so it's probably those images you see now :)

There was definitely one entry in there that used clip art. It was like a stock image of a shed, with clipart images of a jack-o-lantern and a goat pasted on top. If that's against the rules, then I don't understand why it wasn't disqualified.

And then there was one that was just a photo of a doghouse(?) in someone's backyard, and it was obviously not built for this contest. I'm not convinced the person who entered that photo even did anything?

Either they need to do some basic vetting on entries, or they need to remove participation prizes. I don't mind amateur artwork as long as it's clear someone tried. The rest of this is basically spam.

Edited to remove identifying details.

There's an Animal Crossing screenshot here, too. If that somehow won, I think Nintendo's lawyers would have someone to say about it. Is there no rule against copyrights?

- I don't see a problem with including Oatmeal's official art because it's not really the focus. I've seen some where they actually designed a building themselves and put effort into it, and then threw Oatmeal in there for a sense of scale or something. I don't know what the rules said about it, but that seems ok to me.

But like if you're going to draw a basic rectangle around Oatmeal and call it a house, then that's 0 effort again. :P

One of those you're talking about is mine. removed to prevent identifying details 3d models were allowed and there's no rule against having something already that you helped make that fit the specs of the contest. I don't know why it matters if it took me 30 seconds to take a picture, I take offense that you target my entry and don't think it's good enough when the rules don't prohibit from such things.

- I probably shouldn't have started calling out specific entries here, so I'm sorry. My issue is more with the rules than with your entry itself. This sort of confusion is why most contests would ask that you include a sign with your username or something like that to make it clear that it didn't just come off of Google's image search. :x

Thanks for the apology, I appreciate that. details removed so I don't identify which entry is mine I think it would be good if there would be a way to verify in future contests but I don't know if there would be any way to enact that without too much work from staff and to keep the images anon. I could sign my UN on it but then my image wouldn't be anonymous. I could pose in it, but 1. I don't want to and 2. it's not like staff has a picture of me on file to compare.

I think the elitist attitude of "only perfect artists allowed" is ridiculous. Just because something would've taken you 30 seconds to do doesn't mean someone else didn't put time or effort into it. And even if it didn't take them hours, so what? Why does that matter? Some of the best artists can whip up an amazing sketch in 30 seconds but no one would consider that bad. Speed is only considered terrible if the artist isn't top notch.

I'm extremely against Subeta contests ever being vetted for "bad entries". If entries are that bad, guess what? They won't win. Let people have fun and enter contests. It doesn't hurt you in any way if all of us icky bad artists enjoy giving it a shot. As long as entries follow the rules there's no reason to disqualify them.

Although I will say staff should probably look a bit more in depth at the entries. I've seen a stock photo of a can of oatmeal (unaltered, just swiped off Google) and a lot of clip art/stolen Photoshopped stuff.

I found the voting process ok this time, it was pretty fast to go through all of the entries, and just being able to vote up or down was quite easy. I do think I might have voted "up" too many times, as long as it showed people thought about it (no matter how it was executed), it was worthy of an "up" vote for me. :)

And that happens regardless of vetting process...?

God forbid we actually have entries beyond a basic home then. This contest is lucky enough that you don't necessarily need artistic ability to win as it was about designing a home and as we saw you could do it in a variety of ways.

You seriously cannot begrudge people of choosing more artistic entries because those tend to have more details than a basic home. Sorry but not sorry. Staff has kept this more than fair by even promising to stuff the participation prizes in the MC at one point. So yes, I stand by what I said. If you can't be bothered to visualize a home for Oatmeal beyond simplicity, you should be vetted out for not being good enough. We had what? Weeks upon weeks to think up a home? If you can't come up with anything better than a textbook basic home then yes, your entry isn't good enough in my eyes. Unless one of those wins this contest, then I will eat my words. Otherwise, nope.

