Hi guest. Welcome to FreakingNews! Register (free) or Login     
    Live Help  
FreakingNews homepage
Forums | FN T-Shirts | Chat Room | Site News | Member Search | Hall of Fame | 

All Forums
News Contests Discussions

Losing Karma


Register or Login
to Post in This Thread.


Page 1 2 3 4
HoHouse
Republicans
3/21/2013 10:51:10 PM


Status: Commander in Chief
Hey Azure that's me, but I don't care, I'm a fast chopper working my way to the bottom, or until I get tired of seeing chops low balled or FN gets tired of me. It's a game.
Comments: 4078
Contest Entries: 6931
HoHouse

Malcolmxy
Independents
3/22/2013 3:24:55 AM


Status: Attorney General

On 3/21/2013 10:51:10 PM, HoHouse said:
Hey Azure that's me, but I don't care, I'm a fast chopper working my way to the bottom, or until I get tired of seeing chops low balled or FN gets tired of me. It's a game.



by the way - thanks for digging on the stuff I made. You didn't know they were both me when you were doing it, but still, it was nice of you to say what you did on both.

Obviously, the horse one wasn't a joke (I just wanted to see how well I could mask out the horse in a minimal amount of time and make the wing look like it belonged there the whole time), but the thing is, most of mine are jokey. The only difference between my jokes and others is that mine are more subtle (sometimes...sometimes I like to just be completely juvenile), and don't ALWAYS include the same, lame, obvious cast of characters.

Prat falls hurt, but they're easy (and, don't get me wrong...I love them when they're placed correctly...and sparingly).

Anyway, after a bit of a hiatus, and especially after looking at the rest of the entries in that contest (because I knew my Pi entry had no chance, no matter how clever it was), I figured, "cool...there's no way I won't place in THIS one."

Then I didn't.

I thought my St Patrick's entry was pretty good as well. I'm sure no one noticed, but the green in the hair was different than the green on the skin, and the eyes weren't originally orange (I always thought orange got the shaft on St. Patrick's Day...must be a Protestant thing).

It didn't deserve to win, but man...who's a guy gotta blow around here to get a little respect?

ANYWAY

I got booted from W1K again for telling the mods to f*ck off after they dq'd an entry in an abstract contest for being too abstract (are you f*cking kidding me?), so I'll probably take my lickin's here some more...long enough to open up a new account, anyway (I always feel bad when I do, because msgtbob is so nice and accommodating to me each time and I hate lying to him, but oh well...)

[Edited by User on 3/22/2013 3:26:34 AM]
Comments: 847
Contest Entries: 271
War is over, if you want it

AzureSky
Independents
3/22/2013 7:09:39 AM


Status: Commander in Chief
Malcomxy said
I got booted from W1K again for telling the mods to f*ck off after they dq'd an entry in an abstract contest for being too abstract (are you f*cking kidding me?), so I'll probably take my lickin's here some more...long enough to open up a new account, anyway (I always feel bad when I do, because msgtbob is so nice and accommodating to me each time and I hate lying to him, but oh well...)


Mgstbob has been popping over a bit more lately. Why do you react defensively? I would have asked them to define precisely what they mean by abstract. Do they mean Jackson Pollock style for instance? Salvador Dali? Braque or something more literal?

I took a look at the abstract contest on Worth and the winner was clearly a surreal image. Definitely not abstract in the true sense of the word. Maybe the mods need to study art history and learn the different types.

What next? Will they be calling Michelangelo a surrealist? Picasso a classical portrait artist (actually he could do that when he chose) Confusing Aboriginal art with African Tribal art? the list goes on, if anyone fancies adding to it.



Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

AzureSky
Independents
3/22/2013 8:26:46 AM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/22/2013 3:24:55 AM, Malcolmxy said:


Anyway, after a bit of a hiatus, and especially after looking at the rest of the entries in that contest (because I knew my Pi entry had no chance, no matter how clever it was), I figured, "cool...there's no way I won't place in THIS one."

Then I didn't.

I thought my St Patrick's entry was pretty good as well. I'm sure no one noticed, but the green in the hair was different than the green on the skin, and the eyes weren't originally orange (I always thought orange got the shaft on St. Patrick's Day...must be a Protestant thing).

It didn't deserve to win, but man...who's a guy gotta blow around here to get a little respect?




Malcom, I liked you Pi entry but agree it was probably too far out for many people to understand, or appreciate the level of difficulty.

