A BIG ANSWER TO CHEATING

Cheating? Well let’s just say I don’t believe in it. When contestants get upset and frustrated by their lack of success in the Zuda competition it’s only natural and when they start looking for excuses to explain their failure whaddya know? Up pops the reason. It was someone else cheating. Someone else taking an unfair advantage of a resource that was frankly open to everyone. What sense does that make? None.

Listen to me. If you’re banging your head against a brickwall let me make a suggestion. Stop using your head as a battering ram and use it for the purpose it was designed. Think. It’s not about what everyone else is doing right or wrong – it’s about what you’re doing wrong. You can’t win by everyone else losing, although I’m beginning to think that might be a plan for some creatives out there. You have to look at what YOU do. When you get feedback from anyone try listening, really listening. Even to the the unpleasant stuff. Especially the unpleasant stuff. I mean this. If two people say you can’t draw figures properly and one other guy says your word balloon placement is awkward, don’t totter off thinking “Hmm! Must improve those balloon placements asap!” This form of denial is very prevalent in all forms of creative enterprise. Lose it. Those who develop a calm critical eye for their own work will get a lot further than those who just blindly repeat themselves all over again without learning from their mistakes.

It’s entirely possible that you are a misunderstood genius and that one day everyone will ‘get it’, but if you want to be a paid professional working now I’d take a few other opinions into account. Anyhoo, that’s about losing. This is about cheating. Zuda is by nature a competition, which implies a set of rules, which further implies that if you break said rules – well, that’s cheating. What I’m saying is not “it’s only cheating if you get caught” but more “it’s only cheating when Zuda says it’s cheating!”

I’m not saying you should look for ways to cheat the system, but I do think that the rules of Zuda should be tested, twisted and worked around in whatever way your creative brain can think of. Whatever it takes. Seriously if you’re doing something wrong the powers that be at Zuda will do what they can to stop you. In that case you back down and find another way around. If the powers don’t stop you at the first go then do it some more! That to me is called solving a creative problem. You may not agree.

One thing is for sure. Anyone would have a problem winning this competition cold. So … don’t try. Look at the Foz, winner in March with Deadly, and how he crushed all opposition with his fan base. You’d have to be jealous of all those pro-active friends willing to go to almost any lengths to help a friend they obviously thought of with some considerable warmth and genuine affection. It helps to be a nice guy. I’d hate to get all philosophical on this post but it really helps to be just nice. And if you can’t be nice, then at least honest (and polite). Being nice will get you a long way. Being desperate might get you to the same place faster, but the quality of that experience may be lessened by other factors. I may be bias but I like nice people better than complete shits.

So make yourself some friends. Put yourself about. Be nice to people. That’s ‘nice’ not ’slimy’. Be subtle. The needy smell of desperation. Have a little think about what it is you want. The respect of your peers? The cash as fast as possible? The opportunity just to carry on doing what you love. Fame and recognition? Validation and the chance to say “look, I won. I’m right and you were wrong! Yarboo sucks!” I think there’s a fair spread of those motivations on show.

At the end of the day (or at least the end of this post) for me ‘cheating’ only exists in relation to your own personal integrity. The bottom line is that you can cheat your ass off and it won’t make a blind bit of difference to me. It’s when I cheat that the concept becomes a damaging reality. I appreciate you might not subscribe to my ‘karmic’ understanding of the universe, but I can see it working everyday. I can see it at work on Zuda too, and that is why I would advise you not to take the ‘winning’ and ‘losing’ too seriously. They are neither what they appear to be. Winners have lost and losers have won. Because the competition doesn’t end when Zuda says it does. Hope that’s not too zen for y’all!

(I know when I’m doing good stuff – I begin to irritate myself!!)

