Some people seem to be getting frustrated about "Hopefuls" posting sub-standard quality sets repeatedly. I think the reason this is happening (at least in my case this is true), is because many sets being submitted are for the "Most Creative Set" contest, and were not actually rejected sets. Not yet anyway.
I've said this before but I'll say it again: according to Rigel, the normal SG photo quality standards to not apply during this contest. I don't know why or to what extent but my hope is that people will realize this before becoming exasperated. I may be excitable, and yes maybe even a little dense when it comes to technology but I can and do read, and I work to abide by the written and unwritten rules of this site. I think that goes for a lot of the newcomers.
Oh yeah, and don't forget to comment on "Poison":
http://suicidegirls.com/members/Faige/albums/site/4340/
I've said this before but I'll say it again: according to Rigel, the normal SG photo quality standards to not apply during this contest. I don't know why or to what extent but my hope is that people will realize this before becoming exasperated. I may be excitable, and yes maybe even a little dense when it comes to technology but I can and do read, and I work to abide by the written and unwritten rules of this site. I think that goes for a lot of the newcomers.
Oh yeah, and don't forget to comment on "Poison":
http://suicidegirls.com/members/Faige/albums/site/4340/
VIEW 10 of 10 COMMENTS
_panda_ makes an excellent point as well. For those of us who have been around a while, it was both an exciting change, as well as a sometimes confusing barage for there to be un-edited "hopefuls". But it would be a lot to ask for SG to have to screen hopefuls before tagging them as such and making them visible.
And now for your pictures, which I'm defintiley looking forward to!
(that's if you don't count the laugh)
Is that which remains an enigma still?
Who will decipher this for me? Who, I prithee?
Pretentious, eh, what?