Jedi Council Forums - Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 12/11/08 12:40pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Master_Keralys posted: And on a side note, what about Sin's suggestion? You mean in regard to splitting the boards? I'm somewhat ambivalent. I'd be against splitting Lit into 8 boards for specific eras as that'd compartmentalise things too much, but there is the dominating influence of NJO-DN-LOTF in Lit. Perhaps a 2-board split could work of NJO-DN-LOTF(-FORJ) + Legacy and a second board for everything else? What I wouldn't want to lose is the overlaps between eras which enables a fan of one EU strand to become aware of another they may like and without Lit being the way it is, they may not have found out about. Or a fan enters Lit looking info about X, spies a different thread that they find themselves intrigued by and end up with a new EU avenue to explore. -----signature----- Excellence: "You are the forum's Quick Ben." SW EU fans: John Ostrander needs your help! http://www.comix4sight.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Robimus Registered: Jul '07	Date Posted: 12/11/08 12:47pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	I'm very pleased to hear that so much is moving forward, and I have already noticed the tighter moderation in Lit. That year end award idea is a great one! I think it could work in a way very similar to the EU polls on favorite characters, quotes and such. I missed who came up with that one, they deserve a big tihaar (If they are of legal age of course,,,,and if not come to Canada, you only have to be 18 here ) -----signature----- I am forever seeking the damutek of Hooley Krekk Oh, woe! Oh, misery! Oh, unhappiness. Hooley Krekk where are you? . http://www.cccomiccon.com http://www.actionfigurenews.ca
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 12/11/08 2:12pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Havac posted: I think this could be problematic if we get into the idea of "You have to do or think X, Y, or Z to post here" -- I don't want to see this stifle discussion. Fundamentally, I think we can get most of what you're talking about when the original poster strongly defines the topic of discussion and it's clear to everyone what's being discussed, and we the mods are willing to step in and redirect people for being off-topic. So in your example, I don't think you need any house rules beyond the topic itself: what did you like. Someone posting what they didn't like is gratuitously, blatantly off-topic, and that's the kind of posting I know I'd stop on sight. Fundamentally, I think the best advice is to set a clear topic and agenda for discussion in the first post, and those will effectively be your house rules; you don't need regular posters imposing regulations on what people can and can't say in threads, because that leads too much to mini-modding. Furthermore, if you feel your thread is being dragged off-topic, PM a mod and say, "Please come look at this and get people back on topic." We can't be everywhere at once (though Keralys and our Quantum Research Department are currently working on that), and if anyone feels there's a problem -- whether it be with your thread being derailed, someone else's thread being derailed, or just some specific behavior -- the best course is always to PM a mod. Sometimes it may turn out that it's not something we can do anything about; we have to make a judgment call and we judge it's OK. But PMing is always going to bring it to our awareness and we will look at it and consider it, and even if it's not something we feel comfortable shutting down, we can make warnings and attempts to guide conversation onto a different tack anyway. The PM to the mod is one of the most underused tools out there to make your voice heard if you think there's a problem. Just to clarify: The recent DE thread, which saw Keralys intervened in to prevent a retreading of very well-trodden ground would be what I have in mind by 'house rules' - if you start a topic you know has a chance of being derailed in very specific ways, is it so unreasonable to ask that, since it's well-covered ground, we don't go over it again? This is pretty much akin to what you lay out the start of your second para anyway, so this is more a point of phrasing than actual disagreement. -----signature----- Excellence: "You are the forum's Quick Ben." SW EU fans: John Ostrander needs your help! http://www.comix4sight.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
J_K_DART Registered: Dec '01	Date Posted: 12/11/08 4:18pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread) - Date Edited: 12/11/08 4:31pm (2 edits total) Edited By: J_K_DART
