Aventador2004

Decreasing number of MOCs: affected by criticism?

Recommended Posts

 

 

Start of Topic

======================================================================================

While you do have the points against me, if we are to keep the hobby alive and not make it into "Only the fittest survive". We need to encourage some builders onward. This does mean holding our tongue once in a while, or just not posting. If you dont like it, don't comment. Simple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a bit harsh from my side, yes. But I won't edit or delete it before mods make me, because that's what I think. Sariel is right in many points, I could have chosed many names and not specific one.

Yet again:

6 minutes ago, Aventador2004 said:

Does it really matter all that much how it is named?

This is no scale modeling forum, so I think it was reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Aventador2004 said:

"Only the fittest survive".

I believe it's more about "let's try to be fitter". Look, LEGO models come in all level skills and that is fine. But there is a level of difference between a Lego model and the real thing it was supposedly based on that is just ridiculous, and I don't see how turning a blind eye helps the builder here. EB clearly has a problem with criticism, simply suggesting that something could have been done better is often taken as offensive. Is praise the only thing allowed on EB, and how does that motivate the builder to try harder? By the way, I'm seeing a lot of blurry photos at EB, but honestly, at this point I'm afraid of suggesting that there are these things called tripods because that would probably be too offensive.

For the record: I like the crane. It's way better that the cranes I used to build a couple of years ago. But it is not a convincing model of the Liebherr 1060, no matter how hard you wish it to be.

Edited by Sariel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see I should have posted here, instead of in the crane topic.

 

35 minutes ago, Sariel said:

I believe it's more about "let's try to be fitter".

I believe it's more about "let's try to exercise".

What I mean is, let's focus on the process. The process is exercising. Being fitter is a likely outcome of that process.

Anyone doing Lego building, or anything for that matter, should enjoy the process.

38 minutes ago, Sariel said:

But there is a level of difference between a Lego model and the real thing it was supposedly based on that is just ridiculous

And who decides what is "ridiculous" and what isn't?

There's ALWAYS a difference between a Lego model and the thing it represents. That's why it's called a "model". It represents a certain aspect of something, while leaving out other aspects. To me, that's the definition of "model". @gate's crane represents certains aspects of a Liebherr LTM1060 crane, namely its functions, and is therefore a Lego creatoin that models the real crane's functions. It's therefore a model. It's not a model of the looks of a LTM1060. And it may not be a model you like, or even a way of modeling you like, but it is a model.

If you build a helicopter and I say it's bad because it doesn't fly, would that be fair? No, of course not. But the reason it's not fair, is because you chose to not represent the "flying" behavior of helicopters, so any feedback on that is moot. Your focus was on other aspects. @gate's focus was on the functions, so let's feed back on the functions.

It's like seeing a pencil drawing and saying it's too flat and lacks color ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

There's ALWAYS a difference between a Lego model and the thing it represents.

Then it all boils down to how much difference one is willing to tolerate between a real life machine and the model based on it, non?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, @Ngoc Nguyen.

And how much difference one tolerates, differs for every person.

Therefore, what constitues a model or not a model, is in the eye of the beholder. It's subjective.

Therefore, each of us can say what we think is a model or not. But none of us can say how others should be seeing things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The firstborn reason to post your models on EB is to get critics, if you are thinking that you would only get praises is wrong for many reasons.

And therefore I am more than happy to discuss, but getting messages like "If I were you I would start making another MOC beacuse this one has too much flaws" - how to react to them? The forum has it's rules, but it's not forbidden to stand your ground, is it not?

P.s. I could have never expected that such discussion would be caused by the few words describing the name of the MOC*oh2*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point in the original case is that the builder pretty much declares that he doesn't care about the look of his model because somehow only functions matter. Which, pardon me, just sounds like a lazy excuse. Is it a crane? Yes. Does it work? Sure. Does it look like the Liebherr 1060? Not at all, unless I poke my eyes out.

That's one problem, another one is that anyone offering any criticism is automatically branded as an evil and hostile person. Consider that M_Longer's and mine argument was simply that the real crane you're naming your model after looks quite different - yet this simple fact, obvious to anyone with a working pair of eyes, was enough to unleash several pages and two topics of discussion. Damn, I wish really good models got that much attention! Something is rotten in the state of Denmark when high-level MOCs only ever get a few comments, but start a WIP topic with nothing but two sentences or show something that looks very wrong, and you have almost the whole forum's attention.

Consider this: what if I publish a red car but claim that it's yellow? If you tell me it's not yellow, I can use exactly the same arguments that were made in our crane builder's defense: it's yellow enough for me, I have limited supplies, the color doesn't really matter because I consider it yellow anyway. It may sound funny, but if you give it a thought, it's exactly the same situation. Plus, you'll be the bad guy for telling me that it's red.

Bottomline: you're essentially saying that looks are a matter of opinion. I respectfully disagree.