BIG ISSUES – MORE CHEATING

Now to the big issue of cheating. That’s cheating folks, not bending the rules a little. That’s multiple votes for yourself. And here’s where I stand. Getting your Granny to vote for you IS voting for yourself. Unless she regularly surfs the net looking for new comics to read in her own time then you sticking a computer in front of her and telling which keys to press – well that’s voting for yourself. You knew that already though. Jiminy Cricket might have already whispered that in your ear perhaps. Not Gordon Ramsey though.

The whole point of the marketing is to bring in new readers, or white stars as they’ve become known none too affectionately by the Zuda regulars (or the old peculiars as I like to think of us). The idea being that if the white star sticks around they might actually find an avatar for themselves and become regulars – like me! However there’s nothing that panics the Zuda crowd more than a sudden influx of white stars. People suddenly get suspicious, if not downright xenophobic. Along with the white stars comes the natural suspicion of – where the devil are they coming from? Are they real? Did they get here under their own steam? Were they press-ganged? Or are they just the creative team creating new accounts in order to vote for themselves.

I generally think that most white star invasions have been genuine. There have been one or two instances where I’ve thought that the patterns of speech used were eerily similar to one another, but that’s about it. There have been other instances of determined efforts to coral votes from a large captive audience as I mentioned yesterday.

On the other hand (and because I have two) the sign-up and log-in is fairly tedious and off-putting. People, especially work colleagues are not always likely to do what you tell them. Most people I know would vote for anyone else in order for ME not to win! Not knowing the effect you’re having as a competitior will either drive you to desperation increasing your efforts day by day or it’ll make you throw in the towel. I guess Zuda is gambling on the former. Personally I was hoping that the numbers of users would give a clue as to when the tipping point of credibility was reached, I thought about 80,000, but if most of those people are press-ganged non-returners we may be in for a longer gestation period than we thought. Or at least I thought. What are we now, 37500? I can’t help but wonder the percentage of users vs one-time voters. Anyone hazard a guess?

Of course we don’t know the number of voters or the number of votes cast. So we can’t even work out how many votes it would take for a cheater to seriously alter the results. The cheaters and the interested parties are left to guess – which I guess sums up the security arrangements! Other than noting (which I doubt) or barring (which I doubly doubt) the IP addresses of those involved what do we expect Zuda to do? I know some people don’t like my American Idol analogies but they hardly block phone votes from the contestants and their friends and families on that show. Internet votes and phone votes are slightly different beasts, but why should they be treated as such?

We’ve been told before and we’re expected to take it on trust (!) that Zuda has ways and means to sort out issues of illegal or suspicious voting trends. The standard answer to why those techniques will not be made available to the general public has been trotted out. Don’t worry folks your money is safe in our bank. Because we say so. As youthful readers already know trusting that kind of authority is not the kind of thing to be doing. The votes are secret. The system for calculating the winners is a secret. The systems for detecting cheats is a secret. In fact anything within the control of the Zuda powers-that-be is a secret. Why do you imagine those secrets exists. For your protection? Oh excuse me – nurse, my stitches!!! Anyways, so what I’m saying is why should Zuda block any votes at all? Why not let the winner be the person who can physically generate the most false votes? I’m sure you’ll tell me. I’m only asking to check if you are paying attention!

Now Zuda is a sensitive beast not long out in the world so I’m forced to repeat that I’m generally in favour of Zuda as a mover and shaker in the world of webcomics. It’s suffering from being a corporate player at party reserved for anarchists and it’s almost bound to appear a little like a stuffed shirt, but there are ways around this. I would have done things differently, but then I’m a genius. A poor genius at that! Enough! Whaddya think? Let me know.

I’m deliberately trying to pose and provoke questions here. I’ve still some of my own answers to reveal so “stay tuned” as no-one says anymore.

BIG ISSUES – CHEATING

The Zuda competition has rules you know. And rules were meant to be at least tested if not broken altogether. So what constitutes cheating? I’m grateful for all the emails detailing past misdemeanors or suspicious activity, but I’m not going to bring old arguments back to life here, that’s what your comments are for (tee-hee). The main arguments centre around the issue of voting for yourself multiple times and I’ll get to that later. There are only a couple of other issues worth mentioning before we get to that.

