Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think some of that is cultural too. In my experience (I work in an international school, a very mixed environment) people from the US tend toward focusing on positives and trying to be nice when dealing with people interpersonally. That is not the same in all cultures. Germans for example put a higher premium on honesty over positivity and we often have misunderstandings in my workplace between these two points of view - an american colleague will be trying to be nice and put forward a criticism in a really euphemism laden way and the German colleague will take them at face value, or be suspicious that the american is being dishonest.

I find relentless positivity tiresome myself, but I know it's not coming from a bad place.

 Polonius wrote:
If I had to pick between relentless negativiy and relentless positivity, I would choose the latter. You can think something is good, and still discuss it in detail

You can think something is good and discuss it in detail, yes. But you can't discuss everything in detail. You have to carefully limit discussion to the narrow list of approved topics and refuse to allow discussion of anything that falls short of those standards. You can't have an honest discussion of a subject with flaws. And mindless fanboyism towards a subject is not a productive or useful discussion.

If somebody uses thick paint and doesn't clean mold lines, that's really okay.

Sure, you can't be arrested for doing that with your models. If you want to ruin them that's your business. But I don't want to see that trash cluttering up my groups. A group where people post awful models and the only acceptable feedback is pressing the "like" button is inevitably going to have a poor signal to noise ratio and those of us who expect more are going to stop participating.

 Polonius wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Constructive criticism is, well, constructive. It's aim is point out flaws, but also provide solutions. At a minimum, it has some value or content beyond simply stating a dislike.

Everybody has a right to their opinion, and we all love a good dog pile at times, but if you really want to talk about something, relentless negativity doesn't really add much.

You kind of answered your own question in the OP: "it seemed to simply be the moderator didn't agree with what the person was saying and had enough of hearing it." It's not like these are pure echo chambers, but repeatedly hearing unnuanced dislike isn't really discussion.

Is relentless positivity really that much better though? Is nothing but various shades of undiluted adoration really discussion? Because the OP isn't wrong that the pendulum has swung really far in the opposite direction in a lot of places now. Facebook groups are especially guilty, with many having rules that essentially ban the expression of criticism of any kind, constructive or otherwise, general or specific, to the point where beyond a few back-patting sessions about how super-duper-awesome whatever the group's subject is, they're essentially just image galleries where commenting is superfluous since the only sentiment you're allowed to express is entirely covered by the Like button.

Discussion requires at least some level of disagreement beyond "I think this thing is a 9.99 out of 10", "Well I think this thing is an 11/10!", "You're both correct, this thing is the bestest EVAR!"

If I had to pick between relentless negativiy and relentless positivity, I would choose the latter. You can think something is good, and still discuss it in detail.

As for groups that become glorified image galleries... if that's what they want to become, what' the problem? There seems to be this undercurrent in this thread that it's a social imperative that we give brutally honest feedback to people about their hobby.

Not all people want the same level of feedback. This is a hobby, not a job or relationship. If somebody uses thick paint and doesn't clean mold lines, that's really okay.

You can think something is bad and still discuss it in detail as well, it just takes a smidge of maturity from the people who like it so they don't take your dislike as a personal affront.

And you seem to be confusing "not liking something" with "being a dick to people because you don't like something" - there's a difference between "I am not a fan of this new sculpt from GW" or "this release would be more appealing to me if not for other factors that affect it" and "I dislike this thing and think everyone involved with it and everyone who like it are literally worse than Hitler and should die". There's also a difference between gaking on people's work for not meeting your own standards, and offering measured criticism especially when someone posts work publicly without any specific request to refrain from giving feedback. Yet these places I refer to don't make that distinction, or any distinctions at all, they simply outlaw anything except endless positivity.

And sure, they can do that if they like, but then they're not really a community or a discussion group despite advertising themselves as such, so what's the point?

 Polonius wrote:

If I had to pick between relentless negativiy and relentless positivity, I would choose the latter. You can think something is good, and still discuss it in detail.

