Death to Potluck

I've encountered a serious problem with the potluck critique format. Idealy, a piece of artwork would have numerous critiques and in this way the person would get some candy coated,roast,and comfort food critiques. But that leaves the job of the first critique to someone. What do they do?

If they like it, all is fine. They proclaim the wonderful parts of the picture and all other critiques may follow, for better or worse.

If they find a flaw however, they have no clue how to reply. The person didn't specify what they wanted. If you say something critical, they may hate you. If you give them comfort food, they may never get the critical comments they really wanted. So you end up writing something like how cute that outfit looks on their character, or something else neuteral. And it completely ruins the point of the critique. It's like talking about the weather.

The bottom line? Potlucks are good at social functions-where you talk about the weather. But if you want to help someone improve their cooking, it's just not gonna fly, especially if nobody else is there to swap recipies. Does anybody else have an opinion on this?

I would like the potluck option to remain, personally. If so-and-so clicks it then they should expect the range of crits, damned if it hurts their feelings. It's the option I use because I like the neutrality of it for myself (as opposed to asking for neutrality from others, like you pointed out). People are being asked to say whatever they like not 'ohmigawd, crit me hard!' or 'only nice stuff, I'm too sensitive!' Quite frankly, the problem I see isn't with the option itself, but with the people too preoccupied with the idea they might make a mistake by not commenting this way or if they type this, they might accidentally offend someone. If I was to see 'potluck' or the equivalent on any other art site, then I'd comment how I see fit. If there's a big flaw, I'll point it out, if it's perfect, I'll give some lame comment. There's not a great deal of difficulty in that, be it the first comment or the fiftieth, you just have to buck up and type.

Because the other options for critique types are so specific, i.e. Comfort Food, Candy Coated, Roast...there needs to be grounds with which a person can say "I'm going to accept any critique or comment you have". Not everything written about a work posted here needs to be a critique; some people are simply looking for comments, a "wow, that's good" or "i like your lineart, how do you do it?" Some people are able to get better simply by practice and may not require others to point out their mistakes, however may need encouragement to keep working. I think potluck opens the door for people who are really willing to accept anything. To eliminate it would be to ask everyone who posts there work to fit into strict critique/comment guidelines.

Well as I see it, it was origanally put in there cause people submitted stuf that they didn't want advanced crit, or suger coated. They just wanted comments.  I personally use it for art that I didnt  put alot of effort into- like the chibis. I rarely only want suger coating so to me- that should go if anything. I think its a good idea.

As for your point of people critiquing- isn't that the point of the other two options? If people want to improve their, they REALLY need to suck it and select Roast me. Seriously. That is what it's there for. I don't understand the people that are so scared of crit that they select comfort food. It's been considered the soft core version of Roast me, when really, if people that critted didn't have such an ego that ALL roasting would come out nice. Alot of crits are very cold in their choice of words.

Myself, I just really dont see the point of Potluck, but maybe I just dont get the catagory. Personally I always choose roast me, since I for one enjoy the harsher crits as much as I do the good ones, since I learn the most from them.

On Dec 26, 2006 12:14 pm, Psycho Kitty Net said:


Yeah, but some art, like sketches or chibis you don't need to be roasted on- right? Or old art? I put pot luck on those. I don't really want crit, but if people think I can tydy something up then I'll take it on board. IT's not important. What you're talking about is that it's important to get crit. OR important that crit is only candy coated. Slight difference

I agree.  Neutrality should not be an option.  As I've just had an interesing session with the owner of a potlucked piece, I also think it best to make the author pick a side.  Either they want a pat on the head for the effort or they want to be burned to the ground.  With me, there really isn't a middle ground--and I like it hot and my critiques tend to swing that way.

Since I don't like to stroke egos and give people pats on the head for work that I don't feel is sufficient, I'd like to know who those people are so that I won't waste my time.  To me, commenting on a potluck is like stepping on a snake in the sand: You never know what it's going to do.

*sigh*

This is the origanal thred that put the 'Potluck' as an option into PD

Bogusred was bugged about it so she added it. Frankly, the idea wasn't presented clearly to me, but people wanted it. I think it's ok for fun picutres like chibis, btu for full blown seerious pics? Get a grip- you either want to or don't want to improve. I'd only ever label my pics as potluck if I didn't care at all cause it's fun.