One is those issues relates to the rules about extra strip pages. The last argument I got into was with John Zakour when he posted a short story involving his characters that I thought might have been outside the rules of the competition, either in fact or in spirit. The question was valid I thought and deserved an answer. I never did get a definitive answer from either John or Zuda but I’m sure I remember a rule that stated that the eight pages were all you got. In order to achieve a level playing field any other site that hosted your material would have to be taken down for the duration of the contest. Now I might have got that arse about face – it wouldn’t surprise me and it wouldn’t be the first time I’d gotten the wrong end of the stick. Either it’s a rule or it’s not a rule, but either way this raises the question of what other material should be allowed? Is it a free-for-all? I’m dubious that all and sundry should be allowed as many extra pages as they can manufacture, not that it will do them much good, because nothing accounts for the taste of the Zuda audience. However you can’t help but feel for anyone who only has their eight original pages who finds themselves up against someone who has half a graphic novel prepared. I enjoy the supporting ‘production’ blogs but do they not bend the rules when giving a flavour of what might be expected from their comic should it win? I don’t have an issue with those blogs really, it all adds to the ‘marketing that is almost expected now. But. Where is the line to be drawn. That’s all I’m asking for. A definitive answer we can all adhere to.

Now what other shenanigans have people been up to? I think we’re safely past the ‘being rude on another competitors talkback’ thing, although February’s competition came dangerously close. In The Hammer’s efforts to pull in last minute extra votes there were more than a few comments from students obviously press-ganged into signing up by Gabe Ostley. Their comments were not helpful to The Hammer team or anyone else – it seemed an unnecessary and juvenile invasion. I’m reminded of a certain play where our political hero humiliates himself by petitioning votes from hospital patients in no fit state to make any sensible  judgment. I supported The Hammer as much as anyone and I’ve not changed my view on their win, but sometimes the party still gets a little out of hand. It’s what I was saying before about the clowns and the circus. Some people may recall Troy Bowen’s ‘party’ and I feel sure but the name escapes me that some competitor tried to coerce the entire office into casting their ‘one-time-only’ votes. This press ganging in whatever form it takes is leaving some with a bad taste in their mouth. I think it should somehow be discouraged. That aspect certainly falls short of the spirit of the game.

One more thing before I continue this tomorrow. I don’t find the situations above in any way similar to the occurrences of special interest voting. When we get avalanche of votes in from Spanish speakers or Italian speakers, or indeed anyone with a political or religious axe to grind or position to support – I believe those to be all part and part of a good marketing plan. I’m sure you see the difference between selling your comic to a wider audience and locking thirty people in a room until they vote for you. Yes, I am sure.

Gotta take a breather … more words tomorrow!

BIG ISSUES TOO BIG!

Yeah, I know you were promised a post on cheating. Guess what? I cheated! No really, what it is is that I’ve got to give you sensitive types room to breathe between posts and today is just too close to yesterday. It’s one of the problems of updating daily – I don’t always give readers enough time to respond before we are on to the next big thing. So today, I’m offering you, nay, selling you  the opportunity to send me via email and in the strictest confidence your gripes, complaints and frustrations on the theme of cheating within the Zuda competition. I can then work whatever you say into my next BIG ISSUE post. All without mentioning any names. You can trust me. I’m a Brit, Queensbury rules and all that. I’m so far physically removed from the centre of all things Zuda you can trust me not to tell tales out of school. In fact you can let me tell your tales without any of the danger of retribution, not that I haven’t enough tales to tell of my own, but I can look bad on your behalf. Contact me via the address supplied for your convenience below:

contact@mpd57.co.uk

Don’t hold back now. Let it all out. And tell me about your mother! Of course I’m listening.

