Acceptance vs. Rejection messages for completed Dragon Requests

[Bloommist]

I think this would be a lovly idea to implement if it can be ,which I really hope, I, like im shore many others are incredibly greatful and thankful dragon cave has a place like the DR implamented allowing us to not only imagine a concept based in the lore of a site we love so much but also have the opportunity to have that concept become real which is an honour I dream of and have done for years.

I love creating concepts and am beyond humbled and honoured when one or several of the amazing artists take up the concept it's amazing, some take months start to finish, still a fairly decent amount of hours of love and dedication, some like a few of my own have and are developed over a few years (not complaining it takes time) and that's a lot of time to pore your heart over and never no. Again I hope this dosent come across rude asim super thankful of the chance, but every release I hope and its been a few years for some completed concepts that would be nice to know of I should give up hope on. 

 

I hope that makes sence 

[Platykwak]

Golly, don't we all hate it whenever employers ghost applicants, not even giving them the minimal courtesy of sending a rejection email?

 

Receiving a firm No would only be fair! Then those artworks and concepts could be freed for other projects. Support.

Conversely, a Yes queue is understandably out of the question, for reasons Kaini already explained.

[seventeendeer]

This would be nice! Not least of all so rejected submissions can be returned to their creators/artists for use elsewhere. If any of mine were rejected, I'd love to put them in my signature or something instead.

[inghelene]

I think a generalised rejection text would be helpful for all creators.

Those getting rejected will know and can either withdraw or rework in hope of changing this, whilst those who don’t receive it can at least be certain there’s no obvious flaw to their submission. 
It won’t be hugely different for those accepted, but it helps for motivation. 

 

Only issue I see is if something was acceptable at submission and later got outdated. 
It is possible for op to re-open threads, and I think this might be a better approach if they suspect the art to be outdated, rather than tj having to skim through the list to reject old concepts as the standard change. 🤔

[Murkydepths]

Addressing new suggestion of a rejection letter after sprite completion.

 

I think this would have some issues. For one, receiving a rejection just after completion would be better than waiting in hope when it has no chance, but it's going to feel absolutely awful. The excitement of finally finishing straight to rejection is pretty harsh. Logically it might be better, but emotionally it will sting a lot.

 

Secondly is if the rejection comes with a reason. I could see why tj might not want to give a reason for rejection, because it may just be based on his opinion for what fits dragoncave, but without a reason people are going to be even more demotivated. But including feedback has it's own problems. Best case scenario it'd be minor edit to lore or design, and the sprite could be fixed and then accepted. Worst case it's major or vague issues that might become this back-and-forth where essentially tj has to do final crits of every DR, possibly multiple times. Conceptors might become frustrated as to why they couldn't have gotten this feedback earlier in production (which we know is because while the mods, artists, and critiquers of DR do give feedback on suitability for dc, they cannot know ultimately what tj thinks).

 

Feedback from tj could also alter how people approach dragon designs by collecting specific feedback he's given to try and sus out some sort of strict design rules to follow, when a lot of it is going to be subjective and individual per each dragon. Tj could reject a dragon for being too based on real world media, but accept a different one equally influenced just based on execution and concept. People might take feedback for one design and try to apply it to their concept, to try and further their chances. While we do have general guidelines like no props, they're only guidelines, and people can make unconventional dragons and hope to get in(as long as the art is up to standard). Many of the guidelines are up to interpretation too, such as how animal influenced should a dragon be. A good design might even make tj change his mind on a rule. I worry direct feedback from tj may restrict people's creativity, instead trying to 'game the system' by making a dragon that has the least chance at being rejected.

 

Of course feedback would be private, but people do talk.

[seventeendeer]

Alternate suggestion: how about a yearly completed list "purge", where completed concepts that will never be released are formally rejected via PM?

 

Compared to other suggestions, I think this could lighten the work load for both TJ and mods, who could get a bunch of rejections over with at the same time. TJ could mark the concepts that need to be cleared out and mods could send out stock messages to people about X concept being rejected (without a reason attached; I agree with above statements that it would be more of a hassle than a help).