Edited by Sariel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know man, the crane in that topic definitely didn't resemble what it claimed to be, and I don't think there's anything wrong about calling it out. If I make a supercar with shapes and design styles of multiple cars, but use red panels and then call it a Ferrari 458, I'd expect people to tell me that I'm wrong. There's nothing wrong with creating that same MOC and giving it a non-brand or original name. I think people should be more open to criticism around here. Obviously, going around calling other MOCs shit and doomed to fail is not what I'm talking about. But if someone offers a detailed reply about how/why your project is flawed, and even offers a plan or solutions, if you find that offensive then maybe you should humble yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sariel said:

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark when high-level MOCs only ever get a few comments.

I completely understand this. I see it happen the whole time on every single Italian FB Lego page, too. Recently, someone posted pics of their build of Lucio's Dump Truck and got barely a handful of replies; other folks post pictures of their BOXED Porsches and Bugattis and everyone swarms to the topic like so many flies to a steaming pile of rhino dung. Then again, Die Bevölkerung bekommt die Regierung, die sie verdient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think when making criticism you should acknowledge the amount of effort someone put into making your MOC. I personally found the comparison of that orange thing to a Lamborghini Aventador to be kinda insulting (his crane took much more planning/work and honestly wasn't a good analogy). But constructive criticisms with explanations are good.

Edited by z3_2drive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, z3_2drive said:

I personally found the comparison of that orange thing to a Lamborghini Aventador to be kinda insulting (his crane took much more planning/work and honestly wasn't a good analogy).

Because it wasn't a comparison and it wasn't an analogy? I have specifically called it "another example" of the looks problem, not comparison.

Also, by your own argument, shouldn't you acknowledge the amount of effort someone put into that "orange thing"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Erik Leppen said:

Also, he reacts in a normal nice way to feedback and replies (except yours. I wonder why), and I think that deserves a bit more praise. He seems to want to learn. For gate, building this crane is a learning experience. Also, this model gives insight in his skill level.

This is exactly what I was looking for. Just say "Maybe change the name" has worked for me plenty of times. @gate is definitely being calm in this matter :thumbup: Bro. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol!!    back in 1984 , most Lego technic sets barley look like what it represented and technically you are successful.  hate to state this but I feel some individuals are more into the "looks" and forget about the technic side .. Can we have fun with our technics ???  that seems to been lost by a few individuals just over naming ..  we can't call a banana an apple but they are both called fruits!!!    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to make criticisms based on the ability of the creator, obviously I can make mistakes, but what I like the least is that a movement is poorly represented or the use of no Lego pieces. I admit that the appearance is not important for me but the proportion is everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my opinion on this subject:

 

1 - Lego is a hobby,

2- Everyone do it with his experience and own knowledge, this mean I do accept everyone is not able to build top Mocs (I do not estimate myself be able to do so)

3- In each and every project, based on an subjective high implication of his builder, there are potentionaly things to learn, idea to emerge and go on further.

4-I estimate it's important to have respect to every people capacity. Commitment to work is more important. In that spirit I will quickly answer and comment a Moc of a young designer who gave all he had in his Moc than one of a known builder presenting it's 50th hypercar

5- Respect. Is mother of all in here

With this all in mind, I understand your frustration receiving comments. But @Sariel is right, your crane is not a representation of any crane of any real brand.

And this is not important. Important is that you've enjoy your build. I am sure that if you've done further in deep explanation of your build process, attention point, difficulties you've find and positive critisim on your own work, people (and I) would probably be there to say you've done good job and idea on how go further with your build.

respectfully,

Steph

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jorgeopesi said:

I try to make criticisms based on the ability of the creator, obviously I can make mistakes, but what I like the least is that a movement is poorly represented or the use of no Lego pieces. I admit that the appearance is not important for me but the proportion is everything.

I agree completely :thumbup: the problem number one is when someone writes something that other member(s) don't like member who wrote unwanted messages is very often subject of (to much) criticisms, so there is never enough of politeness and tolerance in public discussion. The same is here I think we should try to see with @gate's eyes and it does not have to be that all members should like the same building styles and building philosophy but we have to respect other. Example is Jorge and me, we have different philosophy but we respect each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a lot of discussion about models!  Now imagine if @Sariel posted this:

But had built this:

9b3c9258654b376c4cbbab32d6547ffd.jpg

Sure, it's awesome, but it's not the car it claims to be.  MOCs can be inspired by certain models, but unless they come close in proportions, they should not claim to be that model.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@steph77 your comment is spot on and #6 "respect" is good....but even Sariel can't state that unless he is the Original Manufacturer unless someone is looking into money..Your comment made me opened my eyes to an ugly world and when does MOC importance to money (marketing)  over technic building became the norm???  http://realdealsteel.com/ft-2198-what-does-officially-licensed-mean.html .... 

Edited by sirslayer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm enjoying this thread, really. First, I've learned that saying that two different objects look different is disrespectful and somehow qualifies as bashing, now it somehow has to do with money and marketing. All of this because of one little comment saying "the real thing looks different". Totally worth all these pages and threads guys, really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never talk about money. I find you are right. My post was clear:


 

Quote

 

With this all in mind, I understand your frustration receiving comments. But @Sariel is right, your crane is not a representation of any crane of any real brand.