	Some comments on the ideas put forward... Actively seeking to develop posting habits focused on IU discussion, including a number of oft-batted around ideas (RF's IU trial threads being one of them), and just generally posting and contributing in an IU rather than OOU direction. This, I think, is a good one. I'd be interested to see this done. Creating a separate continuity thread where we can direct all those things so they don't take up everything else. Likewise, I think this has potential. Let's face it, nobody's here discussing how TPM changes the timeline in regard to ANH (I don't even know whether or not it did, but probably!). Continuity is a debate in every newly-published work, meaning that once the continuity has been pounded back into shape again then it's over with. That means a continuity thread can easily work, imo. Possibly implementing an actual policy regarding IU discussion, the details of which we're hammering out, but which would very firmly direct but not eliminate OOU discussion so it doesn't take over so many threads. As I mentioned elsewhere, this would need careful handling re: new posters in particular. Active moderation on negativity of a non-productive variety - especially "drive-by posting" of dislikes in a thread designed for actual discussion, right up to and including bans as necessary. (And frankly, there's no reason this can't include gushing, too, when it's annoying or over the top.) Also, constant harangues on books people haven't read. And in general, the kind of intellectual snobbery that we do all agree is present, even if we differ on the "fanboy" side of things that Lex brought up. Dealing with derailing. Just generally more aggressive moderation. Again, positive steps imo. Of course, some of this will be potentially quite controversial; a poster may not realise they've fallen into that category! There's even an issue re: moderation, because, no offense, but Mods are people too (lol) and are intrinsically less likely (note: I didn't say unlikely!) to see this when it involves an opinion they agree with. That's basic humanity, however hard we try to manage it. It may involve setting up a "safe than sorry" approach, where if a Mod feels strongly on an issue and notices strong posts, they choose to have a Mod with different views check it over? Just thinking 'aloud' here. Looking at how exactly we might take Trip's suggestion to simply get stuff on the table and have a names-named discussion, if indeed it will be helpful (we're talking with admins about this, too, with affirmative response on the things we're looking at). I wouldn't like that idea, tbt, because it just seems... unpleasant to me. The only person I'd feel comfortable raising is myself, because the only person whose moderation I have a direct influence on is me. Planning a Lit Year in Review thread with voting for best-of-the-year awards for books, comics, authors, etc., and highlighting some of the top events of the year and some of the top threads and developments in Lit throughout the year. This is one of those active improvement areas, and it's one we were talking about before this thread came up. This one's definite; we're finishing up planning it and will launch it in January. LOVE IT! Re: Sin's suggestion, my gut instinct is no. It'd compartmentalise things more than I like. -----signature----- "Victory without risk is like a pizza without pepperoni." "I like my pizzas without pepperoni." "Sir master of the long post" - Excellence
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Lord_Hydronium Title: Literature Gardener Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:07pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Master_Keralys posted: More aggressive moderation of book release threads in particular, to emphasize discussion of the book in those threads, rather than other things like how much the series rocks/sucks, continuity, etc. Hopefully this will help address some of mrsvos' concerns about those discussions, which I think are rather important. I know you addressed this in your edit, but just for emphasis regarding this item and the others like it, I don't think it's so easy to divide continuity discussion from some sort of real, allowed discussion. I mean, continuity is an aspect of the book; and it's one tied to a lot of things people who don't care about it might consider actual discussion, like story and characterization. It's on topic, and while I understand that it can be annoying to want to discuss other topics and everyone else is talking about continuity, that's not unique to it. I would often go into the Invincible thread to find discussions on things I couldn't care less about, so I either talked about something I did care about, or I turned around and left. Basically, what I'm saying is that continuity isn't some special subject that we should treat differently, it's a legitimate topic of discussion that, like any other, can take over a thread. What I think might help is if we had a way of treating those kinds of topics as they occur; say, if a certain line of discussion is dominating a general discussion thread to the exclusion of all others, it can be spun off into its own thread. Not automatically segregate continuity—or any topic of—discussion from the start, but give it its own thread for discussion if it seems to warrant one. Master_Keralys posted: Possibly implementing an actual policy regarding IU discussion, the details of which we're hammering out, but which would