Good points raised while I slept. To elaborate on one of them: Who exactly is the judge of who can and can't do better work than someone else? You? Me? The author? A tribunal? Again most of us are just names on a screen to others.
It's rather obvious that most people lack objectivity concerning their own work, and other people can see flaws in my work much more easily than I see in my own. Most people realize this sometime during their teenage years, and this is why someone else generally takes a look at work before we release it.
But this wasn't what it was about at all, really. Instead, the whole driving force behind, "you have to do it better before you can criticize it" is the same old condescension towards anonymous posters, and plain old acrimonious knee-jerk response to criticism, that has been slithering through the thread for a few years now (repeatedly deleted of course). Put in other words, someone wants to keep saying, "and Crush has more talent in one butt-hair than they have in their whole bodies," many times, and they want to keep saying it long past when it was first implied, so many years ago. It was questionable as posting content the first time, less interesting the thousandth time.
Yes, much of what is said around here is unfair, some of it quite obviously so, but two wrongs don't make a right, and it just feeds into it to raise such invalid arguments in response and then to belabor them long past the one or two statements needed to reject them. Instead, there is a tendency to lump all critique here into being just an extension of the least valid thing said, and then some equally invalid point is raised to attack all critique here. This has happened repeatedly and through essentially identical methods and language for years now in this thread, and it lacks too much to appear so often.
There is a classy way to respond to criticism, and there are some completely classless ways as well. We've seen both around here, but it's just Internet "business as usual" to argue endlessly in support of an invalid point that was rejected long ago and which was at best tangential to start with. Again that word "tangential," appearing so often in the deleted posts in this thread. And of course the mocking responses that appear in the posts that belabor this invalid point, it makes the motivation clear. But no, I get it, only Shakespeare can come back from the dead to criticize Crush. All other critiques will be first mocked invalidly, and then deleted. But let us not continue to torment this already tortured soul, and yes there is only one soul that can be seen as tortured in this world. No others need apply.