Also, considering we had a vetting process already, I would really like to suggest the two tier thing happen and for a stricter process. Although ty staff for not making us go through all the entries. It's scary that all those 200 were considered cream of the crop. xD

edited to be as vague and avoid targeting as possible

also to add: I don't care about the time or effort spent on the entry. What I care about is finished product. I wasn't strictly judging artistic ability, time, or effort, but the actual ENTRY. And conceptually there were more than a few that failed to deliver. You don't have to be a good artist to come up with an original idea for a home beyond a basic home structure.

I'm enjoying reading the descriptions for the entries, especially those with not-quite-so-great artwork. Maybe for a future contest, there could be a separate category for descriptive entries (especially if they had a separate voting page), so they aren't judged directly against those with incredible artwork. (I know for the Brew contest, those without images were at a disadvantage on the voting page, so if the text entries had a separate vote page, that'd resolve that problem).

There's some more 'basic' entries that I've voted for, simply because the description of what the user was aiming for, sounded a brilliant idea - just because they can't draw to a certain standard, doesn't mean their idea and entry was a 20 second scribble.

This comment is in no way meant to single out or identify any particular entries - it's meant as an overall view of the contest

I was actually really pleased with how this contest turned out. The voting process alone is much better than for the previous contest (a page filled with loads of entries just means you won't bother looking at any of them), although I'd have preferred being able to see them all again at the end.

I love how the participation prize brought a lot of users out of the woodwork - people who otherwise would never have entered, like me, because their artistic ability isn't amazing and they don't expect to win. I loved seeing people's creations regardless of the different levels people are at. It really brought home the fact that you end up voting for something if you like it, rather than because you're focused on its artistic merit.

Seeing my entry amongst others of a similar level makes me more likely to participate in future contests. Hurray. c:

I still don't really agree with a stricter staff vetting process, even based on the overall entry. Just because they think something is not as good quality of an entry doesn't necessarily mean the users would think the same.

Of course I agree with what they apparently are already doing, which is removing entries that don't follow the rules or are just a picture of something unrelated. But any more than that is going too far into the "ideas are subjective" territory.

It honestly didn't take that much time to go through all of the entries, and even if there were more than 200 entries they are giving us 2 weeks to vote. That's plenty of time to get through them all.

I get it can be tedious to go through and vote down for like 10 entries in a row before getting to a "good" one, but I personally found it fun to see everyone's entries even if they were more plain or not as creative. I even voted up for some of the entries that were kind of simple just because they still looked cute.

It didn't take that much time to go through every single entries. I've gotten annoyed with big images (breaking the site) and also, those on the wrong side. I had to turn my head in a weird angle so nope. I liked the one entry per page and I would not be against a counter or, a progress bar.

Something that made me downvote a lot was the sheer amount of copyrighted entries. Not to mention anyone, but if you've used a template, a game or anything else that is not made BY you from your OWN game and or template, why would you win? I prefer to see someone do a very sketchy shed with flowers on Paint than vote for a thief. Don't base it on skills. Base it on the copyrighted stuff to make it fair.

That's all I gotta say.

Sorry, but I think taking a photograph of anything should not be allowed. If the subject of the photo wasn't made by you, why should you get credit for it? Now, if you used it as a base and then edited/manipulated the image and added your own spin on it - well, maybe I'd consider that a valid entry. But taking a photo of an existing structure, to me, should not be considered valid. Using a photo of something you made but wasn't made for this particular contest is also really pushing it, IMO. Same as using an old drawing of a generic house. At that point, just be honest about the fact that you put very little effort in, and are only allowed entry based on technicality, so you can earn the participation prize. But from a voting standpoint, I think it's pretty easy to tell who actually created material for the contest.

And I agree with what said upthread. It's not about artistic ability, it's about concept and design. I voted for several entries that were quite frankly, poorly drawn, but I liked the actual design. Similarly, there were some really lovely drawings but the design was either too simple, or else not suited to Oatmeal and her environment. And whether the user spent 3 days on it or 3 minutes, we're judging the entry itself and not their efforts.