very firmly direct but not eliminate OOU discussion so it doesn't take over so many threads. If we're going to divide IU, I think I'd prefer to see it like this: One, a general thread that allows IU and OOU. I think because we're talking about fiction, the two are inextricably linked, and it's not so easy to say "talk less about OOU". Writing quality, characterization, the cohesiveness of a series: I think they're all important topics that are firmly OOU. However, two is to create an IU only thread; if people just want to speculate, talk about character motivations, discuss actions of the characters, etc., they have a place to do it there. That doesn't mean IU discussion would be excluded from the other thread, or even necessarily encouraged to all move over there; but in a case like, say, Order 66, it would give those who want to talk about the future of the characters a place to do so when the other thread is dominated by people's OOU concerns with the novel. -----signature----- Great midis have little midis Swimming round inside 'em And little midis have lesser midis And so ad infinitum.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
sabarte Registered: Sep '05	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:17pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Comparing Lit to Resource is silly. The demographics are completely different, so of course the discussion is going to be different. Resource skews female enough that the guys have their own thread to hide from the estrogen. Lit skews heavily male, and the tone of discussion is not too different from other boards on the site that also skew male and continue to, say, loudly argue about whether Darth Maul should have died or not without attracting nearly as much official censure.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Havac Title: Lit Mod of War Registered: Sep '05	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:26pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread) - Date Edited: 12/11/08 5:43pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Havac
	Lex: Havac: I will send you some examples by PM tonight. Many of them are best illustrated with instances from specific threads or specific users, and I don't think it's really appropriate to get into that publicly. You're probably right on that. I'll look forward to hearing what you have to say. Lex again: Actually, there's several full pages' worth of discussion in the Mindor thread about the continuity issues implicated by the identity of the novel's antagonist. (Sorry, I'm not sure how much of that is considered spoilers, so I hope I'm being oblique enough while still being clear what I'm referring to.) And these aren't even actual continuity issues yet - they're anticipated ones. Yet it's already being dissected, before there are even spoilers about how it's actually handled or addressed in the novel. Yes, there's excitement for a Stover book, and excitement to see him handle OT era Big Three (plus Lando!), but when something like half the thread is addressed to continuity dissection rather than story or characters, or general excitement, it sends a message about the priorities of the forum... Yes, there's continuity discussion, but that's because that's the breaking news from the new Encyclopedia. There's nothing else to talk about right now; no one has the book. We can't discuss characterization or plot. Anything else we know about the book is old, old news by this point and has already been discussed to death. And as Keralys and Ben have pointed out, that's entirely natural and normal, and the general response had some negativity, but the overall response has been, "Hey, that's neat." And while I can see your point that, for people who aren't interested in continuity, coming in and seeing that might turn them off -- I can definitely see that -- the fact remains that that's not something we can really do anything about. We can't ban people from talking about what interests them. As Hydro has said, we can't totally separate it out. I don't see how it's any different from, when people get the book, fans who want to see talk about Rogue Squadron's role in the book finding everyone discussing Blackhole, or fans who want to hear about the fleet tactics disappointed that everyone seems to be concentrated on Luke, or people who want to discuss how uber-cool the villain is finding an analysis of Stover's writing of the Big Three. It's unfortunate that people don't always find what they want as the top item of discussion, but it's not anything we can fix; the instant we change the topic, we turn off those people who liked the previous topic. Lex some more: I agree with you wholeheartedly on this. And IMO something like the Mindor thread is a perfect example of what needs to be addressed. It's fine for people to care deeply about continuity. It's another thing entirely for spoiler threads to become bogged down in continuity issues (e.g., Mandalorian backstory in Revelation and Order 66, Daala as Chief of State in Invincible, the Mindor thread, the Wild Space thread, the Rebel