A BIG ANSWER TO MARKETING

Well, I’ve cogitated and digested your responses to my comments on the process of marketing and here’s what I think. It’s a bit of a ramble so you might have to do some work. My feelings on this subject can be summed up by simply paraphrasing Quentin Crisp – you have to be more than you do! Well, that’s what he said about something! I forget what, but perhaps in this case it should be “You have be as much as you do!” I think Sheldon Vella has that one in the bag! But that means that somehow the creative person has to produce more than just the work itself. That’s not always been the way though.

For me the content of the comic was almost everything. I say almost because the quality of the creator’s character is now so easy to discover in these days of twittering, personal websites, MySpace interactions, media coverage and the rest. Frankly I think it’s something sometimes best left alone. Take this month’s Zuda competition for instance. I took a look at the entries and made my choice based on what I saw. I voted. Later I fancied finding out a little more, or perhaps I was just bored, but anyway I found something I wasn’t looking for and promptly changed my vote. The creator of the strip had said something somewhere that I just couldn’t live with. If I’d not read that then my vote would still be with him/her/them, but oh no – they had to go and say something stupid!

Back in the day I loved a lot of really great comic creators without knowing a thing about them. I just loved the content of their comics. Now of course we know all about their political persuasions, their religious views and the stuff they get for free while I’m poor and have to pay for everything I get, as well as their pets, family, musical tastes and television habits. The usual stuff. Shit, I feel sorry for you fans now – that’s way too much information. And you’ll recall that I used to try and suggest to folks that they shut up on their own talkbacks on Zuda, which kinda goes against the grain of shamelessly promoting the hell outta yourself and by extension the Zuda site. I still like the quiet ones better. I’ve always liked the quiet ones better!

Well the way of all things might be fine for some marketing savvy folks, but for most I still feel it’s going to be a disaster. Popular people are going to win every time and the lone voices will be crushed. Some exceptionally talented people, quietly confident about their abilities, but who are not the pageant queens Zuda wants them to be, have already been steamrollered into submission. The reason I came to webcomics was to hear those lone voices. I didn’t join up to hang with the ‘jocks’, a mutual backslapping club with twice as many faces as heads. I hope I’m using the term ‘jocks’ correctly! I don’t mean people with Scottish leanings. Naturally the winners don’t see themselves like that. One in particular goes out of his way to make sure that that insider/outsider thing doesn’t happen, but I’m an outsider myself so let me stick up for the ‘losers’ for just one minute OK?

Sam Little’s first comment was ‘this is going to be interesting’ but I’m not sure he was correct at all. I was trying to prise some new information out of competitors about the interesting ways they marketed their comics to a wider audience but all I got was the same old myspace/facebook/twitter thang which is more than obvious. I’d hoped more people were doing more interesting things, but at the moment perhaps they are holding onto what those things might be to maintain their edge – and who can blame them. Or perhaps I’m wildly wrong and nobody is doing anything remotely interesting. And of course some of the interesting things that seemed to be vote winners just weren’t that effective. I mean who saw the action figure put together by the The Hammer team? I thought OMG that’s amazing, but now I think was it worth it? Did it translate into votes. There’s no denying it was creative, but apart from itself what else was it? I appreciate that not everything should translate into votes, but I can’t help thinking that was it’s primary purpose.

Being creative is tough enough in itself and there’s a part of me that says “hell, would I want to make the sacrifice of being half as creative for being twice as successful?” I suppose it depends on your measure of success. I know I’m not producing a webcomic right now, but take for example this blog. This last week has been relatively successful with a jump in viewing stats and plenty of comments. That’s a nice feeling for sure, but on the down side I know that it’s because I’ve been ‘marketing’ it more successfully – mentioning the right names and talking about things that interest a greater number of people. It’s been much less entertaining for me. So I’m forced to ask myself what am I trying to do here? Am I trying to be ‘popular’? Or interesting? Or am I trying to entertain myself? And are any of these things mutually exclusive?