The St Patrick's Day entry didn't mean much to me as I have no idea who the man is. I think it could have done with something obvious like a shamrock badge added.

You know, I hadn't thought about the Orange/Protestant connection. Now you have mentioned the Orange it is obvious.

There is always a fuss during the Marching season. All thos Orange men marching through the Catholic areas. Just asking for trouble.

I have always found the Southern Irish easier to get on with than the Northerners. I have known a lot of Southerners and am friends with one to this day.


Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Malcolmxy
Independents
3/22/2013 8:35:26 AM


Status: Attorney General

On 3/22/2013 7:09:39 AM, AzureSky said:
Malcomxy said
I got booted from W1K again for telling the mods to f*ck off after they dq'd an entry in an abstract contest for being too abstract (are you f*cking kidding me?), so I'll probably take my lickin's here some more...long enough to open up a new account, anyway (I always feel bad when I do, because msgtbob is so nice and accommodating to me each time and I hate lying to him, but oh well...)


Mgstbob has been popping over a bit more lately. Why do you react defensively? I would have asked them to define precisely what they mean by abstract. Do they mean Jackson Pollock style for instance? Salvador Dali? Braque or something more literal?

I took a look at the abstract contest on Worth and the winner was clearly a surreal image. Definitely not abstract in the true sense of the word. Maybe the mods need to study art history and learn the different types.

What next? Will they be calling Michelangelo a surrealist? Picasso a classical portrait artist (actually he could do that when he chose) Confusing Aboriginal art with African Tribal art? the list goes on, if anyone fancies adding to it.







I think that newsie and mac can confirm that I am, when politely confronted with a reason for a decision I may not like, quite gracious and understanding when that decision is accompanied by the reasoning by which it was made.

In this instance, I made this pic for the abstract contest relating to anger:



It's a fairly famous/common b&w pic (which I can't seem to find at the moment) that I layered onto itself using a "dodge" blend (that got me the basic outline and flushed out the background white), replaced the hair with fire, added one effect from a plug-in, erased all the fine details and blacked out her front teeth to build the devil out of the negative space in her mouth.

I'm quite proud of it, overall.

Not checking my messages or my entries over at W1k terribly often, I only found out that my entry had been DQ'd for "painting elements" after the contest had already begun.

When I reviewed the other entries, I noticed that many of them looked similar, stylistically, with one being almost identical, except that person had a (sub-par) face drawn into a background of fire as opposed to the blank, negative space I chose to use.

Another person used an ACTUAL painting as a background, and the examples go on from there.

So, I sent a message asking why my entry had been singled out given that half (at least) of the entries that weren't DQ'd had these same painting elements.

What I got in response was a bunch of trolly, ridiculing, ridiculous nonsensical bullsh!t.

So, I called them on it, and they banned me.

I don't respect everyone I've encountered in my life, but I never disrespect anyone I've not encountered.

HOWEVER

If someone chooses to be a d!ck to me, they quickly find out that I am infinitely better at it than they are.

That's why.
Comments: 847
Contest Entries: 271
War is over, if you want it

pegleg
Independents
3/22/2013 3:38:33 PM


Status: Presidential Chief of Staff

On 3/21/2013 8:59:34 PM, JannaR said:


I'm aware of how the voting karma works, I've been a member since 2004. But what I am commenting on, is the fact that we,Azure & I, are voting on what we know to be true & fair according to the voting guidelines. But when other, newer, people are amazed by the meme, cartoonish & bobble-head chops....they all vote high. Leaving our votes looking as though we're lowballing the scores. But we're not. We are following the guidelines. If an entry does not warrant high scores, I am not going to start voting 7's, 8's & 9's just to boost my karma.



And that is exactly my issue as well.

Comments: 1761
Contest Entries: 199

Hitspinner
Independents
3/22/2013 4:12:19 PM


Status: Commander in Chief
Yep, I notice that my karma has gone up and down like a roller coaster and I have not changed how I vote since I went AWOL in 2010. Back then I stayed pretty steady at 200. So lately its been bobbing and left me scratching my head as to what I might have changed. Now I realize voting is just trending differently.
I'm starting to feel guilty. I'm not really sure who started it even though I was accused, but I really don't think I am responsible for introducing the characterizing of celebs. However, I sure exploited it in a lot of chops and a lot of choppers were like minded and there was a big boom in those styles that seems to have rooted to this day. Rodney even took it to the next level and turns a buck at it.
So, the style is probably not going to go away because we humans like goofy schitck. But we can agree to limit the exotic techniques and styles to gertain venues I guess. It's all up to our fearless leader. It might be lousy business sense to change anything though and in the end, FN is a business and it's survival depends on the greater number of raised eyebrows and laughs.
Cheers ya'll
Comments: 17245
Contest Entries: 1280
Hitspinner the Wise

