Triggered by: shrinkwrap ("decal") around entire object?

After noticing my question (link above) was downvoted, I commented downstream. Yes, I have used SE for years, off and on. So I am very familiar with the way things work. I also understand gripping about downvotes just for being downvoted is pointless. That's why I'm here now on meta: I see no problem at all with the question (link above), its format, content, or intent. After trying, for several hours, to do what the question asks about without success, I researched for several hours more, until finally giving up and coming here ... This just irks the you know what out of me. And yes, I understand some users just downvote like Trolls.

I am one of those who firmly believe downvoting without comment should not be allowed. (Please don't tell us it would be too expensive for SE to hold such a volume of data. Drivespace is cheaper than dirt. And there are other algorithms which could facilitate this.)

Here's my comment (excerpted from my question's comments):

OK why the downvote? --- this is one of the reasons I hate stackexchange many times. Post a legitimate question ... in detail ... (It took me > 15 minutes to think out the question and step by step details, then I reviewed it, posted and then edited it several times, followed by an image added by request of a commentor.) So you downvote, but don't say WHY. How the heck is this supposed to help ANYONE? Off to Meta to whine ...

... And from the SE Horse's Mouth:

When should I vote down?

Use your downvotes whenever you encounter an egregiously sloppy, no-effort->expended post, or an answer that is clearly and perhaps dangerously incorrect.

My question met none of the downvoting criteria, IMO.

So please DO go downvote my question if it needs improvement or is off-base (which would baffle me if you think so). BUT tell me (US!) what is wrong with it, or how it could be improved.

To be fair and balanced (LOL) you could also support the cause and go UPVOTE the question :))

thank you for your time and consideration.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I did what you asked and downvoted it. I read your question, all the comments to it, and the answer, and still can't figure out what your trying to do. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 12:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ OK I'm baffled by this. Perhaps you all know TOO much and can't think like a noob when approaching a question? (Nothing personal)... However, seeing that you are one of the people who put it on hold, I can say that doing such a thing is a very bad idea for a multitude of discouraging reasons. It makes me just want to delete the question and blow off stackexchange sites AGAIN. Do I sound temperamental? No. It's just that doing things this way is so counterproductive for noobs. AS I commented, if I understood how to do what I needed to do, I not need to ask the question. ... continued ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 21:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ... So I (we) get penalized or the question is frozen just because we don't know the proper jargon? Did it occur to you (all) that maybe someone like me has never even heard of UV mapping before? (I do know well what it is ... and said specifically asked if a simpler method exists.) I rerereRead my post ... I just don't get what is so hard to understand about the idea of "wrapping a picture around an object". Take a jpg, gif, whatever, print it on a piece of paper and glue the damn thing around a cardboard box. Would it help if I edited that into the OP? If so, this just confirms ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 21:52
  • $\begingroup$ ... a feeling of sadness about stacksites in general --- most seasoned users tend too frequently toward being obsessive compulsive about "getting it right," instead of truly trying to understand the intention of the question. (Sorry, you can look at my profile and see that I've been around awhile ... in fact, under a company ID I don't use since I'm not there anymore, I started on StackOverflow in 2009 ... so I'm not a noob to SE, but I am to Blender.) Now, I feel like Blender.SE is going to be the same, time waster ... and you all wonder why the insufficient voting. And thank you ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 21:57
  • $\begingroup$ ... and I mean it sincerely, that you downvoted AND explained why you did so. Perhaps my question was so simple it isn't obvious ... that's all I can figure at this point ... - H $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 21:58
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You could have done something as simple of showing an example of what your were trying to do. That example could have been of anything. Presenting a unclear description of what you have tried to do, to fix a problem you never clearly explain, does not help anyone. We can't answer your question, and help you solve your problem if we don't know what your trying to do. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 23:12
  • $\begingroup$ @x-27 --- "show a simple example of what you are trying to do" ... OK, you got me. I give up. How can I show an example of what I am trying to do if I can't do it in the first place ??? That is precisely why I wrote an explanation. I tried both to photoshop it and do it in After Effects, but it was too complex (for me at least) to do 3D w/ those tools ... so I turned Blender. I really don't understand why you don't understand. I'd delete my question out of frustration, but the variations of the answers might prove useful to others. thanks anyway. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 16, 2016 at 0:07
  • $\begingroup$ @X-27 please see also my final comment to the answer I accepted for the OP. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 16, 2016 at 0:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is how I read your question, and why I DVed it. "I'm trying to acheve an end result, but I'm not going to say what that end result is. This is the approach I've taken, which isn't working how I imagined it should. How can I make my approach work?" You could simply have said: "I'm trying to make ______. I have tried this already, but it didn't work. What should I be doing?" $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 16, 2016 at 19:53
  • $\begingroup$ I don't see the point of this any longer. I did what you said. I specifically said exactly what I wanted to do in the very first sentence. Then, in the instructions, I said "take any arbitrary image" ... it doesn't matter what ... I picked "brain" at random. It could have been a picture of strawberries, or a dead horse. Put picture on a plane, or empty, then wrap that picture around an arbitrary object. What is so hard to understand about that?... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 16, 2016 at 22:08
  • $\begingroup$ @X-27 - as more than a few folks said my question was unclear, I've edited the o.post to try to clarify it, now that I understand the terminology. Thanks again for taking the time to assist on this! $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 18:46
  • $\begingroup$ @x-27 PS thanks for releasing / reopening the question... if you all had not done so, I would not have gotten the answer from today 24Aug16. That answer was precisely what I was looking for. (Also, for the sake of blender.se. meta, please see my comments below to David.) $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 19:04