Anyhow, when I eventually get around to producing a webcomic I’m going to have to ask myself the same questions. Undoubtedly I’m going to have to use the power of social networking sites to generate and maintain interest from outside – so that what I’ll be doing won’t be entirely invisible and self-indulgent, but the crucial factor for me will be to what extent I choose to use those tools. Creators have been known to build incredible castles on shifting sands and then suffer the fall as graciously as possible. I’d rather build a more modest property on firmer ground.

So for me I guess it boils down to marketing yes, but also marketing how? And that’s where I feel I’m no further on after the questions I posed last week. Marketing how? I’m not going deny that marketing is an essential part of what we do as creatives, but I’m not going to sit in front of a computer for four weeks begging people to like me! The work should have done that. I thought Zuda was a talent contest, not a shouting contest.

So, now you’ve told me marketing is a good thing and I’ve agreed with you. We were never on different pages to be honest, but let’s hear something about technique, the nitty gritty, the wording, maybe. Maybe not. Tomorrow I’m going to be talking about ‘cheating’ – oh yes! Be warned! You know who you are. It will be a time for legends to rise and civilisations to fall! How’s that for marketing tomorrow’s post?

Need I remind anyone that it is in my nature to point out the elephant in the room that everyone else is too polite to mention? I can’t help myself, so it’s going to come out one way or another. Apologies in advance for any upset caused.

BIG ISSUES – MARKETING

OK here we go with a new feature I’m calling BIG ISSUES – your chance to bring together all the diverse opinions about one single aspect of the Zuda competition into one place. Although these issues have a direct bearing on Zuda most of the issues will also indirectly bring into focus concerns that would effect any strip in the broader webcomic world. The first issue is ‘Marketing’ or advertising or generally recruiting new readers to your comic. Zuda is obviously a votes based system, but wherever your comic is hosted getting new readers on board is a primary concern. So how should you do that? When should you do that? Why should you have to do that? Big issues huh?

Alms for webcomics!

That’s three questions and I don’t think any of them are as obvious as you might think taking them at face value. We’ve just seen a titanic struggle in Zuda’s February competition which resulted in some delay as the final rankings were sorted out and double checked no doubt. Two teams did everything they could to get views, favourites, ranking stars and votes, and both tied at the top. But how? Let’s see who volunteers what, but I assume it was in the main a combination of getting known friends across the internet to come and vote and a determined push to try and generate new friends who might vote in their favour. All this seems to have been done through a combination of the available networking sites MySpace, FaceBook and Twitter. That seems to have been the form in the past. I personally didn’t see any traditional ‘adverts’ this time round. Perhaps the contestants so far have determined that method to be either ineffective or just too expensive.

Something that had been suggested last month was that perhaps a special interest group had been brought in for extra support. I can imagine that being quite effective if not for the rigmarole of signing up to vote, which I still think is a bit much to ask anybody let alone a complete stranger unless they think they have a vested interest. The attention of a special interest group might be brought to bear on the subject of the comic or even on the creators themselves. The Spanish speaking vote is not to be sniffed at for example. Another method of attempting to garner votes is to generate ‘local’ interest. One of the contestants set up a blog (as most do) and attempted to involve as many existing readers as possible in order to create a sense of community and therefore loyalty. Other contestants in the past have made noises to the local press. It’s hard to measure which of these approaches is either effective or appropriate, but it appears that these are the tools we have.

So that’s part of how, but your suggestions to expand that are more than welcome. I have a number of suggestions myself and those will be put foward in the follow up to this post THE BIG ANSWER on Sunday. Hopefully you’ll give me plenty to think about during the week.

When should you market your comic gets the response “all the time” I suppose. Bearing in mind the rules of the Zuda competition that may seem like a level playing field in that it’s restricted to the month you are in. I don’t think it’s as simple as that. More later.