AzureSky
Independents
3/22/2013 8:57:35 PM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/22/2013 8:35:26 AM, Malcolmxy said:

Malcomxy said
I got booted from W1K again for telling the mods to f*ck off after they dq'd an entry in an abstract contest for being too abstract (are you f*cking kidding me?), so I'll probably take my lickin's here some more...long enough to open up a new account, anyway (I always feel bad when I do, because msgtbob is so nice and accommodating to me each time and I hate lying to him, but oh well...)

I think that newsie and mac can confirm that I am, when politely confronted with a reason for a decision I may not like, quite gracious and understanding when that decision is accompanied by the reasoning by which it was made.

In this instance, I made this pic for the abstract contest relating to anger:



It's a fairly famous/common b&w pic (which I can't seem to find at the moment) that I layered onto itself using a "dodge" blend (that got me the basic outline and flushed out the background white), replaced the hair with fire, added one effect from a plug-in, erased all the fine details and blacked out her front teeth to build the devil out of the negative space in her mouth.

I'm quite proud of it, overall.

Not checking my messages or my entries over at W1k terribly often, I only found out that my entry had been DQ'd for "painting elements" after the contest had already begun.

When I reviewed the other entries, I noticed that many of them looked similar, stylistically, with one being almost identical, except that person had a (sub-par) face drawn into a background of fire as opposed to the blank, negative space I chose to use.

Another person used an ACTUAL painting as a background, and the examples go on from there.

So, I sent a message asking why my entry had been singled out given that half (at least) of the entries that weren't DQ'd had these same painting elements.

What I got in response was a bunch of trolly, ridiculing, ridiculous nonsensical bullsh!t.

So, I called them on it, and they banned me.

I don't respect everyone I've encountered in my life, but I never disrespect anyone I've not encountered.

HOWEVER

If someone chooses to be a d!ck to me, they quickly find out that I am infinitely better at it than they are.

That's why.



I just looked up abstract and anger on Worth. The one thing they have in common is a coloured background. Not sure why yours would have been DQ'd, unless they do not appreciate or understand simplicity.

The pic you used reminds me of Janet Leigh in Psycho. I think the whiteness and simplicity of your image is why it was DQ'd. Not that I agree with the decision.

Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

macwithfries
Independents
3/22/2013 10:19:49 PM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/22/2013 8:35:26 AM, Malcolmxy said:

On 3/22/2013 7:09:39 AM, AzureSky said:
Malcomxy said
I got booted from W1K again for telling the mods to f*ck off after they dq'd an entry in an abstract contest for being too abstract (are you f*cking kidding me?), so I'll probably take my lickin's here some more...long enough to open up a new account, anyway (I always feel bad when I do, because msgtbob is so nice and accommodating to me each time and I hate lying to him, but oh well...)


Mgstbob has been popping over a bit more lately. Why do you react defensively? I would have asked them to define precisely what they mean by abstract. Do they mean Jackson Pollock style for instance? Salvador Dali? Braque or something more literal?

I took a look at the abstract contest on Worth and the winner was clearly a surreal image. Definitely not abstract in the true sense of the word. Maybe the mods need to study art history and learn the different types.

What next? Will they be calling Michelangelo a surrealist? Picasso a classical portrait artist (actually he could do that when he chose) Confusing Aboriginal art with African Tribal art? the list goes on, if anyone fancies adding to it.







I think that newsie and mac can confirm that I am, when politely confronted with a reason for a decision I may not like, quite gracious and understanding when that decision is accompanied by the reasoning by which it was made.

In this instance, I made this pic for the abstract contest relating to anger:



It's a fairly famous/common b&w pic (which I can't seem to find at the moment) that I layered onto itself using a "dodge" blend (that got me the basic outline and flushed out the background white), replaced the hair with fire, added one effect from a plug-in, erased all the fine details and blacked out her front teeth to build the devil out of the negative space in her mouth.

I'm quite proud of it, overall.

Not checking my messages or my entries over at W1k terribly often, I only found out that my entry had been DQ'd for "painting elements" after the contest had already begun.

