digitaljames... I'm still confused as to what your meaning is. Are you complaining that the moderation has not been strict enough lately? That wallpapers have been posted that don't deserve it? Or, are you saying we are too strict in our moderating? I'm serious, I don't know which you are saying...

I have no way of knowing how many walls come in every day. I see anywhere from none to maybe as many as 5 or 6. There are other moderators here that also go through the queue doing the same job I do. Therefore it's impossible to know how many.

As for changing the way things are done and letting all wallpaper submissions in. I do not make rules here - that responsibility is Pat and Alexandrie's. But the last time I saw a request to do something like that the answer was 'no'. We have a system in place that is not unlike most of the other sites. The biggest difference is this site is a bit easier to get a wallpaper accepted.

*thanks Renato

btw - I hadn't seen your last post before my response. So, I assume you feel the moderation is too strict?

I have no idea what you are referring to with my brutal rejection notice. I don't believe I've ever sent a brutal rejection to any moderated wallpaper. The only thing I can think of is one artist who wrote to me shouting and demanding that I explain why his work was not accepted (after the moderation notice). My response to him was a probably more complete and honest than most I send out. I remember with his piece I tried to be specific about what my feelings were and I tried to point him towards making better compositions. If he has a problem with my response he should email me. But he should learn to be more civil in his tone too.

There are always going to be bruised egos with moderation. We are not trying to hurt anyone's feelings and we are trying to be fair and consistent with our efforts. If it's not perfect, that's something we can strive for. If it's a case of the artist not being able to accept being juried on submission, then this isn't the site for him.

Sheesh...I think the moderation criteria is too easy. I just was looking for more standardization.....the Citizen I have in mind should have been moderated in my opinion also but other walls much worse fly right on through, hence his plight or beef as it were. Personally, I say mod everything that looks like it may have been created friviously. "If" the guy I have in mind e-mailed you with arrogance it is/was not known to me. Maybe I shouldn't even be debating this issue for him. Thanks for the further information David. I'll go be a good Citizen now....

digitaljames, you were as clear a mudd, with your posts/comments are you sure your not a female?

Walls get moderated for more than one reason, but are approved for only one reason, so long as they will work reasonably well as computer screen backgrounds.
Yes, that is what they are 'supposed' to be.
Something that can 'work' as a back-drop to your operating system's icons, etc.

Realistically, simple, low-contrast non-distracting graphics are 'more' suited to the task than any other.
Take my two 'walls'.
Note the content...
Note it with regards to these criteria...
Note the download number...
Glory be praised...the more muted, less distracting one has twice the downloads....must mean something.
OK, the scores are a bit whacky in comparison, but I didn't rate them.
Had I, they'd be different...

To the case in point.
If it is the wall I'm thinking of, the most polite way of putting it is 'stuck an 'XP' in it for downloads'.
Quite frankly, there are other letters in the alphabet.
Last time I looked, there were 24 others.
But...
I could be wrong.

I don't know if the artist in question is the one I'm remembering with the email either... There's no reason for this to be dragged out here. Feel free to write me if you would like to discuss this any further...


haha - China you are too much...