And because I don’t want to get too wordy – this is supposed to be a discussion, not an essay – I’ll just touch on why you have to market your comic. I don’t think you should have to market your comic frankly, but this is the way of all things so we’ll take that as a given. Outside of Zuda it’s obvious that you need to get the word out about your comic effort at every opportunity. Inside of Zuda I think some people including myself thought that that was the point of Zuda. That Zuda as part of DC negated the very idea of you having to market your own comic. However marketing yourself seems to be part of the plan. An unavoidable part.

A couple of thoughts I want to throw your way.

What does your marketing success (or failure) say about the quality of your comic? When folks say “hey you marketed better than the next guy so you won” – does that not imply your comic was, well … not the best? Are you not insulted? Does that not automatically devalue the win? Does that not bring us back to the idea that the real winners are the instant wins chosen by ‘real’ editors? Does that not blow the whole idea of Zuda out of the water?

And what does your marketing plan say about you as a creator? There are times in every competition when normally sane, composed, rational people start talking like idiots. It’s the stress born of desperation to win. But sometimes in those stressful situations people blurt out revealing aspects of their nature which it’s hard to put aside later. Nothing is quite so ugly as naked ambition or even ill-disguised bitterness. These things happen all the time to varying degrees, and I’m not saying I would be immune myself no no, but my point is does the circus not make clowns of everyone? Should we choose to perform or not to perform? Should we choose to turn the circus around and make it something that doesn’t make performing animals out of talented creatives?

The views and ideas above are not necessarily what I think or believe. I’m just trying to bring some thinking to the table. Dismiss or support those ideas as you will. Change them, amend and revise, reverse them even. S’up to you.

GREAT WORKS OF RATHER LOW ART?

We've not strayed too far from home have we?

Much as I’ve enjoyed my love affair with comics over the years even I struggle to compare them favourably alongside the many other art forms I’ve held an interest in for the 30 or so years I’ve been able to appreciate them properly. Discounting forms that hold little in common with what we all understand to be ‘comics’ or even ‘comic strips’ then comics have been around for at least as long as film and yet no one really associates film with being inherently childish. Films may have childish themes and subjects (and even methods sometimes) but the effort that goes into financing, producing and marketing them involves such a level of skill and such backing that no one feels able to dismiss what they eventually see with quite the same ease that they can a comic book. Calling any work a graphic novel doesn’t so much help as draw the shortcomings of the medium into even greater relief.

I love film so it’s easy for me to defend it. A handful of titles should suffice. Citizen Kane, Henry V, Once Upon A Time In The West, Annie Hall, Lifeforce (hehe). Insert your own favourites – it isn’t difficult. I love comics too, but not quite so easy to defend as a medium I think you’ll find. Maus (I’ve not read it), Watchmen (I thought it was er not very good), Akira, (Er … that’s about it), Marvel Two-In-One (hehe). Insert your own favourites if you can. You’re an intelligent person. Even you can see this argument failing?

A late thought here. If I listed my personal favourites I’m afraid they’d all be from before, during or just after the second world war!!! Any later and they might be English strips. I mean I enjoyed some of Claremont’s X-men, I enjoy the Fantastic Four, I appreciate Superman and Batman, there’s a lot of strips and talent I like … but I’m talking great here. Timeless classics that weather passing fads. Superheroes just ain’t that great a subject. Wait, I thought of one Love and Rockets! Phew, do I really have to think that hard.

Will Eisner sums up the problem best in the introduction of The Theory of Comics and Sequential Art (1985) : “For reasons having much to do with usage and subject matter Sequential Art has been generally ignored as a form worthy of scholarly discussion … I believe the reason for this sits as much with the practitioner as the critic … unless comics address subjects of greater moment how can they hope for serious intellectual review? Great artwork alone is not enough.”

Greater moment. Hmmm! Ah, Love and Rockets! Do you see what I’m saying? Hell, do you agree? I suppose, just to make it clear, that despite what Eisner describes as serious intellectual review, we can substitute “how can they hope … to be taken seriously at all?”