 

Meanwhile, those who make DR's would have a bit of breathing room in between completing a request and having it potentially rejected. We'd know it was coming and we'd be prepared. I think the anticipation could even be kind of fun!

[inghelene]

Hmm, yeah, as we explore this topic, I’m leanings more and more toward the current system working the best.

At least given that this is not really paid labour for either party involved. After all, the promise of release if all criteria is met isn’t even there, which all creators should be aware.
“A contest where the award is really just the fun of participation.”

So, withdrawing a work that meets the standard is just as valid if you see a chance to repurpose it.

 

I do like the idea of a deadline though, where you know anything older will be rejected. However, given how lengthy the process can be, I fear the “expiration date” will either be short, and hurt your chances, or be so long that it looses its purpose. 
I mean at some point I’d rather not want a message telling me it expired, as it would be too old to repurpose. And if I have no purpose for it, I’d rather just have it sitting there if there’s still a chance.

If anything I’d rather just have a loose estimate of how many years I should wait before I should assume the chance to lessen and possibly rethink if I desire my work to be withdrawn. If hard to set in stone, just knowing average as well as the oldest dr ever accepted gets you far. 

That way you have a loose rule of thumb, and users can weight when they think it’s better to recall what they want to repurpose, and when they’d like it to remain despite knowing their odds are likely lowering over time.

But if there’s really no time frame at all, and just what looks rad and matches tj’s mood and cereal that fateful Thursday, I’m going to loop back and say I am content with the way things currently are. 

(Aka. If tj feels there are no real aging of past submissions at all.)

 

After all, it is fully by the rules to re-open the archived posts for a second pass, if their creator thinks that they might need a second round of critique to polish against an updated standard.  

 

Though it would be fun knowing the oldest dr ever accepted as a fun little trivia. Maybe as a “op’s beware, and older unaccepted remains still” when starting a dr. 😂

Edited February 20 by inghelene

[KageSora]

I mean, not all artists might want to repurpose the art exactly as it is but it would be nice to be able to post it elsewhere or touch it up for reuse in another place.

 

That said, a regular review sounds solid but should try to balance frequency to be fair to artist hopefuls while not being so frequent it's a daunting task for TJ to do.  Obviously we don't know how long the completed list is so we have no idea what kind of timetable would be best for that, and it may even be best for an initial review to be done in periodic batches...

[seventeendeer]

Yeah, as KageSora says, just having the option to show a concept off or reuse it elsewhere would be really nice. I think the one thing that's sort of frustrating about DR's is that when you submit your request, all the lovely art you've made for it can never be shared anywhere else unless the dragon is eventually released - so concepts that never see the light of day are wiped from online existence, sort of getting the short end of the stick twice (won't be used on DC + can't be recycled for use elsewhere).

 

If it's something TJ and mods would want to do, I trust they'd be able to balance it in a way that keeps things manageable for them. Even a purge every four years or so would be nice, honestly. Taking on the existing completed list a little at a time also sounds very reasonable.

 

I don't think it's ultimately needed, because DC is clearly doing very well vis a vis having enough concepts suitable for release (as the steady increase in art quality shows), but it would just be very nice!

[Murkydepths]

I think a deadline/purge after so many years would be good.

[Bloommist]

I also like the purge idea, hopefully they would get one final check then purge for the ones submitted prior to implementation (if it were to happen of course) but I'd be happy with a simple purge after a set amount of time that way the creator or artist can keep the date of submission and in .... years be like OK time to move on from that concept 

[Brite]

On 2/20/2024 at 12:39 PM, Murkydepths said:

I think a deadline/purge after so many years would be good.

Agreed. Also agree with artists being able to use their work elsewhere so it's not all for nothing. 

[Liurnia]

Support! I understand not being able to give an exact timeline for release, but it would be nice to know if something is definitely NOT going to be used so the artist can post it or use it elsewhere. A looot of work goes into every submission and even if it doesn't make it on to the site, it would be nice if it wasn't held in limbo forever.

 

Also support the suggestion to have a purge or at least a re-evaluation after a set amount of time for ones that weren't a hard no but did not get released. Maybe every 3-5 years?

Edited March 6 by Liurnia