How did you guys MANAGE to get to this situation ?

After the "admins are gone, pschiiiit", now it's
a "software issue", which you don't EVEN consider
to fix.

 From the "bazaar or cathedral", you once chose the
cathedral, and due to the useless secrecy and disdain
for newcomers that could help, now that's a shabby
and ruined cathedral ! I'm talking of POV-Ray, there,
the IRTC being just the most visible victim of that
incredible attitude.

Back to the IRTC, the choice of an obscure Smalltalk-based*
framework, which only ten people in the world are
familiar with, was a recipe for disaster. If only it
allowed a quick rebuild, but, no, it took more than
a year to get something up. Any rookie using PHP could
do it in two days, including me** ! And there are millions
of people that can fix PHP, if needed.

(* don't get me wrong, I'm a Ruby lover, and I know
how beautiful is Smalltalk, but for a rather simple
rendering competition site, efficiency matters most)

(** I did this in seven days :
  http://le.royaumedad.es
  php-mysql-based record collection showcase, including
  online encoding of new items)

How bad would it hurt to make a public call to get either
someone to fix the stuff, or a fast rewrite in PHP ?

The "new" IRTC literally sucked, quality-wise, (the images,
not the site), compared to what was produced some years
ago.  Either you should have the guts to pronounce IRTC
dead once and for all, or make that public call to get it
back within less than a month, so it could maybe evolve
again, instead of stepping back like it did.

Post a reply to this message

Fabien <fab### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> How did you guys MANAGE to get to this situation ?

  Thanks for your insightful comments. They really helped making things
much better.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Fabien <fab### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> How did you guys MANAGE to get to this situation ?
>
> Back to the IRTC, the choice of an obscure Smalltalk-based*
> framework, which only ten people in the world are
> familiar with, was a recipe for disaster.

I'd be happy to volunteer to fix it. I know Smalltalk, and have used Seaside a
bit.

Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

On 03/03/2011 7:12 AM, Fabien wrote:
> How did you guys MANAGE to get to this situation ?

You could, if you want a competition, you could always enter the TC-RTC.

http://www.tc-rtc.co.uk/

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Fabien <fab### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> The "new" IRTC literally sucked, quality-wise, (the images,
> not the site), compared to what was produced some years
> ago.

Ouch.

Well, I personally don't think my images sucked too hard in comparison to the
"old" IRTC (but I suppose I'm biased).

-------------------------------------------------
www.McGregorFineArt.com

Post a reply to this message

Fabien <fab### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> The "new" IRTC literally sucked, quality-wise, (the images,
> not the site), compared to what was produced some years
> ago.

While you may have some points worth arguing regarding maintaining of the IRTC
site, I think it's a bit harsh to lay such criticism on the images in the newer
contest site (I assume you refer to the TINA CheP).  The people working on the
images generally have worked hard at learning the program [POVRAy] and using it,
whether or not their images can be classed to a 'high-quality' standard.
Perhaps some of the preious entrants that had developed great expertise in
POV-Ray have been absent (for whatever their reasons), but that is no reason to
casually sling such unconstructive, anbased and blanket criticism at those who
have participated.  They are there to learn the craft and present what they have
done, and perhaps learn something from it.  That has been (generally) the whole
spirit of POV-Ray and the community since it's inception (I have been using and
present here intermittently since 1994, there others that are even longer).  The
spirit is for everyone to learn and contribute, through praise encouragement and
constructive criticism of what they have achieved so far.  This is one of the
best and consistent communities I have ever run across.

Would you criticize a 5 year old about his crude drawing of a person and tell
him it sucks?  Perhaps one day that 5 year old will be Van Gogh, having learned
and developed far beyond that initial crude drawing.

Say what you need to regarding the running of the IRTC, and those responsible
can handle that, but please refrain from slagging the artists.  If you have
specific constructive criticism on how they can improve their work, it would be
much more welcome and helpful.