As for groups that become glorified image galleries... if that's what they want to become, what' the problem? There seems to be this undercurrent in this thread that it's a social imperative that we give brutally honest feedback to people about their hobby.

Not all people want the same level of feedback. This is a hobby, not a job or relationship. If somebody uses thick paint and doesn't clean mold lines, that's really okay.

That's not asking for 'criticism' or 'feedback'. That's asking for praise. If at any point in life you do anything in front of an audience, you can't expect everyone to offer nothing but praise. That's a pretty poor expectation, and one deserving of a swift dose of 'wake up'.

As far as the groups that allow 'nothing but positive'- do you really think Johnny Slapjob needs to be treated like his work is on par with Gary Golden Daemon? No, it doesn't. That doesn't mean you tell Johnny Slapjob 'you suck', that means you say, "Dude, let me show you where you can learn some techniques".

I'm not sure if I mentioned it up-thread, but part of offering constructive criticism is what we called in Finance "KYC" or Know Your Client. It goes well for a lot of other stuff too. If you want to help someone then it's a really good idea to know if they want to be helped, and how they would like to be helped.

 Nurglitch wrote:
I'm not sure if I mentioned it up-thread, but part of offering constructive criticism is what we called in Finance "KYC" or Know Your Client. It goes well for a lot of other stuff too.

Yeah, pretty much this. I would definitely give different advice (and a stronger emphasis on the positive) to someone who clearly is just starting out or a child than I would to a skilled adult who has been progressing and would like to continue doing so.

I think most people who ask for constructive criticism already sort of know where their weak points are so there is no real reason to be a jerk when pointing them out. it's rare that I ask for advice on a model and I am completely surprised by the response.

Peregrine wrote:Sure, you can't be arrested for doing that with your models. If you want to ruin them that's your business. But I don't want to see that trash cluttering up my groups. A group where people post awful models and the only acceptable feedback is pressing the "like" button is inevitably going to have a poor signal to noise ratio and those of us who expect more are going to stop participating.

Adeptus Doritos wrote:
That's not asking for 'criticism' or 'feedback'. That's asking for praise. If at any point in life you do anything in front of an audience, you can't expect everyone to offer nothing but praise. That's a pretty poor expectation, and one deserving of a swift dose of 'wake up'.

As far as the groups that allow 'nothing but positive'- do you really think Johnny Slapjob needs to be treated like his work is on par with Gary Golden Daemon? No, it doesn't. That doesn't mean you tell Johnny Slapjob 'you suck', that means you say, "Dude, let me show you where you can learn some techniques".

I'm going to tackle these both at once, because they seem to come from the same viewpoint, which is that it's personally distasteful to allow mediocre or bad work to go on critiqued. The response to that is simple: not everything is about you. Not every painter is asking for feedback, some are just excited about what they produced.

We can get into a philosophical discussion about how communities form, and how they bring value to the members while at the same time limiting their freedom, but the short of it is that every internet community is going to have it's own goals, and mores, and standards. If you don't like them, it's probably best if you left, because clearly the rest of the community is okay with it.

I'm in a decent sized handful of Facebook minis groups, and I guess I simply don't see the behavior that people on this thread are describing. When I do so a model or conversion that is pretty lousy, it tends to get lost in my feed, simply because nobody really responds. That's the real reality, especially with social media. If you post stuff up, and nobody comments, or you get a few token "nice color scheme" type responses, when the next person gets plenty of love, that does the job.

I've found some of the Facebook groups like 'Eavier Metal to be pretty good.

 Polonius wrote:

Peregrine wrote:Sure, you can't be arrested for doing that with your models. If you want to ruin them that's your business. But I don't want to see that trash cluttering up my groups. A group where people post awful models and the only acceptable feedback is pressing the "like" button is inevitably going to have a poor signal to noise ratio and those of us who expect more are going to stop participating.