When I reviewed the other entries, I noticed that many of them looked similar, stylistically, with one being almost identical, except that person had a (sub-par) face drawn into a background of fire as opposed to the blank, negative space I chose to use.

Another person used an ACTUAL painting as a background, and the examples go on from there.

So, I sent a message asking why my entry had been singled out given that half (at least) of the entries that weren't DQ'd had these same painting elements.

What I got in response was a bunch of trolly, ridiculing, ridiculous nonsensical bullsh!t.

So, I called them on it, and they banned me.

I don't respect everyone I've encountered in my life, but I never disrespect anyone I've not encountered.

HOWEVER

If someone chooses to be a d!ck to me, they quickly find out that I am infinitely better at it than they are.

That's why.


From reading the rules of that contest I believe it revolved around "abstract concepts"? Not whether an entry looks "abstract" in a traditional art way?

So the contest was to create a visual representation of the "abstract CONCEPT of anger".....

I'm presuming your entry was DQ'd because worth separates entries over there that use photos and mostly realism from entries which are mostly effects and "painting elements"?

Illochop/Painterly - Used interchangeably, they describe an image that is more illustrative than photographic. In an effort to keep the voting on an even playing field, these images are *not* permitted in the FX section, except when the Illo/Painterly guideline is waived in the contest rules.

So was your chop more "illustrative than photographic"? To me it is....

There's one that used a painting as a base, but that's a different ball of wax....as they manipulate paintings in the FX contests there all the time...(photoshopping an existing painting)

I'm just giving you my interpretation based on the worth rule above in relation to what you've said as to why it was deleted, from looking at your DQ'd chop, and the chops remaining in the contest.

I like the abstract simplified look you gave to the screaming woman source too...it's quite effective....it just probably doesn't fit into that contest due to the rules in the FX section....that's all...

But that's just my two cents.....


[Edited by User on 3/22/2013 11:10:01 PM]
Comments: 5844
Contest Entries: 230

Malcolmxy
Independents
3/22/2013 11:55:24 PM


Status: Attorney General

On 3/22/2013 10:19:49 PM, macwithfries said:

From reading the rules of that contest I believe it revolved around "abstract concepts"? Not whether an entry looks "abstract" in a traditional art way?

So the contest was to create a visual representation of the "abstract CONCEPT of anger".....

I'm presuming your entry was DQ'd because worth separates entries over there that use photos and mostly realism from entries which are mostly effects and "painting elements"?

Illochop/Painterly - Used interchangeably, they describe an image that is more illustrative than photographic. In an effort to keep the voting on an even playing field, these images are *not* permitted in the FX section, except when the Illo/Painterly guideline is waived in the contest rules.

So was your chop more "illustrative than photographic"? To me it is....

There's one that used a painting as a base, but that's a different ball of wax....as they manipulate paintings in the FX contests there all the time...(photoshopping an existing painting)

I'm just giving you my interpretation based on the worth rule above in relation to what you've said as to why it was deleted, from looking at your DQ'd chop, and the chops remaining in the contest.

I like the abstract simplified look you gave to the screaming woman source too...it's quite effective....it just probably doesn't fit into that contest due to the rules in the FX section....that's all...

But that's just my two cents.....


[Edited by User on 3/22/2013 11:10:01 PM]



I disagree with you, but since you said what you did as politely as you did, were you a mod at w1k, I would have accepted what you said (begrudgingly, though quietly so) and moved on, but the mods over there (sans one whose userid i can't remember any longer) are giant ssholes who refuse to accept the fact that they aren't always perfect.

Why can't people on the internet ever admit to making a mistake, or is this not a new phenomenon?

(thanks for finding the source...I'm a little scattered these days)
Comments: 847
Contest Entries: 271
War is over, if you want it

pegleg
Independents
3/23/2013 12:04:42 AM


Status: Presidential Chief of Staff
There are definitely some outstanding choppers over at w1k...I check in there frequently to look around. Usually always blown away by the top placing entries.
Comments: 1761
Contest Entries: 199

JannaR
Independents
3/23/2013 12:31:10 AM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/22/2013 4:12:19 PM, Hitspinner said:
Yep, I notice that my karma has gone up and down like a roller coaster and I have not changed how I vote since I went AWOL in 2010. Back then I stayed pretty steady at 200. So lately its been bobbing and left me scratching my head as to what I might have changed. Now I realize voting is just trending differently.
I'm starting to feel guilty. I'm not really sure who started it even though I was accused, but I really don't think I am responsible for introducing the characterizing of celebs. However, I sure exploited it in a lot of chops and a lot of choppers were like minded and there was a big boom in those styles that seems to have rooted to this day. Rodney even took it to the next level and turns a buck at it.
So, the style is probably not going to go away because we humans like goofy schitck. But we can agree to limit the exotic techniques and styles to gertain venues I guess. It's all up to our fearless leader. It might be lousy business sense to change anything though and in the end, FN is a business and it's survival depends on the greater number of raised eyebrows and laughs.
Cheers ya'll