Thanks

-tgq

Post a reply to this message

On 03/03/2011 5:45 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
> Fabien<fab### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
>
>> The "new" IRTC literally sucked, quality-wise, (the images,
>> not the site), compared to what was produced some years
>> ago.
>
> While you may have some points worth arguing regarding maintaining of the IRTC
> site, I think it's a bit harsh to lay such criticism on the images in the newer
> contest site (I assume you refer to the TINA CheP).

I read it that Fabien was referring to the new IRTC site.
But since you mention TC-RTC may I say that it was set up as a temporary 
stand in for the stalled IRTC by the late Steve Paget. It is a 
commercial site now maintained by Thomas de Groot and myself. This costs 
money and it is for the benefit of our community.
Lately there has been a drop off in the number of entries which IMO is a 
shame. But maybe if we can rally round it will be an outlet for our 


closes on the 15th of April.
If anyone has any ideas for the topics or any other constructive ideas 
the will be welcomed.

> The people working on the
> images generally have worked hard at learning the program [POVRAy] and using it,
> whether or not their images can be classed to a 'high-quality' standard.
> Perhaps some of the preious entrants that had developed great expertise in
> POV-Ray have been absent (for whatever their reasons), but that is no reason to
> casually sling such unconstructive, anbased and blanket criticism at those who
> have participated.  They are there to learn the craft and present what they have
> done, and perhaps learn something from it.  That has been (generally) the whole
> spirit of POV-Ray and the community since it's inception (I have been using and
> present here intermittently since 1994, there others that are even longer).  The
> spirit is for everyone to learn and contribute, through praise encouragement and
> constructive criticism of what they have achieved so far.  This is one of the
> best and consistent communities I have ever run across.
>

Well said.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoys_at@aoldotcom> wrote:
> On 03/03/2011 5:45 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
> > Fabien<fab### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
> >
> >> The "new" IRTC literally sucked, quality-wise, (the images,
> >> not the site), compared to what was produced some years
> >> ago.
> >
> > While you may have some points worth arguing regarding maintaining of the IRTC
> > site, I think it's a bit harsh to lay such criticism on the images in the newer
> > contest site (I assume you refer to the TINA CheP).
>
> I read it that Fabien was referring to the new IRTC site.

Sorry, I was unaware that the IRTC had been running again recently, and assumed
he was referring to images at TC-RTC that you had set up in its place.

Other than that correction, my comments still stand.

-tgq

Post a reply to this message

On 03/03/2011 8:14 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
> Stephen<mcavoys_at@aoldotcom>  wrote:
>> On 03/03/2011 5:45 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
>>> Fabien<fab### [at] gmailcom>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> The "new" IRTC literally sucked, quality-wise, (the images,
>>>> not the site), compared to what was produced some years
>>>> ago.
>>>
>>> While you may have some points worth arguing regarding maintaining of the IRTC
>>> site, I think it's a bit harsh to lay such criticism on the images in the newer
>>> contest site (I assume you refer to the TINA CheP).
>>
>> I read it that Fabien was referring to the new IRTC site.
>
> Sorry, I was unaware that the IRTC had been running again recently, and assumed
> he was referring to images at TC-RTC that you had set up in its place.
>

No apology required.

> Other than that correction, my comments still stand.
>

No matter who Fabien was talking about your comments are valid and welcome.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 08:12:41 +0100, Fabien wrote:

> How did you guys MANAGE to get to this situation ?

Wow, what a troll you are.  Something maintained by members of the 
community for the community and it doesn't meet your standards.

Let me grab the world's smallest violin and start playing it for you.

Instead of being a jackass about it, how about offering to pitch in and 
help rather than just heap criticism after criticism on the site?

You say "any rookie using PHP could do it in two days, including me" but 
I sure as hell didn't see you step up and offer it.  Instead you decided 
to act like a jerk and criticise.

Instead of stepping up, you stepped on.  Bravo indeed - WELL DONE, Fabien.

Jim

Post a reply to this message