Force thread) instead of the actual story. I think a very interesting experiment would be to try a Continuity Discussion thread, spoilers allowed, and keep continuity discussions out of the spoiler threads. Let's see how the tone and dynamic of the discussion within the spoiler thread changes when continuity issues are taken elsewhere. IMO, the change would likely be very favorable, and would encourage more people to participate. But why is it different? What about a thread being bogged down in discussion of how the story fits into continuity is different from a spoiler thread being bogged down in early speculation about who the villain is, or discussion of the awesome action scene on page 207, or discussion of Luke's characterization, or discussion of whether they think this opens the door to a follow-up story, or discussion of how awesome Lando was, or discussion of the cool new character working as the villain's right-hand man who you never actually see die on-page? I've already suggested that we use the existing system of spinning threads off from official discussion threads to handle continuity, or anything else specific that threatens to overwhelm the main thread. I think we're better off using that to respond to situations on a case-by-case basis than starting off from the base assumption that continuity discussion needs to be put in a ghetto where none of the continuity fans can hurt the "real" book discussion. TKL: You know I went back looking through pages to give you a concrete answer but it’s just impossible unless there’s a way to recreate Page Ones on the times I clicked and thought, “Oi vey! How many threads can there be griping about the Mandos or Jacen’s fall, etc.” The fact is they are my impressions and the impressions I’ve heard from others; and the fact is you agreed above that contentious points seem to take over the boards. So really I’ve made my point and you’ve agreed with my impression. I’m not a mod, but there are times I’ve seen first page and felt like threads could have been shuffled together. Next time I see this I’ll let you know, if you’re interested I absolutely agree with you that that impression can be there; my problem remains with the question of how grounded that perception is in reality. If it's a perception that people can get, but it's an exaggerated one based on a very subjective impression of a few threads, I'm not sure what we can actually really do to keep people from getting that perception. TKL some more: Well actually you did. I participate in Lit. Maybe not up to your standards, but your post classifies opinions as “inside” and “outside” and therefore you’re qualifying their worth. And this isn’t an isolated case of you classifying opinions. You dismissed my opinion in a recent discussion because I was a fan of a certain character, and derided another user’s ability to actually read a story as a way to class them out of the discussion. Let’s compare that to your request for me to clarify when these good old days of VIP harmony existed. While my posting status came to bear when you needed to classify my “outside” status; it certainly wasn’t relative in regards to the length I had been around TFN. Dingo came in to explain that the good old days was before your time. But he didn’t go out of his way to say, “Yeah, well you’re a relative newbie so you wouldn’t know about that.” He just answered the question. What I’m getting to here is a matter of style. You see nothing wrong with putting people in boxes in a manner that suggests superiority or inferiority and making sure the poster you’re addressing, as well as everyone else knows that. Obviously you think that style is okay, perhaps because that’s what you’ve seen in your three years at TFN. In Resource, say one user addresses another user by prefacing, “Well we know what ‘ship you favor…” then goes on to finish the post, that type of talk isn’t really acceptable because it’s decisive. Not only that, such decisive interaction is discouraged, not only by the mods, but also by the community as well. And I’m certainly not suggesting we can’t be contentious but really it’s about arguing the point and not the person. If your position has merit, whether I’ve posted two or two thousand times, your position will hold up against mine without qualifying the value of my opinion or that of others. I didn't dismiss your opinion. I clarified what particular point of view you were coming from. If you see superiority or inferiority with being an outsider or insider, that's baggage you're bringing into the argument, not me. I've pointed out: being outside brings a valuable point of view as someone who can see things people inside can't. But people inside can also see things people outside can't. We need both points of view, but we shouldn't confuse one for the other, and it's important that we know where people are coming from so we have a context for what they're saying. Becca's points are right on here. TKL: You see, that’s the problem in and of itself. You and Havac are turning this into a right or wrong. It’s not about right or wrong. Am I right