|
Post by The Scrac that Smiles Back on Sept 1, 2014 20:33:10 GMT -5
All I can add to the "what does the Icy Taco look like" is that there's a tree in the square, not too far from the fountain- in my headcanon anyway. So many people have had their characters sitting or hiding in a tree and I've always figured it's the same one. XD (I believe it originated as Icon's character Shia's sketching place, but I might be wrong.) I also recall there being a pool off to one side of the square
|
|
|
Post by Andrea on Sept 1, 2014 20:47:46 GMT -5
HEY i want to contribute some things
Regarding FAQs: this is probably the best thing we can do for the Taco. It should cover things from the OOC (about what a smiley set is and how not everyone needs one but they're fun to make) to the IC (like how the universe works in general). I'd be happy to get more specific and help out with that.
Building placement: a map is sort of good to have for people like me who are now paranoid about where everything is after a tragic mistake in a story a year ago ("What do you mean, he ran to his friend's room?! It was on the third floor! And the building was on fire!"). I hope this doesn't come across as patronizing, though, but it should be really optional to 'study' it. Like, it would be a good reference, but maybe just a list of buildings would be best if they're really needed. With a place like the Taco, things seem like they'd come and go as needed.
Self-Demonstrating Guide: This is the biggest thing I want to talk about. I will even use font effects to show how serious I am.
I remember during the IT3 event, TB had a line where he was like "How the $%&^* do I write thoughts again?!". And we laughed and helped him out, but I think there shouldn't be a set format for how to write a Taco post. Some people will distinguish actions via italics- they said, before eating the last hamburger on the face of the earth- or asterisks or even prose. Some people will use fun smiley sets and some will just use nametags. So long as you can immediately recognize what the writer is trying to convey (e.g. you look at a post and read "Bob: .oO(I'm hungry)" and recognize that Bob is thinking) then it should be fine.
Uh, again, I'm afraid this sounds patronizing or sardonic, and I apologize. I just don't want anyone to feel intimidated. Which brings me to the issue of Taco canon.
I think lists of characters and plot arcs w/ descriptions would be neat but I remember a long time ago Stal brought up a good point: that it might scare away people who see this giant canon. I know it doesn't have to be read, but I remember being too afraid to join Spacefleet because I didn't want to go through the past GW roleplays and I was afraid I'd do something stupid if I didn't.
On the other hand, since Proboards changed, formatting is broken on a bunch of old Taco stories so... what are you going to to, read through them now? I don't know, I'm torn on how I feel about it
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Sept 1, 2014 20:57:51 GMT -5
I don't have any coherent thoughts on the manner right now, but I approve of the whole general idea of making things clearer.
Until I do have more coherent thoughts, I just want to make a note that I'm willing to help fix formatting on old arcs if people want me to. I can do them on my own time, but it would also be awesome if people sent me PMs with the links to the posts they want to fix as well as the post content with the fixed formatting so that it's easier to put in. Otherwise, I can get a list of links going for posts in arcs where I can fix formatting, but the fate of when they get fixed will depend on the mercy of my schedule.
In short, if you want formatting in certain posts in old arcs fixed and you're not able to do so yourself, let me know.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2014 21:26:25 GMT -5
ResponsesStory Summaries, "Canon", and Character Directories (Re: Andrea) Well, as far as story summaries go— I know that I personally would very much like to set my old Scrapbook thread on fire. It's full of very old writing, with poor formatting, and broken BBCode at that. It's painful to read, and I doubt anyone does anymore. I only really use it for reference, myself. I'd very, very much like to take it down. Problem: the stuff inside is part of the collective "history", more or less. It's still going to be referenced from time to time. Removing it entirely and not offering an alternative seems like it would just be creating a different problem. But having a summary that can be referenced/read if people are curious (and they can ask me about the full versions if they really want to subject themselves to my old writing) sounds like a workable solution. Whether we like it or not, the past events have effects on characterization in the present. The use of summaries to document major changes/events seems to be pretty well-receipted with other kinds of RPs. I don't anticipate it being required to read, but I seem to recall people saying that such a thing would be useful. Character directories were also suggested. Requested, rather. The idea of a directory would be to give a laconic version of the DP, as I understand it, and would function more like a yearbook than a biography. Map (re: Everyone, but especially Omni) Originally Candy was going to post my ginormous list of locations that went along with the map. Which yes, included the arcade, etc., etc. I suggested not to because I don't anticipate that being used, and didn't want people to get the impression that we'd have this huge list of locations. At the moment, I can think of maybe a few general areas and less than ten specific buildings that are mentioned/used frequently enough to be suitable for a list. (Interesting how most of them are public services.) But since the city itself is so flexible, I suggested a while back that while it be left up to the individual in most cases, if it became important due to story purposes, the person running an interaction would have say on the layout. (Because nothing derails an otherwise fluid interaction like participants taking actions that you hadn't even considered because it was impossible due to how you pictured things.) How-To Guide? (Re: Andrea) You have a point with how conventions can differ. It's never come up much until this point. But this does present a new set of questions. Should each individual style be explained, then? Listed under personal preferences in descriptions of each Writer? Would a line or two in a FAQ "Everyone does things differently" and nixing a self-demonstrating guide be a better solution, or much less helpful? In general, what is being looked for that will help distinguish between "If you are wondering what X means, this is what it means" and "You must do X"? This seems to be a core problem, here. Those proposing updates mean it as the former, but feedback suggests it's being taken as the latter. That's… well, counterproductive. If informational threads are going to be perceived as demands rather than as their intended purpose as helpful guides, updating such things will accomplish very little.