Don't get me wrong...schtick is good....when it's done well. But I'm talking about things like:
Shadowing - just because you add one doesn't mean it's good. If it make the addition float off the ground/chair when it's obviously supposed to be standing/sitting on it....not good
Adding lot's of extra images into a chop: within context, fine. Makes it a bit busy...but ok. But each addition having a different contrast, perspective, lighting angle/source.....not good.

So, style and taste, I don't vote on. I don't compare one image to the next. I look at full view. And I vote accordingly. I don't care who wins, but the idea behind voting is to hopefully inspire choppers to improve.



[Edited by User on 3/23/2013 12:33:05 AM]
Comments: 4198
Contest Entries: 369
“I’ve got plenty of common sense…. I just choose to ignore it.”- Calvin and Hobbes.

Hitspinner
Independents
3/23/2013 5:59:15 AM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/23/2013 12:31:10 AM, JannaR said:

On 3/22/2013 4:12:19 PM, Hitspinner said:
Yep, I notice that my karma has gone up and down like a roller coaster and I have not changed how I vote since I went AWOL in 2010. Back then I stayed pretty steady at 200. So lately its been bobbing and left me scratching my head as to what I might have changed. Now I realize voting is just trending differently.
I'm starting to feel guilty. I'm not really sure who started it even though I was accused, but I really don't think I am responsible for introducing the characterizing of celebs. However, I sure exploited it in a lot of chops and a lot of choppers were like minded and there was a big boom in those styles that seems to have rooted to this day. Rodney even took it to the next level and turns a buck at it.
So, the style is probably not going to go away because we humans like goofy schitck. But we can agree to limit the exotic techniques and styles to gertain venues I guess. It's all up to our fearless leader. It might be lousy business sense to change anything though and in the end, FN is a business and it's survival depends on the greater number of raised eyebrows and laughs.
Cheers ya'll


Don't get me wrong...schtick is good....when it's done well. But I'm talking about things like:
Shadowing - just because you add one doesn't mean it's good. If it make the addition float off the ground/chair when it's obviously supposed to be standing/sitting on it....not good
Adding lot's of extra images into a chop: within context, fine. Makes it a bit busy...but ok. But each addition having a different contrast, perspective, lighting angle/source.....not good.

So, style and taste, I don't vote on. I don't compare one image to the next. I look at full view. And I vote accordingly. I don't care who wins, but the idea behind voting is to hopefully inspire choppers to improve.



[Edited by User on 3/23/2013 12:33:05 AM]


Spoken like a true artist... or teacher even. There have been times when I lost to some of thos floating shadow chops. Nearly sends me to the pub. I ask myself why the New Jersey did everybody give a pass on some of the most rudimentary mistakes. I am a real hardliner on placement, form and intensity of shadows. If any of you got 6s or 7s from me then your shadowing is where you should look first. Makes or breaks a chop IMO. But sometimes the communication content and impact of a chop is so good it begs technical forgiveness.

Comments: 17245
Contest Entries: 1280
Hitspinner the Wise

AzureSky
Independents
3/23/2013 4:41:35 PM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/23/2013 12:31:10 AM, JannaR said:

Don't get me wrong...schtick is good....when it's done well. But I'm talking about things like:
Shadowing - just because you add one doesn't mean it's good. If it make the addition float off the ground/chair when it's obviously supposed to be standing/sitting on it....not good
Adding lot's of extra images into a chop: within context, fine. Makes it a bit busy...but ok. But each addition having a different contrast, perspective, lighting angle/source.....not good.

So, style and taste, I don't vote on. I don't compare one image to the next. I look at full view. And I vote accordingly. I don't care who wins, but the idea behind voting is to hopefully inspire choppers to improve.




I am not quite sure what schtick is never heard of that word. I definitely agree about the infuriating lack of knowledge regarding shadows.

I have seen experienced shadows get them wrong. Worse are the floating things that would be so easy to put right.

If a chop is interesting and eye catching, chopped cleanly and has the light and shadows done properly it will get a good mark from me.