because I liked Invincible and those who didn’t like it wrong? No. Those are just different opinions. You’re opinion is that things are fine. My opinion is that things could be better. The fact remains users like Dingo, who has been a valuable member of TFN for years, don’t want to come into Lit. The fact remains a Lit mod recently resigned and expressed frustration with the forum. The fact remains that there are posts all over other forums where people have said, “Yeah I don’t go to Lit because it’s too harsh there.” The fact remains that VIPs like book authors and editors don’t come around like the used to. In my opinion, this means there is room to improve. By saying it’s fine, you’re saying all these things are okay. You say later you want proof, that’s on me to give you concrete details. Do you deny these facts above? You’re a Lit mod; you haven’t tried to deny that authors feel uncomfortable or that you don’t understand the reasons why. You were around when dp4m quit so I think you understand the specifics of his complaint. And every single person I've seen in here, mods included, has agreed that Lit has problems. No one's said it's fine. Where people haven't agreed is on whether specific things are problems or not, or whether specific situations are as described. And I certainly can't see how we're supposed to keep these things from being issues of right and wrong. If it doesn't matter whether a criticism is on-target or not, we might as well all just say what our opinions are and go home, because anything being wrong with Lit is just an opinion. I acknowledge that not everyone wants to come into Lit, or is happy with the status quo. But until they speak for themselves, I can't know what exactly to fix to bring them in. And as I said, Lit cannot be all things to all people; it may be that Lit's simply not the right fit for some users and there's nothing we could do to get them there without fundamentally compromising what Lit is. I don't know, because they haven't spoken up. But we agree there's room for improvement. We want more VIPs and users. We're taking steps to do that. But if we don't buy the specific argument that continuity fans are the problem, or that fifteen out of twenty-five threads are grumbling during release, that absolutely doesn't mean we think Lit's all OK, or that certain other problems are OK. TKL: And yes, as Havac so astutely pointed out I’m not a Litizen. Why is that? I read the threads daily because once in a while I see something that inspires me about SW. And every so often I find a discussion that I’d like to put my two cents into. If Havac cared to scrutinize my post history a little closer he might have noted that I have participated on a broader level in Lit type discussions in Resource – character discussions, book discussions, timeline discussions, etc. Where there and not here? Because the atmosphere is different. At the same time I know there are times when I would have liked to participate in Lit discussions but they had already degenerated into LFL sucks, Traviss sucks, theyhaveruinedSWforever! Then it becomes a moment when I pause and think it’s already gone so far downhill any relevant input I make will be lost. I also have heard that sentiment expressed by others. I come into Comms and see a discussion about the nature of the Lit forum and I think here’s an opportunity to weigh in so perhaps more people would feel like posting in Lit. On a personal level, it’s because I would love to see a day when an author felt like he/she could come in and participate in a discussion about their latest release. Authors already do come in and participate in discussions about their latest releases. Not all of them; that may be because they don't have the time, or would prefer not to influence the discussion, or because they just don't care for any criticism at all. There's nothing we can do about those. For those who aren't posting because of a specifically excessive atmosphere of criticism, we're working on cutting down on that. As for your personal posting, I'm sorry you feel like Lit's not worth your time, but by your own account the only person stopping you from posting there is you. Maybe if you gave it a shot, you'd find your input wasn't ignored. I don't know. But we're working on creating an atmosphere were negativity is kept under control. Ben: Just to clarify: The recent DE thread, which saw Keralys intervened in to prevent a retreading of very well-trodden ground would be what I have in mind by 'house rules' - if you start a topic you know has a chance of being derailed in very specific ways, is it so unreasonable to ask that, since it's well-covered ground, we don't go over it again? This is pretty much akin to what you lay out the start of your second para anyway, so this is more a point of phrasing than actual disagreement. I think that you can generally fit that in under defining the topic and agenda of discussion, yeah. The thing is, if you can't -- if you're in a situation where you're setting up a thread where you go "How do you feel about NJO? Now, I'm tired of people saying