Take it how you want- maybe the discussion isn't as much ofan 'is it needed' as much as it is an 'is it still wanted'

Frankly, I wouldn't miss it. Someone else may do. *shrugs*

I understand the idea of a no preference thing, but keeping an air of neutrality is like walking in a gray area.  Like you MIGHT want to hear what someone has to say--if it's good or if it's bad--depending on your mood at time of comment.  That's never worked for me.  Either you want it or you don't.  End of story.

But some people don't want to pick a side.  That's the issue.  They just want whatever people have to say, "good or bad" (though they might not really mean it).  That's wishy-washy, in memory of Charlie Brown.

How bout this?  People are wanting comments this way, but it's like they aren't wanting to be embarassed or shot down at the same time.  What about private critiques--comments posted on the piece that are only seen by the artist / author?  I think it's a bad idea altogether, really, this "potluck" thing. 

Snakes, Quixote.  Snakes.

BR wants us to critique more. Ok. So I go to do that and all but two of the recent artworks were potluck. It was very agrivating to think of something neutral to say. It made me realize how hard it is to critique potlucks, especially if the description lies along the lines of  " a quick doodle of my cat."

I will agree with Chief Icy Sunset- part of the indecision is on my part. I don't want to aggrivate anyone.  If they knew what they wanted they would put that instead of Potluck. But as for agreeing with Delta-no more wishy washy. They should make a choice.

The positive side of potluck is this-group commissions,old work,random doodles-you don't want any particular type of critique on them. So they are an EXCEPTION.  I'm not all for deleting the option of potluck. But it should be made clear it is there for THE SOLE PURPOSE of NEUTRALITY. It has been made, it doesn't need improvement. It is a finished piece, end of story. If you want to look at it,fine. If you want to critique,ok-but I didn't ask for it.

Potluck in this way is like forbidden fruit but more accepting of what others have to say. For love of the wonderful food adage used here for critiques, let's call it a rare dish. Something for special occasions. Let us please replace this ill thought potluck-or at least proclaim the stupidity of using it for selfish reasons such as indecision.

I think we're stepping into dangerous territory when we're telling people why they're using the "Potluck" option. No, not everyone who puts there work into Potluck is doing so for neutral purposes, and frankly it's not up to me or anyone else for that matter to decide why they've done so. Potluck is open to anything; people who use this option are made aware they must expect any critique or comment that comes their way; it's part of the decision process.

"Potluck: There is no specific type of feedback I am looking for. All comments appreciated."

As a person going to comment on an artwork under the Potluck category, I look at that description and say "They want me to comment"; however how the author wishes to take the comment is up to them, as they've informed me they're accepting of anything. Unless I've gone completely out of my way to be mean (which is against the rules), I can defend my comments to the artist by simply saying "you placed it in Potluck, you gave me the option". If things escalate from there, you contact myself or any of the other moderators or BogusRed.

Potluck doesn't mean a person wants neutral comments. It just means they are looking for whatever comments the person wants to leave.

As Arkillian pointed out, there originally wasn't a Potluck choice. It was added to the site later after enough people asked for it. I'm not about to remove it.

On Dec 29, 2006 11:04 am, eegirlee said:


I agree with many of the points said here about not having a potluck option. But it seems to be upsetting to many people to not have the option. There's nothing I can really do to control how people actually use the features here unfortunately

On Dec 29, 2006 11:04 am, eegirlee said:


Do what I do. If you want to give advanced crit- ask first, otherwise, just comment. At worlds worst, they'll be insulted and you either apologise or remind then what option they ticked for critique. You're being SO much better than alot of people just by commenting. if they don't accept it, they should've made themselves clearer in the first place.

I like Potluck. I always assumed it was just what it said on the tin: a range of all comments with no particular one in mind. Got crits? Sure, come on in! Wanna gush? Have a ball! To me, it comes off that Roast Me doesn't want compliments at all, and that the fluffier options can't get crits. It's the general middle ground; the Jolee between Bastila and Revan. *waits for no one to get it*

I dunno.  Potluck never seemed like that big a deal to me, either.  I put everything under Roast Me, because I want people to tell me how to make it better.  Even with doodles.  If I mess up something in a scrap, I might make the same mistake in the future, so it's best to nip it in the bud before that happens.

I just figured Potluck was there if you didn't care one way or the other what kind of feedback you got.    If the artist can't handle crit, they should have put it under Comfort Food.  But that's just me.

On Dec 31, 2006 2:04 pm, Sollie said:


Or that they would *rather* critique rather than general "That's so pretty"ness Roasting doesn't rule it out but yes- I totally agree ^^