Adeptus Doritos wrote:
That's not asking for 'criticism' or 'feedback'. That's asking for praise. If at any point in life you do anything in front of an audience, you can't expect everyone to offer nothing but praise. That's a pretty poor expectation, and one deserving of a swift dose of 'wake up'.

As far as the groups that allow 'nothing but positive'- do you really think Johnny Slapjob needs to be treated like his work is on par with Gary Golden Daemon? No, it doesn't. That doesn't mean you tell Johnny Slapjob 'you suck', that means you say, "Dude, let me show you where you can learn some techniques".

I'm going to tackle these both at once, because they seem to come from the same viewpoint, which is that it's personally distasteful to allow mediocre or bad work to go on critiqued. The response to that is simple: not everything is about you. Not every painter is asking for feedback, some are just excited about what they produced.

We can get into a philosophical discussion about how communities form, and how they bring value to the members while at the same time limiting their freedom, but the short of it is that every internet community is going to have it's own goals, and mores, and standards. If you don't like them, it's probably best if you left, because clearly the rest of the community is okay with it.

I'm in a decent sized handful of Facebook minis groups, and I guess I simply don't see the behavior that people on this thread are describing. When I do so a model or conversion that is pretty lousy, it tends to get lost in my feed, simply because nobody really responds. That's the real reality, especially with social media. If you post stuff up, and nobody comments, or you get a few token "nice color scheme" type responses, when the next person gets plenty of love, that does the job.

I'm busy trying to promote my game on social media and I'll second this with an exception or two. Stuff that isn't great or engaging does sink without a trace; but so does stuff that's great and doesn't really need a thumbs-up. Additionally, I 'like' what I like, but I'm always astonished at how much goes below my radar that's pretty awesome but that I'll never notice without obsessively hunting for it. I'm hoping that most of my social media campaigning is simply stuff that hasn't hit that critical mass to get re-posted by real people as well as automated aggregators, rather than being so 'meh' that people will skip over it. Say what you will about haters, at least they care enough to let everyone know just how much you suck! I've had this perverse thought before, that I wish I was big enough, like GW, that people hated me enough to point that out.

Did you ask someone to critique your models?

Yes? Then expect, this part is good, but I think you can work on this and this, also, you painted outside the lines here. There's no reason both people can't be civil in the critique and feedback.

No? The other person should just point out what they like and leave it there. Otherwise, they can shut the feth up with any negative critique. Didn't ask your opinion, butt-in-skee.

 kronk wrote:
No? The other person should just point out what they like and leave it there. Otherwise, they can shut the feth up with any negative critique. Didn't ask your opinion, butt-in-skee.

Posting on a public forum is an implicit request for an opinion.

 Peregrine wrote:


Posting on a public forum is an implicit request for an opinion.

Going for a walk in my neighbourhood is an implicit request for my neighbours to say good morning to me and comment on the weather. Not to tell me my clothes are too thick for this weather, that my shirts colour is a poor choice and that I should quit walking, I bring shame to other walkers.

I agree with your post on not wanting groups being filled with noise. I hate digital noise, especially in wargaming groups. People posting the same old memes, paint pot spills and 'look at I brought' on release days (when ever one has brought the same damn thing) but not sharing painted models, no matter the skill level? That's what most of these groups are there for, more people should share their work, a lot more often.

Plus how the hell would you police such a thing? Ban anyone that misses a mouldline? Only except a certain level of painting skill are allowed in? Only except people that make the final cut at a competition? Only allow people to post that paint professionally, as their main occupation? Even in the top tier of painters skill sets vary radically. 'Eavy metal painters are pretty high up there in skill level, but don't come close to what you see in the really big competitions. So ban 'eavy metal level painters?

 RexHavoc wrote:
Going for a walk in my neighbourhood is an implicit request for my neighbours to say good morning to me and comment on the weather. Not to tell me my clothes are too thick for this weather, that my shirts colour is a poor choice and that I should quit walking, I bring shame to other walkers.