they hated it because of Anakin, so no one talk about that," there you have a problem because you're laying out a general topic of discussion, and then forbidding certain people from weighing in because of their opinion. That's not the kind of rules I'd like to see, and I probably wouldn't allow that kind of mini-modding of what's permissible in your thread. However, if you created one where you delineated the topic carefully and said, "How do you feel about the NJO, aside from Anakin's death -- do you feel like the rest of it had merit, or that you would have enjoyed it without that?" you'd have a topic of discussion that's limited, not a wide-open topic where some people are told they just can't voice their opinions. -----signature----- "Is there a captain's hat involved in this?"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
The_Loyal_Imperial Title: C&G Game Host Registered: Nov '07	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:35pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	sabarte posted: Comparing Lit to Resource is silly. The demographics are completely different, so of course the discussion is going to be different. Resource skews female enough that the guys have their own thread to hide from the estrogen. Lit skews heavily male, and the tone of discussion is not too different from other boards on the site that also skew male and continue to, say, loudly argue about whether Darth Maul should have died or not without attracting nearly as much official censure. I just want to take a moment out here and second what sabarte has said. Speaking as someone who cross-posts between the Literature and Expanded Universe Community boards, the EUC does tend to slide towards the same kind of demographics as those in Resource that were mentioned, and the same sort of division of discussion shows up there too.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Bly Registered: Mar '05	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:46pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	It seems to me the crux of the problem in Lit is Traviss, and the controversy her works arouse in Lit posters. Fortunately, there is a simple solution: ban the discussion of Traviss and her works from Lit. Do that, and the discontent will disappear. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. Stover, Perry, and the other authors currently writing simply don't arouse this kind of ire in Litizens. -----signature----- "Get the order and execute it. Let the Generals sort out the rest." -Commander Bly Proud recepient of Thrawn McEwok's Bronze Thranta™ "Politics is simply the continuation of war by other means." -Mandalore the Ultimate C/TSgt in the Civil Air Patrol
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Gabri_Jade Title: Fan Fiction Archive Editor Emeritus Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:47pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	The_Loyal_Imperial posted: sabarte posted: Comparing Lit to Resource is silly. The demographics are completely different, so of course the discussion is going to be different. Resource skews female enough that the guys have their own thread to hide from the estrogen. Lit skews heavily male, and the tone of discussion is not too different from other boards on the site that also skew male and continue to, say, loudly argue about whether Darth Maul should have died or not without attracting nearly as much official censure. I just want to take a moment out here and second what sabarte has said. Speaking as someone who cross-posts between the Literature and Expanded Universe Community boards, the EUC does tend to slide towards the same kind of demographics as those in Resource that were mentioned, and the same sort of division of discussion shows up there too. Thirding it, and not just because of the male/female demographics. In my experience, FanFiccers and Litizens often come at the same material with fundamentally different objectives. That doesn't mean that crossover won't happen - as a matter of fact, there are quite a few FanFiccers in Lit and vice versa - but it does mean that such crossover is not a given, nor should it be. Each board exists for a specific purpose and appeals to a certain group, and there's nothing wrong with that. -----signature----- Evil Twin of LadyPadme This concept of "wuv" confuses and infuriates us! - Futurama All I can do is be me. Whoever that is. - Bob Dylan Serendipity (Leia-Mara vig) - http://boards.theforce.net/b/b1/30178069 !!11!1eleventy
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
rhonderoo Title: Former Head Admin Registered: Aug '02	Date Posted: 12/11/08 5:54pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread) - Date Edited: 12/11/08 5:55pm (2 edits total) Edited By: rhonderoo
