St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> >  Projecting a bunch of meshes to the screen is not showing what POV-Ray
> > is really capable of.

>     Then what was the point of allowing modellers at all if a "bunch of 
> meshes" on the screen is NOT going to have a chance of winning? If this 
> wasn't about 'art' and rendering with PoV-Ray, then what was it about?

  Since no amount of repetition will make you understand, then why
should I bother repeating it once again?

  You really, really don't understand what is the difference between
using third-party models and composing your entire image with them?

>    Without risk of getting personal, you are talking down to me as though 
> you are some kind of elevated level above me. You are not. You are on the 
> same level as me and anyone else here.

  You started insulting me, and I'm a person who can't take much of that
without getting angry, so you get a response according to that.

> >  What do you mean by "I will still say that I have sen as good in the
> > IRTC"? Firstly you haven't even mentioned IRTC before this, and secondly
> > I don't understand what you mean by that. As good as what? And what does
> > that have to do with anything?

>     Ok, what was "ground-breaking" in this contest? Was there *anything* 
> "ground-breaking" at all? No. That was one of the criteria of even entering 
> the contest, and yet, it wasn't there in my opinion.

  "Ground-breaking" and using modellers seem to have some relation, at
least from your point of view. Sorry if I'm too dumb to understand it.

> >> >  Not true. If you had made a definitely better image than The Last
> >> > Guardian, you would have won.
> >
> >>      BS, and you know it.

>      I'm not calling *anyone* a liar.

  It's rather clear that you are calling me a liar above. I know how
the images were judged because I was part of the process and I know
that an image much better than the current winner would have won
regardless of how it had been made. You are saying that this claim
of mine is BS. Thus I'm lying to you.

> Heck, Warp, can't you see what my real problem with this whole thing is?

  Yes, but can you?

  Your real problem is that there was a lot of $$$money$$$ involved,
you missed the deadline by a quite short margin and did not get into
the competition and you are now pissed off because of that, and you
are now seeking some kind of revenge on the whole competition.
  You will of course deny that, but I am quite sure.

> It 
> was judged by *some* people that in my opinion shouldn't have been judges. 

  So now that your "csg-only" argument is not really holding water,
you start attacking the competence of the judges?
  What next? Will you start attacking the sponsors perhaps? The pov-team?
The contestants? Something else?

> >> > The method of production was only secondary.
> >
> >>   Exactly.

>     I meant 'exactly', as in, it wasn't secondary.

  Oh, sorry. I must have some reading comprehension problem. Perhaps your
English is a bit different than mine?

> The method of production 
> in 'your' eyes was 'pov only'. Tell the truth Warp, did you judge *solely* 
> on what the image looked like? Or did you take into account that an image 
> used pov only?

  I judged mainly on how the image looked like and secondarily on how
it was done. I had picked my favorites before I even looked how they
were done exactly (my initial top 6 was approximately the same as the final
result).
  But of course because I'm full of BS you don't have to believe me.

> >> there was *no way* I would win using an image made up of Wings models 
> >> only,
> >> however good it would be.
> >
> >  Yeah, you know this thing better because you were a judge and I was not.

>     Now you're not making sense.

  I think it's pretty clear. What are you not understanding?
  (Btw, it's sarcarsm, if you know what that means.)

> >  You are still an idiot, it seems.

>   <sigh> And there you go. A judge calling someone an idiot. So you 
> concluded that I was an idiot before, then? That's the first time you've 
> called me an idiot, but it was already in your head. I rest my case with you 
> being a judge, and biased towards me. I've met you before. If I'd have 
> entered, and everyone else thought my image was the best, I bet you would 
> have argued against them. Tell me you wouldn't have.

  I knew you would quote that line alone, separated from its context,
and that's exactly why I wrote it in its own line, so I could say this.

  Your paranoia is reaching ridiculous extents.
  Firstly, I succumbed to the temptation of calling you an idiot only
because of your attitude in this thread. I do not have any memory of
any previous texts you have written to me or anyone else and I do not
have any concept of your personality. Even if you have fooled around
in the past, I don't have any memory of that (it's very rare that I
remember people by name/nickname because of their texts).
  Secondly, judges did not know the authors of the images. Even if you
had entered and even if I had negative feelings about you personally
(which I did not), I would have had no way of knowing which image was
yours.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -