JOURNAL: gotegenks

  • finally releasing amv france video 2012-04-02 16:20:34 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYrOY9cH8XE&lc=hzOkRLqaFs_udRxG-bW_z8VY3Nfs8VeLUv0Hqezsfjc&feature=inbox

    org upload and announcement to come with contest results. 
  • YES! 2012-04-01 00:00:03 I'M TIED FOR FIRST IN AMV FRANCE ONLINE CONTEST!

    WOOOOOOOOOP!

    anybody reading this with the ability to vote, you know what to do.

    *cough* alright alright alright *cough* 
  • egh 2012-03-14 16:35:16 i shouldn't have made myself out to be an ass like that, i elaborate on things way more than i should.

    --
    on a related note, every time i open my mouth i seem to make some new enemies. 
  • @ 2012-03-13 22:14:24 ileia, who said i thought she could've or should've done better? I said "that argument is illegitimate" because strong emotions would typically make you want to do the best you can, which i'm sure she did. the flaws that were in there were a creative decision by her, that's completely defendable on her part (which she did).
    the part in parenthesis at the end was just defending that trying not to have flaws in a video doesn't necessarily make it "just another video." like she made it sound like. that's it, i don't remember ever criticizing her video except saying it wasn't perfect and i was just trying to be more real there.

    niwa. i never criticized her video, at all, except mentioning it WASN'T perfect, almost on accident, but that's it. Me saying that you would want to try your hardest on a video you were dedicating to a deceased friend, that was just me explaining why her response was not right, why it didn't make sense. I like that video a lot and i dont see much wrong with it. i NEVER QUESTIONED the way she felt, it was always all about the text she wrote in response to this person with an innocent opinion on the video. the guy didn't mention anything about magnus, so there's no reason to bring magnus into it, except to say "you're right, sorry, the reason i overreacted was because my friend died and i'm pretty emotional."

    I never tried to say anything about the way she felt, anything that looks like i did try is just me explaining how the response makes it LOOK like she felt.
    if that was how she felt, then she would be perfectly fine writing what she wrote. but apparently she doesn't feel that way so i'm just saying that journal is not a very flattering journal post if she DOESN'T feel that way, but maybe i shouldn't pretend to understand her feelings and she might actually feel like her journal post lets on, maybe she knows better than i do and that journal post is perfectly representative.

    i don't know how many times it needs to be said, i liked the video i LIKED THE VIDEO! IT WAS A GOOD TRIBUTE to him, it got THE MESSAGE across (in fact i disagree with the quick comment) and i can FEEL that they were good friends. GOOD JOB CHIISUS, 5/5, THERE'S NO OTHER WAY you should've done that, I'M NOT CRITICIZING your editing or gifting or attributing methods or tactics or feelings or emotions or skills or ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S PURELY THAT LITTLE BIT OF TEXT that you wrote replying to a completely innocent quick commenter, all i was doing was defending him. THAT IS IT.

    i need to get better at writing. 
  • @chii2 2012-03-13 20:44:52 i think it's good that you weren't worrying about critical reception too much (not that there would be anything wrong with that). It seems a little backwards to me that you would want to leave flaws in to videos that are important to you. so what i said is still somewhat true, your video has flaws in it because you don't feel like this emotional edit should be perfect because it's "raw emotion" but i guess it's a creative decision on your part to do that which personally, i don't understand, but hey it's art and that response is 100x more becoming of you and your work than what you put. It's almost the opposite, what you told the commenter was "i didn't care about taking out flaws" but if i'm not mistaken it's more like "i left the mistakes in there on purpose" which is a stronger defense, and not a copout (no offense)

    i really tried to prevent you from taking it as an insult to your intentions, what i meant was that your RESPONSE made you out to be that way, which i'm sure you're not, and the response being so unrepresentative is one of the things i disliked the most. What i wrote was just against what you wrote, not how you actually felt.

    "don't tell me I used my best friends death as an excuse or a defence to why that person didn't like my video."

    but you kinda did. Now i know it was an artistic decision on your part that is completely fine but your video has flaws because your friend died and you wanted to better represent your emotions by purposely leaving in flaws. Those flaws are why he didn't like the video. The response looked like "my friend died so critique is invalid here" but really it's "my friend died so that inspired me to use tactics that you personally dislike"

    "I made him something because I felt like it was all I could do for him."

    so i was wrong in saying you had a moral obligation to make him a video? It was because you felt like it was all you could do for him, yes, but obligated nonetheless, there's nothing wrong with that obligation. I'm not saying it was a social obligation so you wouldn't look heartless, Parents are obligated to provide for their children. Volunteer workers are obligated to do the best work they can do. You were obligated to show your love and respect to magnus in a way you thought best because he was a very good friend to you. Perfectly fine, and very admirable. I'm sorry if you didn't like the word obligation, and again i wasn't even saying you WERE merely obligated it was just that your response made it sound like that and the response is the only thing i take issue with here, not you as a person, not the situation, not your intentions or anything, only the text in your journal entry.

    "I was upset that all some people can see in videos is the technical side, that there is nothing more to a video than a concept."

    come on, look at your thread, this guy is in the severe minority here. And even if he wasn't, all there is to the video is the video, so his opinion is whatever. He's not obligated in any way to take the motives into consideration when judging it. You have the ability to not give a crap about his opinion, and that's fine, understandable, perfectly dandy, but the video is a video, the opinion is an opinion on that video alone, so separate his thoughts on the video from the situation, because they're not related, and shouldn't be treated as such. I mean, you might want to take the motives or message behind a video before saying something, and you might in disagreement over that tactic, but if you commented a bad video dedicated to someone who passed away saying it was good, what if the editor attacked you over that? You said it yourself, you were annoyed because people kept saying they were sorry and being overly sensitive (in those cases, not the other examples), so he would feel like attacking you over that because he was sick of people complimenting his awful video (that he himself recognized as being awful). That would be crappy of that editor, and what you posted was crappy of you.

    again, i repeat, what you POSTED. The text that went into the journal entry. i make no claims to know your motives or your feelings or anything about you except that you were close with magnus, it's solely based on your journal entry.

    you didn't offend me, i'm sorry if i've offended you (which i'm pretty sure i have...)

    (also, i believe you can edit your emotions though making a flawless memorable emotional video, i've attempted it multiple times, and i would like to think they weren't "just another video," from trying harder on them than usual, but that doesn't have much to do with the issue at hand so w/e.) 
Current server time: Oct 25, 2014 02:24:18