Yes, definitely an interesting set of issues and concerns being brought up in those discussions (but nothing new).

One issue I find the most peculiar is where Damien tries to explain why the "rules" were set up the way they are:

   "The sponsors require this as a hedge against
    insufficient quality being submitted."

Which is rather strange, since the rules were in place long before they ever got a sponsor signed up.


And I too was involved with such things in the beginning, and for a few years there after.  But I recall that you did not start using UF in the beginning.  In fact, it was not until almost this exact day back in 1998 that you stated:

    "....it took a little gentle cojoling from Damien to dig into UltraFractal...."

And that was when UF ver. 2.0-Beta-6 was being used.  I had started using UF back when it was version 1 (around a year and half before people were being "cajoled" into using UF).

on a slightly tangential note, i found the first (to me) truly excellent xd fractal yesterday: http://love1008.deviantart.com/art/3dFractal-Watergrass-50256771


i do feel there is a solid basis for saying the competition is an "ultrafractal spirals" one, but on the other hand some new things do get selected. last year someone i know through the demoscene had their (self-programmed) work selected for the final, which kind of restored my faith in that approach to a competition like this.

however all this bickering, talking about it being "amateurish" (tim said it best i think: "Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. ROTFLMAO."), is certainly uncalled for and disrespectful to a large number of skilled artists.

great, now they're trying to blame the readership for the recent poopiness (can't think of a better adjective) of their blog:


pffft, speaking for the fractal community, talk about delusions of grandeur... they speak more than enough for themselves, leave us out of it