![[Main Page]](/skins/common/images/wiki.png)
I read this on /DQN/ and liked it so much I saved it for you to read here. Enjoy!
As a sick fuck with a large and always growing collection of drawn Japanese pornography pertaining to many themes, I'd like to make a few observations and state things I have noticed:
- It is difficult to give an absolute rating of the quality of a specific media piece, meaning that two sick fucks with completely similar interests would agree on the relative position of various materials, but wouldn't agree about which numerical rating to give. (Note: since I will use absolute ratings in this, they will reflect my own prejudice. I think of myself as extremely discerning, but since everybody enjoys believing his opinions about quality are rational, I think it'd be better to have a relative appreciation of my absolute values)
- You can approximate a consensual rating of the relative technical quality.
- The higher the consensual technical quality is, the less objective the rating will be. It means that using a rating system of 0-100%, obvious shit will get rated from 0 to 10%, while very high quality could be rated in the 70-100% range.
- Artist-specific idiosyncrasies can create large variations in rating. For example, an unusual shading technique can prevent suspension of 2D-complex.
- Japanophile sick fucks are extremely diverse. It means that only the technical aspect can be appreciated by all the sick fucks. Subject matter is often much more important, because it can both increase and decrease the quality rating. Some specific subjects can induce drops of 99%, as they can spoil the enjoyment of everything else.
- It is impossible for a specific media piece to obtain a score larger than 80% unless it causes in the viewer an emotional response he appreciates.
Newcomers to a specific interest will tend to only have and share crap. Why? I can think of the following reasons:
- Scarcity of quality is a self-perpetuating myth, that can only be fought with a frequent display of quality. However, nobody wants to hang out with losers, and sicks fuck who do not appreciate quality do not deserve to receive it.
- Newcomers will generally start their collections by searching the internet, and given the current state of the internet pornography world, and the abysmal web-searching skills of the average sick fuck, their first pieces will be of a very low quality--yet they will feel attached to them.
- Sharing collections sound like a good way to kick-start them, however, it isn't that frequent a practice. Collections shared are generally of poor quality.
- When media is acquired in bulk, people are much more tolerant about crap.
Quality ranges generally found (my observations exclude the rare gem you can always find anywhere by sheer dumb luck):
- Web, direct search: 0-30%
- Web, indirect search: 20-65%
- Web, indirect search, then "quality ladder" climbing (via links and general experience): 30-80%
- Imageboard (not the western-style gallery forum), half-related: 50%-70%
- Imageboard, related: 20-80%
- Imageboard with good posters, related or not: 50%-95%
- Usenet: 0%-85%
- P2P from central search system (built-in or on the web): 0-40%
- Dedicated IRC channels or DC hubs: 30-70%
- Dedicated IRC channels or DC hubs with good users and discussion of the shared materials: 50-95%
- Torrents originally posted on a random site: 0-40%
- Torrents originally posted on a somewhat related site: 20-60%
- Torrents originally posted on a related site: 40-95%
tl;dr: why people only post crap on imageboards relevant to my interests :(