2 Answers 2


Your question in its current state is surely not that bad (in terms of lacking information) that I would DV it (I've seen worse). But then there is cegaton's answer - and the wonderful first paragraph seems to be a hint, right? ;-)

The problem is that most of the people with a reputation above 1000 will post the same comment over and over and over again; "Welcome to BlenderSE, your posting lacks structure and vital information, please add some informative images, also consider uploading your file to blend-exchange....yaddayaddy"

So some of us then even try to answer the question to our best knowledge and with the little information we get, but then it's almost always a very long answer since we want to cover all the possible solutions that unclear questions bear.

So here's the thing: Writing good answers is time-consuming and all we get is this nice warm and fuzzy feeling that maybe we helped that person with our effort. Oh, and street cred, of course. The least thing we could expect for our effort is that people ask their questions after they did research and - if they didn't find a good answer - describe their problem in the most comprehensible way possible.

The easiest way to describe a problem is starting with the expected result, like "I want to create a cube that has brain-like patterns allover its surface." Maybe then you could inform us also about the purpose, like "I want to use that model as a still rendering/in an animation/as a game asset." Because... things like these matter sometimes, you know...?

Good questions deliver good answers. Bad questions won't get any answers, only comments and in some cases they get DV'd. The world keeps turning. It's a learning process (hopefully).

  • $\begingroup$ Great answer, couldn't have said it better. $\endgroup$
    – iKlsR
    Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 9:33
  • $\begingroup$ Thx metaphor_set; I've accepted your answer although this Q&A round format really doesn't fit for meta-level discussions (another sore spot with me an SE) - and especially for the DV'ing. Re my question: since at least five people said they didn't understand what I was asking, I accept that my question was unclear. However, cegaton's shotgun approach hit it - and a few hours ago, Duane Dibbley nailed it spot on, or "interpreted" it correctly. So at least one other person understood it. I am glad it was openned again or else Duane's answer would have never happened ... (cont.) ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 16:56
  • $\begingroup$ ... I still think across all SE sites, those with expertise would better serve the sites by refraining from blasting away with the generic "your post lacks ..." and halting it, rather put that as a comment (as, yes, is often done too). You see, I understood exactly what I needed to do, but being a real blender noob, I had no way of knowing the correct terminology to use. Also I didn't want to just "create a cube with brain like patterns allover it's surface" ... I needed the method of putting any picture on any object (not a material, not a texture, not a UV wrap, not a pattern - and not .... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ ... specifically a cube.) That's why I said what I said at the get go. The brain on a cube was just an example. Now - after - all the answers, I could ask my question again more precisely. But I'd not need to ask, would I ? TRying to "explain" in detail from a noob's perspective would have been far worse than the XY problem. Do you see? How does a blind man model an elephant, much less ask what tools to use? thanks much for your attention! $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 17:30

