craeonics goes wait for the first 'moderation sucks' threads to show up

And while we are mentioning it would be great if people would refrain from throwing an XP logo on to their wall as well. I have seen many wallpapers that look great on their own but for some reason the author felt compelled to place an XP logo on it. It usually has no bearing on the original view of the wallpaper what-so-ever other than the author trying to receive download counts.

So it would be appreciated if authors would use some self control and stay away from that XP Logo

Makes good sense!

Maybe it is just me, then again maybe not ........

To "suggest" what artists incorporate into their walls, or what they don't incorporate is a matter to be deceided by the artist, not the moderator. I can understand suggestions or "requests" made on the part of the end-user, but to discount someones creativity based on the "popular consensus" smells of censorship to me. Granted, it seems this site is narrowing its boundries to skins, next we will be hearing that maybe winamp skins are not the "skin-de-jour". Is this the reason why all the wallpapers are so similiar, because they are what the site likes? I enjoy "abstract" art as well as the next guy, but................ I guess if you want your wallpaper to "pass" give 'em what they want.

dont mean to rain on the parade but thats the way it works here at wincustomize. It popular concensus, thats y theres sites like deviant art, wallpapers here are meant to compliment the skins on the site not be the main ideaa of the site. if it can go with skins then its good in my opinion

Thats my 2 cents, and may i mid u i am a wallpaper author

I think the first thing that needs to be done is to moderate the current library to the new standard. There are in my opinion, which is pretty worthless , many, many, skins that would not come close to making it "in" today.

What I see causing more discontent than anything is not letting in a good wall when there are poor examples still in the library. That will hurt feelings.

Give the membership here an example to aspire to...

From my side of view, it seems like that it would make people feel alot better by not telling it to every, instead email the denied people this message. But on the other hand you should really clean up some of the other sections on this site, there are some pretty plain wallpapers here.

Doh! sorry to double post... I meant "There are some pretty plain skins here too"

I agree with Bill, clean out the existing library...........and if mine don't make the cut, so be it.

It's something that I had been thinking of in particular. Back when there were about 800 walls I went through the entire bunch about 3 times over......by the time I had sifted through I'd got 'em down to about 700. [a quite long, time consuming task on a 56k modem] Prior to that there had been no 'conscious' handling of the submissions to any real extent.
That was about a year ago. Since then the site [and its popularity] has grown, hence the larger wall count at present.

The problem seems to me to be how to 'reject' now something that had already 'made it through', except perhaps to compare dl-counts over time.....500 dl's in a week would clearly be better than only managing 500 dl's in a year, ergo the latter was 'less' of a successful wall.

If you filter your browsing through the walls by 'rating' and/or 'dl-count' [popularity], either way you get quite a high standard of works.
At the other end of the scale, save for a few glitches/anomalies, by and large, the walls are significantly less enticing....

But does 2140-odd walls signify 'culling time'?
Is it warranted?

We could set the bar at anything less 'popular' than my two walls......that should knock the numbers back to...oh, about 2138...

You could consider culling the herd by date. Say anything over 18 months(just an arbitrary #). That way you would not have to hurt anyones feelings.

I've wanted to cull the wallpapers on occasion but it is currently way way too slow. The admin pages are quite slow for us (deleting something is time consuming - like 30 seconds per thing deleted). It's much easier to clamp down more so on newer wallpapers than to cull old ones until we have a system where it's easier to remove several walls at once.

I agree with those who have said that you need the cull the current selection of wallpapers. There is some stuff in there that is of poor quality. If people are submitting higher-quality stuff and getting rejected, they might be understandably annoyed if there is poorer-quality stuff still in the wallpaper section.

Perhaps you could get the assistance of a few more individuals to help with the clean-up process?

Wise...culling by date is a terrible idea.......IMHO