Kevin's Watch

I always do a search with "display results as posts," not topics. I find that helps, if I have any idea at all of who the poster was and/or around what date the information is I am looking for.

Damelon did comment on perhaps breaking the Game thread down by Eiran year to me last night via Messenger. I do not remember replying, as I wanted to consider it.

The group read in the JKR forum aside, I am not one that likes a long list of sticky threads at the top of a forum. So my intitial reaction is one of resistance to the idea. But, I can see the validity of doing such. Again, this is something for Xar, as forum moderator, to decide. But, I guess I am fine either way as I have always been able to find the information I have looked for in the various Game threads (even if I do tend to misinterpret it).

~*~EDIT~*~
You posted as I was writing Murrin. IIRC, you were the one who pointed out the "display results as posts" option to me when I first joined the Watch. My sincere thanks for that.

The threads shouldn't be stickied. If the thread is locked it will eventually sink out of the way through non use. At the end of the game, the threads could all be merged.

Hmm...

But the Game thread and Comments thread have always been stickied.
(I think...)

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the banter that doesn't advance the story line (I'm pretty much with Murrin). I think it would be a good idea to have three threads: the comment thread, the roleplaying thread, and a character conversation thread.

But if there is a character conversation thread, would those who are not a fan read them? What if Xar does use something from that thread, and several deities do not know where it came from because they didn't read all of the threads?

For example, I seem to remember where plans to join forces to heal Eiran were discussed in the Game thread in the Second Age, yet a very important deity skipped a lot of the conversation due to being extremely busy during those two weeks. IIRC, that led to some misunderstandings for a short time.

Murrin wrote:...But if you set it to display posts, not topics, it gives you the exact location.

Really??? LOL! I've been here 5 years, and I never noticed.

Syl wrote:Personally, I'm not a big fan of the banter that doesn't advance the story line (I'm pretty much with Murrin). I think it would be a good idea to have three threads: the comment thread, the roleplaying thread, and a character conversation thread.

I just don't see this working out. The Comments thread often has stuff that should be in the Game thread, and we're sometimes told to move it there. How much worse would that be with a third thread that did allow IC conversations?

Menolly wrote:But if there is a character conversation thread, would those who are not a fan read them?

Who cares?

What if Xar does use something from that thread, and several deities do not know where it came from because they didn't read all of the threads?

What if worms had machine guns? And how is that any different than the way things are now? All I'm saying is that it would make things a lot easier for those of us who are trying to find concrete game information (as well as making written pieces, like from character POVs, more fitting). Most of the conversation in the game thread could easily go into the comments thread, except it's in character. So take the fluff out of the game thread by having both in and out of character comment threads.

Personally, I don't think Xar would base anything remotely important on the fluff, and this would allow him (and the rest of us) to more easily separate the wheat from the chaff. And if you can't find a way to make it work in the RP thread, it probably isn't worth considering for the game.

Just like if you're sitting around a table playing an actual RPG. There's the stuff about the game ("I can cast any of these spells, right?"), stuff you're actually doing in the game ("I'm casting magic missile."), character conversations in the game ("Hello. I am Gallstaff, Sorcerer of Light."), banter about the game ("Then how come you had to cast magic missile?"), and stuff that has nothing to do with the game ("Where's the Mountain Dew?"). I think in this format, it's best to keep things as separate as possible lest we confuse Xar and each other or bore people into inattention.

Syl wrote:Just like if you're sitting around a table playing an actual RPG. There's the stuff about the game ("I can cast any of these spells, right?"), stuff you're actually doing in the game ("I'm casting magic missile."), character conversations in the game ("Hello. I am Gallstaff, Sorcerer of Light."), banter about the game ("Then how come you had to cast magic missile?"), and stuff that has nothing to do with the game ("Where's the Mountain Dew?"). I think in this format, it's best to keep things as separate as possible lest we confuse Xar and each other or bore people into inattention.

Thank you for the summary Syl, since I can't watch the video.
I guess I still have a lot more to learn...

Zephyr wrote:I just don't see this working out. The Comments thread often has stuff that should be in the Game thread, and we're sometimes told to move it there. How much worse would that be with a third thread that did allow IC conversations?

If that's the case (I don't think I've ever had that problem, and I surely won't this time around), then I politely request that we tighten up the game thread, at least after the game actually starts. Though I still stand by my suggestion that it would be better to have a thread for important actions and proclamations, written events, speeches to the Pantheon, debates over Eiran, etc.

Menolly wrote:Thank you for the summary Syl, since I can't watch the video.
I guess I still have a lot more to learn...