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Sept 1, 2014 23:37:40 GMT -5
I was under the impression that at least the arcade was mentioned often enough to be of note. Granted, maybe just Scrac and I were the only ones to mention it a lot and I never realized. @torkie10 does bring up a good point. It never occurred to me that the FAQs and such might be interpreted as concrete standards, rather than the travelers' guide we're aiming for. That said, now that I think about it, I think we might be over-complicating things and not even realizing it. Maybe we should just have one thread, with an FAQ and a short set of rules. Maybe there could be some suggested reading and such further in. We might be able to do a bit more than that, but we should probably keep it limited. To make things clear, I think the first question (or at least one of the first) should be something like 'Do I have to do all these things in my posts/style my posts in a certain format?' and the answer 'Absolutely not! As long as it's clear what's going on, use whatever style works for you.' For rules and such, I was thinking a good policy would be 'No Means No': basically, you're generally assumed to have permission to do pretty much whatever you want (with a few exceptions). If someone is uncomfortable with something being done to their character, they should just come out and say so and the other person should stop. After all, first and foremost, we're all here to have fun.
|
|
|
Post by PFA on Sept 2, 2014 10:59:58 GMT -5
Yeah, I definitely agree that we don't want to make this HARD AND FAST RULES so much as a general guideline and explanation. The How to Read the Taco guide was helpful for its time, when like most of us were using that convention, but that's not really the case anymore and it just confuses people. :'B I think a quick mention of post formatting in the FAQ (with a note that there's no concrete rules and that you can just ask if you get confused) is all we really need here.
We can also probably pull stuff out of the Taco opening post and put it into the FAQ, since a lot of that is just FAQ. (I personally feel like the intro post has gotten a little overcomplicated, anyway. XD; ) Basically I feel like the goal here would be to simplify and explain.
Also, I would personally be happy to write up a new FAQ once we decide what exactly we want to put in it. ^_^
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Sept 2, 2014 17:28:47 GMT -5
Yeah, I definitely agree that we don't want to make this HARD AND FAST RULES so much as a general guideline and explanation. The How to Read the Taco guide was helpful for its time, when like most of us were using that convention, but that's not really the case anymore and it just confuses people. :'B I think a quick mention of post formatting in the FAQ (with a note that there's no concrete rules and that you can just ask if you get confused) is all we really need here. We can also probably pull stuff out of the Taco opening post and put it into the FAQ, since a lot of that is just FAQ. (I personally feel like the intro post has gotten a little overcomplicated, anyway. XD; ) Basically I feel like the goal here would be to simplify and explain. Also, I would personally be happy to write up a new FAQ once we decide what exactly we want to put in it. ^_^ Making an FAQ from the first post is a good idea. We might also want to reset or remove the 'current events' portion, partly because those seem to have been pretty much forgotten, partly because I think it might be one of the more intimidating things for newcomers. I think one of the things mentioned on the rules/FAQ would be when it's appropriate to move to a separate thread (which I think would basically be 'things that are meant to be too serious or long-running'). Maybe you could make a Google Doc or something so people can see what's currently on the FAQ and get a better idea of what to suggest?
