even to listen to these idiots.
That is uncalled for, @gric. I've tried to be very civil and hopefully mediate between the two parties. My position is there is validity in both sides.
There are some circumstances where is is appropriate to include the source of inspiration and other instances such as fan art or something that possesses numerous inspirations that may not make inclusion feasibly. I think most reasonable people would understand the omission under those circumstances.
In other instances when a majority of the design of the inspired work is derived from another, it is reasonable to indicate it as such. This would apply to a trace jobs for instance.
The second issue is the possibility of some artists employing deception to give their work a more favorable impression than it would have otherwise. To assume that nobody would employ such a tactic is naive but the question is how to respond.
Perhaps, jaguar goes overboard in their approach. If it were up to you, I would imagine nothing would be done. My position is finding an acceptable solution somewhere in the middle but I think both parties will need to give a little ground for that to be achieved.
I would recommend you first drop the ad hominem if you really care about this issue being resolved. Name calling is not the path to compromise.
Posted using Partiko Android