Not at all the same. A street is primarily a place to get somewhere, not a place for conversation, so it's reasonable to be on a street somewhere without expecting conversation. But a forum exists for the sole purpose of conversation. The whole reason to have a forum instead of a gallery with a "like" button and no commenting allowed is so that you can have a discussion of whatever is posted. And a discussion means discussing the subject, not merely spamming "LIKE" as the only acceptable comment. If you don't want comments on your work then don't post on a forum.

That's what most of these groups are there for, more people should share their work, a lot more often.

Painting groups are there to provide interesting content. A model with obvious mold lines, sloppy paint, trashy "OSL" by "look at me I have an airbrush" commission painters, etc, is not worth looking at and shouldn't be posted. Models like that belong in the box of shame, not being shared on a public group.

Plus how the hell would you police such a thing?

With honest feedback. People that post garbage will get "this is garbage" and be discouraged from posting any more of their garbage. People that post work that needs improvement and are genuinely trying to get better will get accurate feedback on where they need to improve. And people that post good stuff will get compliments, and maybe some things to improve to be even better. The first group disappears, the second two remain and provide content.

Whenever you make a post anywhere you open yourself up to interpretation of that post. You don't control the replies given, you get what you get. So if you simply post a photo of a model and give no guiding insight as to the typo of reply you're looking for; then you should expect to get critique as much as you can expect not to get critique on the model.

A simple "hey I'm just sharing this" works great.
Some sites make use of different sections for this - many photography forums have critique sections or the whole general gallery is up for critique with a "Just for fun" area where threads posted within are not to get critique. Because lets face it sometimes you don't want feedback you just want to share and that is perfectly fine.

Peregrine - I honestly can't agree at all. I mean I get where your'e going with that comment, but really a general group without any welcoming aspect toward new talent and training and nurturing new people into the hobby/interest is just setting itself up for a steady death. Especially in todays market where the mighty Facebook (and other big single social network sites) has drained the pool of members for other websites drastically.

What you describe as a gallery would be fine if run alongside another gallery focused on beginners and on teaching and improvement. But I'd hate to join an online community that was build as you describe (and in my experience such communities can fast stop being about quality and start becoming about very specific styles as users try to bully/push others into posting only what they find interesting - and my experience people like that on a forum are less inclined to contribute in a positive fashion toward the overall community).

 Peregrine wrote:
With honest feedback. People that post garbage will get "this is garbage" and be discouraged from posting any more of their garbage.

That's the problem right there. In my experience, most painters don't start out very good. Some are young, some have bad brushes, and so on. You rarely know this context when some posts their stuff.

Why run someone out of the hobby? What is the net gain?

Most people don't buy minis, paint them to the best of their ability, and post pictures of facebook thinking that that they are apparently auditioning for The Voice or something, but with total strangers as judges and absolutely nothing as a prize.

Agreed - if anything model groups don't do enough to encourage good painting and critique. There's a LOT of encouragement for assembly and construction; but I tend to see a lot less focus on the artwork.

This isn't unique to models either - art in itself has (I think through very poor teaching at school level) entered an area where a lot of people (even the skilled) lack the vocabulary and experience and understanding of fundamentals (to a point where they can impart that learning to others not just perform the action themselves) to provide good feedback. It's in that "its natural talent" area far too much and often.

It also has a lot of people with "no formal training" which often translates too "I do stuff that's good but I can't tell you how to repeat what I do in any detail".

You've both missed, or chosen not to comment on, the next part of the paragraph:

"People that post work that needs improvement and are genuinely trying to get better will get accurate feedback on where they need to improve"

Of course, I don't know how you tell "garbage" from "wants to improve" based on just a picture. In that case, I'd just suggest areas for improvement either way, and the poster can take that as they wish. Better all round, I think.