Well, not much I can say to cheer you up (and this next bit wont help.)

We will probably never see mandatory comments for DVing. This type of thing and many variants have come up on the main meta for years.
One of the biggest reasons for not having a mandatory comment after a DV, is anonymous voting. If every user that DVs your post has to leave a comment at the same time, it would become rather clear who DVed your post, and that is not something we ever want to let lose.
(You think the DVs are unfair now, you can't even imagine how bad it would get when people can target users and revenge vote.)

Now for any user under 2000 rep, they are asked to leave a comment. A box pops up under the vote buttons that says "Please consider adding a comment if you think this post can be improved."
screen shot of BSE DV message for users under 2000 rep.

If I were to venture a guess as to why somebody DVed your post, I would say that it is because it was unclear, maybe a bit long winded (you only get to the question at the end, and it only becomes clearer what you are trying to do with the sentence you edited in later), and it seams to be kind of a XY problem question.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks David. You said, " ... reasons for not having a mandatory comment after a DV, is anonymous voting. If every user that DVs your post has to leave a comment at the same time, it would become rather clear who DVed your post, and that is not something we ever want to let lose." That's an example of what I said about algorithmic fixes. When you downvote, it forces a comment, but the user ID could be left off. One bit set. Sure, they could leave it blank, but at least they'd be tempted to say at least "it sux" or somesuch. It's not remotely similar to the XY problem. Why? ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 22:04
  • $\begingroup$ ... because the first thing I said was the question. Then to clarify, I gave you, the reader the step by step process to get to the same point I was, thus showing you how the result differed from what I was asking about. I've been told I'm very good a teaching other people technical things, and being able to think like someone learning that thing new. So please read my comments above to @x-27 's comment above. BTW, I do appreciate you both taking the time to assist on this. I'd like to hang out here on Blender more, but, honestly, it seems like the same, old worn-out SE shoe ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15, 2016 at 22:08
  • $\begingroup$ @HowardPautz The reason it seems the same, is this is an SE site, so all the same rules and procedures apply. It being old an worn out is a valid opinion, but there isn't really anything we here can do about it, you would need to talk to SE employees up and down the food chain if you want anything to change. Most of us have come to appreciate how it works, and think it does so very effectively. $\endgroup$
    – J Sargent
    Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 14:32
  • $\begingroup$ @NᴏᴠɪᴄᴇIɴDɪsɢᴜɪsᴇ - understood. Indeed, I too think SE is effective overall, but the effect on downvoting noob posts on the noobs themselves is difficult for experienced users to experience, IMO. In general, the more seasoned an SE user, the less tolerant they might be towards malformed noob questions ... understandably ... it's taxing and tiring to see the same junk over and over again. It's not the noobs themselves, it's their noob-way of asking. There should be some way of getting them to clean up their act without discouraging them. It feels horrible to see downvotes on your very ... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 18:56
  • $\begingroup$ ... first post. Noobs do not understand this. It's only after you've gained some experience (say > 5 to 10 posts) that you then see what downvoting does. I'd wager a box of doughnuts that there are thousands of people who legitimately post once or twice, get their posts down to -1, -2, even -3, then never come back. OK, I supposed we could be Darwinian about this and say if they're not tough enough to survive that initial hurdle, then maybe they shouldn't post at all - but doesn't that just seem wrong? $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2016 at 19:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .