The problem there is qualification and artistic castration.kireblue wrote:I think that a "no hentai" rule is a little too broad. I think that a "no pornography" rule would be more suitable. doesn't actually have any hentai in it, but it does have a "mature" theme. Thus, a rule that allows 18+ videos is necessary. But I don't feel that actually has pornography in it (especially since even though the video was edited to portray rape, the scene doesn't actually exists in any of the sources)
I think that (coincidentally by the same editors) is a better example of using hentai/ yuri to tell a story and be a entertaining video. But just as in the case of , the scenes that portray sex were handled "tactfully" enough to avoid being classified as a hentai video (even though it is definitely 18+)
I am only open to getting rid of a "no hentai" rule if it is replaced by a rule that prevents people from submitting outright pornography. I know plenty of underage editors that are far more talented than myself, and it would be unfortunate to have rules in place that would prevent them from participating in Pro and Masters.
Not going to dive too deep into it, but it goes back to the argument of nudity in art. The lines blur based on who you ask
I presume it was sarcasm. That said, it's got merit. I made my opinion well known, but I liked the idea of only new vids in pro with a separate masters contest.drewaconclusion wrote: I find this statement rather hilarious. Especially considering you've consistently entered videos that were very obviously premiered before AWA pro, nevermind the fact that they'd won multiple awards before AWA.
expo = video dump. If it wins an award, yay? If not just enjoy the crowd reaction.
Pro = set out to win with the best you got, Grind away on one video, if you have time try for a 2nd.
Masters = Start 2 years out and pour your heart and souls into something that's totally new to you.