is when the family of 20 looks at the 'bus' and thinks 'car', but generally most will look at a 'bus' and think 'bus'...

As for suggesting to the artist what may or may not suit a wallpaper is akin to suggesting that seats for 45 passengers is a bit OTT for a 'car'...and carrying this analogy to its logical conclusion...suggestions to make a 'bus' more like a 'car' really helps with parking issues when all the parking spaces are 'car'-sized...

For 30 years now, I have been designing residences, etc for clients....they provide criteria/limitations....I fit in [comply]...[as much as possible].
If I want to be 'freely artistic' [with NO limitations] that's on my own time...or for my own use/benefit/projects....where there are no constraints or 'moderation'.
Wincustomize.com has 'limitations/criteria', for good reason....and is a reflection of the 'real-world' of Graphic Design...

Reply #20 Monday, September 9, 2002 1:16 PM
In wallpapers you are NOT free, you have to take in mind colours that are soothing for the eye for instance. "If I want to be 'freely artistic' [with NO limitations] that's on my own time...or for my own use/benefit/projects" > I have the luck being in that position! Can you stop now? And just accept there are different views?
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!








Reply #1 Thursday, September 5, 2002 2:27 PM