|
|
|
Post by Andrea on Sept 3, 2014 15:37:50 GMT -5
@torkie10: You're very much right, which is what I was struggling with re: story summaries and Taco 'canon'. I'd like to suggest sort of an intermediary, then: only the most important arcs are summarized. If, hypothetically, there was a character who lost his arm in an RP, then that could be covered in a character summary ("So-and-so is a character belonging to X [...] He lost his arm while fighting a monster"). Longer summaries would be good, but not a lot of RPs/stories here are too long: at what point is one just rewriting an embarrassing old piece of writing rather than saying what happened? I really feel like a wall of a million summaries, some of which are huge (as opposed to a few short summaries) would scare newcomers away, but... I need a second opinion on that. As for your question regarding how RP/writing conventions differ: I don't know if it needs to be taken so far as to say how each writer writes; even you and I have smileys for some characters and use nametags for others. If something isn't self-evident, it should be based on context. There's a difference between using italics for actions- He runs- and for thoughts-- I need to get away from here. I think the only "rule" (not so much a rule, even, just how people choose to do things) is that nobody really uses prose in the Taco itself, except for description lines like those previous. For when characters speak, it's what fanfiction writers would call 'script style,' whether that involves or tl;dr: I only mean to come across as saying there are different ways people RP. In the FAQ, I think it should just say that there's no set way to write an IC post. Like was already said, 'Absolutely not! As long as it's clear what's going on, use whatever style works for you.' As for the rest of that post by Omni: I've been so out of the loop for a long time that I don't know if it's been addressed or not, but let's be frank: how will 'seriousness' in the Taco be handled? IC fights, big conflicts... so on. We tried splitting the Taco in half and all, but things seem to have settled down since then. We still have that Arena thread for duels between characters and I think one for fights outside the Taco itself? Is the Taco reverting to an "anything goes" board that it was upon its creation, or are we going to hold out on doing certain things such as RPing evil characters or blowing up buildings or so on in case 1. characters, within the RP realm, don't want to be there anymore or 2. someone's actual feelings are hurt? I mean, "No Means No" is exactly what we should aim for since it doesn't lay down a rigid sense of "this is what you can and can't do" and relies on common sense and being open with one another, but... I guess I just want to say in a potential FAQ like: "Avoid characters that will shoot anyone they see because they don't like them, as the other RPer might see that as the start of something serious and dramatic for their character whereas the first RPer with the shooty character was just being silly?" I don't know if there's a lot of distinction between 'crack RPs' (blowing up the moon) and 'serious RPs.'
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 16:22:43 GMT -5
Summaries: (Re: Andrea) I can see your point about a textwall. Though I would like to assure everyone that I, personally, would not be writing any story/character summaries for any FAQs. Should qualification for summary be based on importance or on length? The latter seems like it would be easier to define. Regarding being obvious based on context: I think the primary problem with that would be that what is obvious to one person won't necessarily be so to another. Would people be required to ask? Left to guess? "Seriousness"/ "No Means No" (Re: Everyone, particularly Andrea and Omni) Andrea brings up an excellent point regarding seriousness. I may be wrong, but it seems like newer people are more interested in an "anything goes" atmosphere? :\ Something I discussed with someone else regarding important distinctions between crack and serious RPs: I feel like the perception of what qualifies as "serious" varies so much from writer to writer, even from time to time for the same writer, and from character to character. :/ The potential line in the FAQ seems good to me, but I don't know how effective/helpful/enforceable it would be. How enforceable would "No Means No" really be, though? Would someone who prefers being serious and has a lot of "No" be looked down on/"talked" to by mods/complained about/otherwise harassed? That seems like it could be a potential problem.
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Sept 3, 2014 19:04:50 GMT -5
Just replying to this for now: How enforceable would "No Means No" really be, though? Would someone who prefers being serious and has a lot of "No" be looked down on/"talked" to by mods/complained about/otherwise harassed? That seems like it could be a potential problem. In my experience, it's usually the serious writers that are likely to complain about something being done to their characters. I feel like the less serious writers could take just about anything being done to their characters and go with the flow. Whereas if a serious writer doesn't like something that's, say, meant to be taken as silly, they can just ask the other person to stop and the less-serious writer would be willing to just change to something else. So basically, I don't think that'll be a problem. EDIT: Also, I think it would only need to be enforced if someone refuses to stop.
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Sept 6, 2014 13:13:45 GMT -5
Mmkay, so one of the things I've been wondering about is spoilers. In general, I think we've done pretty well, but maybe we could work a little harder. Heck, I was going over my DP and noticing that I was doing some indirect spoilers (noting that specific things are spoiler... which could be a clue-in).
Anyway, we've often not done outright spoilers without at least giving a warning in advance, particularly in side threads. However, I did stop following one thread fairly recently due to there being some spoilers without any sort of warning. I think we could probably do better in cases like that.
And what about side-content? Like, stuff that might not be in the main games/show/whatever, but in other media related to it. If nothing else, I think it would be good to avoid it if it could potentially spoil the main story.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2014 13:17:02 GMT -5
I'd strongly prefer if we stick to one thing at a time right now, or else—based on what experience tells me—nothing will get done.
|
|
|
Post by Omni on Sept 6, 2014 13:46:56 GMT -5
*shrug* So long as we're working toward progress.
So, does anyone have any suggestions for the FAQ then? I was thinking the spoilers thing could go on it, but we can add it once we've got that solidified.
... Actually, in general, we should probably talk about rules/guidelines first. Otherwise we might find ourselves having to modify the FAQ after it's been 'finalized.' At least assuming we want to clarify them in said FAQ. It might be good to start without clarification for now, though.
But yeah, the first post would probably be a good starting point for an FAQ. </ramble>
|
|
|
Post by The Scrac that Smiles Back on Sept 28, 2014 17:28:52 GMT -5
I think the IC Taco's description on the main page, though amusing, should be changed. It's more confusing than informative.
|
|
|
Post by The Scrac that Smiles Back on Feb 10, 2015 21:17:51 GMT -5
Does anyone else support the idea of having a sub-board for plots/arcs/mini-arcs and doing away with the location threads?
NOT deleting them, just discontinuing their use for that purpose.
|
|