At the end of the day it's a contest. There have to be winners and losers, and I think that having a tiered reward system in place would help eliminate a lot of the half-assed entries. There can be a base participation prize that any entry who meets the contest criteria can win. Then, the second tier can be for users who let's say received 0-20 votes, and they get an extra prize or two. Then the middle tier for users who got, 20-40 votes who get slightly better prizes, and then then the winners. I feel like giving everyone who entered the same prizes is frustrating for those who really did spend time and effort on their entry. People are lazy. Some will do the bare minimum just to win a prize, and though I don't really care as much as this post suggests that I do, it's the principle. I didn't enter, because I didn't have time to devote to a proper entry. Seeing all of the ones that got through the vetting process pisses me off, because I easily could have come up with a 2 minute MS paint job and got the participation prizes.

Very well worded. I agree about it being about the principle.

Also, I would love to go back and see what I up-voted next time! I would have loved it if after we voted there was a second round of voting for the ones we up-voted. I agree with whomever said 1-5 scale would be nice. As yes or no doesn't really capture my enthusiasm for some entries. D: You know, like a two thumbs up option for ones you really, really like.

I like 's first point, but I don't think there should be tiered prizes. That definitely rewards users with more artistic ability, and in past contests, there was enough backlash when only those users with a lot of creativity and/or ability got extra items.

Also, definitely like 's idea to have the second-go through only show entries we up-voted. That way it gets easier to compare the entries you really like and weed out the ones that you don't like.

And I made the comparison before, but just to reiterate, I don't think downvote has a negative connotation. I don't know how else you could really word it, especially because "like/don't like" implies that you really don't like an entry even though you might be downvoting it but still like it!

I really would like a counter. I had to save my progress in the middle because I had to go offline and really wasn't sure if it actually saved my progress or not.

I'd like to think some sort of barrier to entry (No Google Images/Does It Look Like You Spent More Than Thirty Seconds On This) would be helpful, but I think any entry barrier should be stated very clearly up front. Like, No google images, must be your own work. I don't know that there's a way to say "must look like you spent more than 30 seconds on it" because I know my art looks awful even though I spent more than two hours on it (I have no talent) and as others have said, how do we know how long the person spent on it? It's very subjective.

I know I thought much better of badly drawn images if they had a description/interesting idea to go with it, so I really like that there was a place for an image plus a description.

I'm not a fan of tiered prizes. I feel that tiered prizes would again turn it into a competition like the ones we've had in the past, where artistic merit alone is what always wins top prizes, or it turns into a popularity contest. I like a little variety in the contests and this one seems very open to everyone.

I really like the setup of this particular contest, I'm very glad we have only one entry at a time to look at. The page is less cluttered, and I have the time to evaluate each on their own merits.

But like several posters have said, it's really not about artistic ability. It's about design and concept. Both here and in the comments, people have said that they're voting for poorly drawn entries who have great design ideas, so I really don't think that good artists are the ONLY ones being rewarded. But even if they were, so what? Just because the contest is open to everyone, doesn't mean everyone has the same chance at winning - there will be better artists and better ideas and those ones will be rewarded. And the voting for tiers would be done by users, not staff, so I really don't see why users can't decide which entries are "better". You'd still get the participation prize for entering, but then more votes = more prizes - and it's all anonymous so it can't be about popularity.

It's a contest, with winners and losers. Not "let's give out prizes to everyone". Why shouldn't good artists win? Why shouldn't people who have time to put into their entries win? Sorry, but person who submitted a couple of shapes in MS Word - doesn't matter how long it took them - should NOT be on par with someone who submitted a thoughtful design that is easily readible by viewers.

There was a really well-drawn entry that I down-voted because it looked like it had nothing to do with Oatmeal and her mythos/environment. There were at least 4 or 5 that I voted for that quite honestly looked like a 6 - year old had done them BUT I could see their idea, and it looked cool. Good drawing will only take you so far.