That book would have carried more weight for me if he’d left the words ‘comics and’ out of the title. Never mind. But that is what’s dragging us down here. The weight of negative expectations. I expect every comic I read to be rubbish because more often than not they are. That wouldn’t be so bad if only their ambitions were set just a little higher. Even a trivial entertainment like comics can afford to carry a little more weight. Discuss.

THE FUTURE REQUIRES EDITING

It's an ongoing process obviously.

Sorting those categories out there on the right I’ve been able to include a great many worthy and interesting sites that I hope to give a fuller nod to in future, but one surprise was the online comics category. Er, I struggled to find any thing to fill it with! I had thought that in the process of trawling through many many webcomics last year that I’d find plenty of worthy and interesting efforts. I didn’t. Well a few, but the odds of finding them were stacked heavily against. Despite the webcomics scene having existed in some form or another for more than ten years I don’t think the form has truly found itself yet. Not by a long way. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of great comics and greater talents online but not a great deal that embraces fully the nature of the medium. And fully is the key word here.

The online comic content that I can see mostly resembles nothing less than the UK ’small press’ scene – only less well thought out. A bit all over the place. Perhaps that’s why I’m waiting for some heavy weights to muscle in and show us how they can make a difference. And they will make a difference. DC has made a slow but realistic start with Zuda, as have Shadowline and a few others in DC’s wake, while Marvel lags disappointingly behind content to try and flog it’s existing back catalogue. The difference these heavy weights will make is in editorial control.

We have creators (artists and writers mostly but occasionally colourists and letterers) all doing their own thing with varying degrees of success, but the one thing that’s noticeably missing is editors! They are the guys who control the quality. And as Zuda has inadvertently proven, relying on the audience to act as editor is not always going to work for the greater good. As usual most people need to be told what to like. Asking what people want to read will only result in the inevitable answer “well, whatcha got?” Ninjas. Zombies. Vampires. These are the easy casual choices that will continue to be made without editorial influence.

Unfortunately editing is seen by many as an unnecessary controlling force there to prevent the ambitious and temperamental creative diva from doing ‘what they really really want’ but it is a necessary ‘evil’ and a skill much like any other. Perhaps it’s one you only really appreciate as you mature. As a movie buff I thank god for good film editors. They can make a great movie even greater or foul up so badly as to make a good movie incomprehensible – A Quantum of Solace on the down side for instance. Mostly they make good films better. I’m no longer a fan of the director as auteur either. A director’s cut would normally be described by me as the wantonly self indulgent cut. There are exceptions of course. You tell me. But basically most art forms need editing at some point and will be edited whether we like it or not. At one end of the spectrum the good editor (who in other art forms might be described variously as curator, publisher, broadcaster, DJ even  perhaps) can illuminate or enhance the creative effort as well as create interesting juxtapositions between selected works, just as at the opposite end they can simply filter out the rubbish before we waste our time on it. And never more so than in ‘webcomics’ do we need the rubbish filtering.

Take a look back at Zuda. Whatever you say about the editing process and how they implement it you have to recognise that it’s happening. Without an editorial influence you’ll soon just be wallowing in an enormous trash pile in which you’d be hard pressed to find anything worth reading at all. What are the instant winners unless an insurance policy against such a trash pile? It might all be out there to discover for all I know but do you really want to have to look that hard to find it. Isn’t this corralling of content what the internet has proved itself to be good at. The proper portal into quality online comics has yet to be built? It’s certain to me that Zuda is not the complete answer, far from it due to it’s reliance on the audience making the big decisions, but at least it’s a step in the direction, maybe the first proper foundation stone and that is why it still holds my interest. We’re not there by a long stretch yet and Zuda is only part way there, a first step or a signpost to what might yet be built, but I think for now it’s the most reliable signpost we’ve got.

Unless of course the lack of editorial control drags it under along with the ninjas, the zombies and the vampires.