Well, it's not much of a summary, just a few quotes, but the piece is actually an old Dr. Demento bit done with 8 bit graphic (FF) players. You can find a transcript here.

Syl wrote:

Menolly wrote:Thank you for the summary Syl, since I can't watch the video.
I guess I still have a lot more to learn...

Well, it's not much of a summary, just a few quotes, but the piece is actually an old Dr. Demento bit done with 8 bit graphic (FF) players. You can find a transcript here.

*grin*

Thank you.

I used to love Dr. Demento when he was on air here.

...and I take your point...

I would be more in favour of the yearly game threads, than the comment, converstaion, and game thread.

Much of the banter may be inconsequential, but it does give clues to affiliations and can be important to the game. I'm thinking of Bhakti/Nor dialogue - it went on for pages and pages, but I was definitely against the idea of them starting a new thread for it.

I'm against the yearly threads. One, that's way too many threads. Two, it'd be a pain in the neck to manage. And three, it would mess with continuity (you could mostly fix that by putting a hypertext link to the next thread at the end of the other, but that goes back to the second problem).

As for Nor and Bhakti, although reading through pages of the same thing was tedious, I didn't quite like the idea of a separate thread. In a perfect world, the conversation would've been cut down to the important parts, and the back and forth stuff carried on via PM. *shrug* But even then, that was directly game related. It's more of the back and forth antagonism, flirting, and buddy-buddy stuff that kind of makes my eyes gloss over.

Whatever. It all makes no nevermind to Aarklar, to be sure.

A related tangent - does anyone have a problem with Aarklar's quotes? Not in the fact that they're semi-cryptic or whatever, but that they're quotes from our world? If it takes away from the... verisimilitude for anyone, I could try to make up a reasonable approximation from a fictitious person of Eiran (Eiranian?).

Syl wrote:As for Nor and Bhakti, although reading through pages of the same thing was tedious, I didn't quite like the idea of a separate thread. In a perfect world, the conversation would've been cut down to the important parts, and the back and forth stuff carried on via PM. *shrug* But even then, that was directly game related. It's more of the back and forth antagonism, flirting, and buddy-buddy stuff that kind of makes my eyes gloss over.

Syl...didn't the in-game banter intensify because Xar said he wanted less behind the scenes PMs and for more interaction to take place in the Game thread where he could be a part of it by at least being able to read it? Including banter between deities?

...I'm probably misreading and not remembering something right again...

My main purpose for suggesting splitting up the game thread by years was archival. End of the game year the thread gets locked. Rather less to weed through, if you have to look something up later in the game; particularly if there are 19 players.

There is a great deal of value splitting off game important information from the general role playing. It'd be nice to see all the reveals together for instance. But I don't really see how roleplaying and general conversation wouldn't bleed together or that they should be split apart, since part of the fun of role playing a deity is the opportunity for ham acting in conversation as well as in role playing.

In answer to your question, Syl. No, I for one, don't mind you quoting from RL.

then I politely request that we tighten up the game thread, at least after the game actually starts

This is why I haven't really been too concerned. Once we actually have something to talk about, the banter will calm down. Right now though, before we receive the turns, we're just puttering around.

Syl wrote:A related tangent - does anyone have a problem with Aarklar's quotes? Not in the fact that they're semi-cryptic or whatever, but that they're quotes from our world? If it takes away from the... verisimilitude for anyone, I could try to make up a reasonable approximation from a fictitious person of Eiran (Eiranian?).

I like that I can look up who said it.

I don't mind real-world quotes, but I certainly object to the use of the word "verisimilitude." (Well, come on, somebody had to say it.)

Im fine with ya quotes Syl

And Im glad that I am not the only one feeling the way I am about the game thread. Was starting to think I was the odd one out

Menolly wrote:Syl...didn't the in-game banter intensify because Xar said he wanted less behind the scenes PMs and for more interaction to take place in the Game thread where he could be a part of it by at least being able to read it? Including banter between deities?

I could be wrong, but I don't think that had much to do with it. Xar just didn't want people planning stuff and making major game moves behind the scenes. I don't think he'd care that much if two players just chatted/bickered over PM.

And yeah, for archival purposes, yearly threads would be good. It'd be hell trying to split them all up after the fact, though.

great. MV was the one, last game, who was told she didn't take part in the banter ENOUGH so no one knew anything about her or didn't understand her or whatever. and yet, any time she DID she was also chastized for what she had to say or her "attitude" or whatever.

so i figure i'll show up and take part and flap my yap and well, that's wrong too.

yeesh.

i like syl's three thread idea.
i don't care for the yearly thread idea for same reason syl didn't.

and no, i do not have a crush on syl, i just like the way his brain works.