And this is not important. Important is that you've enjoy your build. I am sure that if you've done further in deep explanation of your build process, attention point, difficulties you've find and positive critisim on your own work, people (and I) would probably be there to say you've done good job and idea on how go further with your build.

respectfully,

Steph

 

get back to Mocs topics...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sariel said:

That's one problem, another one is that anyone offering any criticism is automatically branded as an evil and hostile person.

That's not what I experienced after giving criticism.

2 hours ago, Sariel said:

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark when high-level MOCs only ever get a few comments, but start a WIP topic with nothing but two sentences or show something that looks very wrong, and you have almost the whole forum's attention.

I have seen this on every place on the internet. It's not "rotten", it's human nature. It's well-known that humans react much stronger to negative things than to positive things. If all is well, it's not noticed. I thing are strange or uncanny, our brain notices this in a split-second. It's perfectly normal. It may not be how we would ideally like it, but there's very little that can be done against something that's normal human nature.

Interestingly, have you noticed that you are exactly doing what you condemn here, by replying on a remark on gate's crane because you disagreed? I haven't seen buttloads of +1s from you lately ;)

1 hour ago, Sariel said:

2 hours ago, Sariel said:

Consider that M_Longer's and mine argument was simply that the real crane you're naming your model after looks quite different - yet this simple fact, obvious to anyone with a working pair of eyes

Are you now implying gate doesn't have a working pair of eyes? Apparently, clearly, to him, his crane represents the real one in a sufficient way - otherwise he would've changed or renamed it, wouldn't he?

What you seem to be forgetting is that what's clear to you isn't clear to everyone. It's easy to forget how difficult Lego building is if you have years of experience. Please don't use phrases like "everyone with a working pair of eyes sees this", because it's insulting to those who don't. My rule in teaching is: if someone doesn't understand something, never say it's easy.

2 hours ago, Sariel said:

Consider this: what if I publish a red car but claim that it's yellow?

Not the same. gate didn't say it looks like a LTM. He said it works like a LTM (implicitly). In fact he states literally that it wasn't his goal to replicate the looks exactly. If you say it's yellow when it's red, then you're not only wrong, but implying that color is important; meaning feedback on color is warranted. Yet, nobody crizitized my Excalibur TC14 theme park ride for being yellow where the reference picture was red, so people clearly understand which parts are modeled and which parts are changed. And I gave my model the real name too! Why did I not get a comment from you about my model being the wrong color?

13 minutes ago, Sariel said:

All of this because of one little comment saying "the real thing looks different".

You didn't say "the real thing looks different". you said "literally every single proportion is off". That's a whole other tone of voice, isn't it?

In fact, the entire thing that makes me make such a point about this is your tone of voice. Especialy in your post a few minutes back. You're not being the nice person I know you as. Why?

Edited by Erik Leppen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to wade in here and give $0.02 worth of advice if anyone cares.  First off, I could care less what someone calls their MOC, and I don’t care if somebody called a moc a specific brand and model of a crane even though a blind monk could see the difference.  I have seen three bricks of Lego put together and called a Model 1911 Colt pistol that didn’t look anything like a semi automatic handgun. But boy did the kids have fun “shooting” each other with it.  Let’s not get too upset on either side of this argument, shall we? I think criticism needs to be level headed, respectful, and taylored to the recipient. 

Personally, I thought we were all here to share in a common hobby, the building of neat models using Lego Technic.  I accept criticism when offered, and praise when offered as well.  I offer criticism and praise too. I do it with respect, with some thought, and always with the intent of making people feel accepted and part of a community.  

I think it’s that last part of the sentence that EB forums tends to ride roughshod over at times and especially to new kids on the block.

So, I respect someone’s right to call their MOC what ever they want, and I respect someone’s right to critique that name selection, but can we do it with a little more compassion and a little less authoritarianism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's the fact that some builders strictly adhere to references and documentation to ensure accuracy of their models, claiming something that clearly doesn't resemble the subject tarnishes the reputability of the model and others like it. Maybe that's why many individuals aren't so impressed with some of Lego's renditions of the Porsche or Bugatti, as they know it can be done better, Yet the masses of non-Lego individuals flocked to those models, as if those were the ultimate rendition of their respective vehicle. Those models are deemed close enough to be considered acceptable, but if you look the disappointment of the Austin Martin released for the James Bond creator set, it vaguely resembles the DB5, failing to capture the curvature and elegance of the real world vehicle, but it does replicate the functions... is that justified? That depends on your rationale for purchasing a set.  Basically you can call your model whatever you want but thats only an opinion. As for some functionality, I can see this being a compromise, if you want to justify making a very specific function that compromises the external appearance of the subject, though if one truly attempts to replicate something they will mitigate this, or find a different solution.

Edited by Tommy Styrvoky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.