The bobble heads are hard for me, I think it takes more than a big head to make a caricature.

I remarked on a big head and was informed it was a caricature. It wasn't because the face remained in proportion.

At least I kept my karma on the last contest, so will vote again as I did not enter the last contest.

If we keep pegging away JannaR, people may start to put more effort into getting the details right.
Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

AzureSky
Independents
3/23/2013 4:48:10 PM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/22/2013 10:19:49 PM, macwithfries said:

From reading the rules of that contest I believe it revolved around "abstract concepts"? Not whether an entry looks "abstract" in a traditional art way?

So the contest was to create a visual representation of the "abstract CONCEPT of anger".....

I'm presuming your entry was DQ'd because worth separates entries over there that use photos and mostly realism from entries which are mostly effects and "painting elements"?

Illochop/Painterly - Used interchangeably, they describe an image that is more illustrative than photographic. In an effort to keep the voting on an even playing field, these images are *not* permitted in the FX section, except when the Illo/Painterly guideline is waived in the contest rules.

So was your chop more "illustrative than photographic"? To me it is....

There's one that used a painting as a base, but that's a different ball of wax....as they manipulate paintings in the FX contests there all the time...(photoshopping an existing painting)

I'm just giving you my interpretation based on the worth rule above in relation to what you've said as to why it was deleted, from looking at your DQ'd chop, and the chops remaining in the contest.

I like the abstract simplified look you gave to the screaming woman source too...it's quite effective....it just probably doesn't fit into that contest due to the rules in the FX section....that's all...

But that's just my two cents.....




Good and helpful explanation.

Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

AzureSky
Independents
3/23/2013 4:52:25 PM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/23/2013 12:04:42 AM, pegleg said:
There are definitely some outstanding choppers over at w1k...I check in there frequently to look around. Usually always blown away by the top placing entries.



Do you chop on Worth1k? I put some chops on there, sometimes they tank because I missed something obvious or they are rubbish. Occasionally they place in the middle. I have even won a gold and silver. The voting on there is mostly very fair and I agree with the placings.

Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

AzureSky
Independents
3/23/2013 5:06:09 PM


Status: Commander in Chief
Well I voted but didn't get them all done in time doh!
Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

pegleg
Independents
3/24/2013 12:44:25 AM


Status: Presidential Chief of Staff

On 3/23/2013 4:52:25 PM, AzureSky said:

On 3/23/2013 12:04:42 AM, pegleg said:
There are definitely some outstanding choppers over at w1k...I check in there frequently to look around. Usually always blown away by the top placing entries.



Do you chop on Worth1k? I put some chops on there, sometimes they tank because I missed something obvious or they are rubbish. Occasionally they place in the middle. I have even won a gold and silver. The voting on there is mostly very fair and I agree with the placings.




I never have, but look around over there often. Very impressive choppers

Comments: 1761
Contest Entries: 199

AzureSky
Independents
3/24/2013 10:05:39 AM


Status: Commander in Chief

On 3/24/2013 12:44:25 AM, pegleg said:

On 3/23/2013 4:52:25 PM, AzureSky said:

On 3/23/2013 12:04:42 AM, pegleg said:
There are definitely some outstanding choppers over at w1k...I check in there frequently to look around. Usually always blown away by the top placing entries.



Do you chop on Worth1k? I put some chops on there, sometimes they tank because I missed something obvious or they are rubbish. Occasionally they place in the middle. I have even won a gold and silver. The voting on there is mostly very fair and I agree with the placings.




I never have, but look around over there often. Very impressive choppers




Some the contests would be right up your street, pegleg. The knot one has just finished and is open to vote. Chop a hippo looked fun but I didn't have time to enter. Some of the contests are a bit gory. I cannot face the current eyeball one.
Comments: 12495
Contest Entries: 1352
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

pegleg
Independents
3/24/2013 5:09:14 PM


Status: Presidential Chief of Staff
I can see you winning golds and silvers, for sure.
Comments: 1761
Contest Entries: 199

Page 1 2 3 4

You must log in to comment!

home - register - login - contests - galleries - FAQ - terms of service - tutorials - guidelines - privacy - copyright - contact - ^top

Madonna Facelift Anthony Hopkins Mugshot Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama Joined Mime Vice President Mickey Rourke Facelift Tommy Lee Jones Facelift

© 2019, Freaking News. Code by Worth1000. Page generated at 11/15/2019 1:29:48 AM in 0.125 seconds.