	Bly posted: It seems to me the crux of the problem in Lit is Traviss, and the controversy her works arouse in Lit posters. Fortunately, there is a simple solution: ban the discussion of Traviss and her works from Lit. Do that, and the discontent will disappear. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. Stover, Perry, and the other authors currently writing simply don't arouse this kind of ire in Litizens. I would want that no more than wanting games discussion or OOU discussion "banned". Lit has made it through controversy before with some pulling up of the boot straps and making people post respectfully. It's even shed some of it's more controversial users that were "detrimental to the community" for repeated infractions (Mara bashing in every post comes to mind). It will make it through a few overzealous fanboys and girls and an author getting their knickers in a twist, just like it's done before. -----signature----- DT421 FYI: You don't deal with me. I deal with you. Damned right the Jedi's fire has gone out of the universe. I was the bad-ass Class C extinguisher who snuffed them. - @darthvader (Darth Vader on Twitter)
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
The2ndQuest Title: Manager: -Literature -LACWAC -Games Registered: Jan '00	Date Posted: 12/11/08 8:30pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread) - Date Edited: 12/11/08 8:33pm (1 edits total) Edited By: The2ndQuest
	Yeah, we can't just outright ban a series of books by an author- especially when said other has written so much now and coming up in the universe. Any SW book/story should be able to be discussd in Lit or there's really no point to the forum. Jedi Ben posted: I would take issue though with the notion that there was ever a Golden Age of Lit in regards to fan agreement - there has been numerous fan schisms and there always will be, such is fandom. There's always been fan divisions over what they prefer, but, with exception to a few key posters, they generally did not inspire such vitrol. I don't think Lit/EU fandom has ever had a Golden Age in regards to fan agreement. I do think the forum has had a general Golden Age, however. Things palpably changed After 3 Million from what they were Before 3 Million. I could tell then when it happened and we're still dealing with issues, at their core, that originated from that debacle. Things that have been brought up here as related issues such as Lit's perception as being so negative really came from there. Lit was spoken of in a (mostly) positive manner. I still wonder how much different things would be right now if I had paid attention to that thread early instead of waiting to read the article for myself, and nipped that crap before it got out of hand. It wouldn't have stopped the TOS and blog problems related to it, but it may have dulled Karen's retaliations in her stories and blogs over the years and calmed some of the more current itterations of issues we're dealing with. ..and we could all chill on the beach with a Goatee'd Spock. It'd be pretty sweet. -----signature----- "When your future self tells you to do something, YOU DO IT." K'Kruhk, 140 ABY:"Why haven't I come forth earlier to share my Jedi knowledge with Skywalker? Well, it's kinda a long story, see, I had this freaking sweet hat..."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ChildOfWinds Registered: Apr '01	Date Posted: 12/11/08 10:48pm Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Stars! Miss a day; miss a lot here, I see! Master_Keralys : I also invited folks like you, relatively new to Lit, ChildofWinds, that I couldn't have less in common with as far as our appreciation of Star Wars goes unless she thought Zayne Carrick the devil, Well, we have one point of agreement anyway. I LOVE Zayne Carrick and the KotOR comics! CoW - thanks for that insight. I think you hit a valid point, though I do want to find a good balance as regards VIPs as well. Are you referring to my comment about feeling strongly about it being better to err on the side of expressive freedom rather than restrictiveness? I think the point that users needing to feel their POV has at least been heard and respected, even if disagreed with, is a very important one. How do you think we could accomplish that better? Well, you can't really control what comes out of a poster's mouth (keyboard) when, as Robimus said, people say things like "You don't get what Star Wars is about", or Why do you read the books if all you do is complain?" or just flat out say, "That's ridiculous! You're wrong," when someone expresses an opinion. I've actually heard posters tell other posters that their morals are "all messed up." However, when someone engages in this kind of negative posting fairly consistently, then maybe a mod can step in and do something about it. But I think the best way to make users feel that they are respected and valued is to proactively have a friendly, welcoming atmosphere on the boards, and all of us can help with this. That way, when there is someone who makes a snarky or offensive or hurtful remark, it's easier for posters to brush it off as atypical. Sometimes just a positive comment about something that a user posts now and then helps. A little positive reinforcement goes a long way. I know that I always welcome someone new who posts in the SOS thread or who says he/she is new to the boards in other threads. It's also good when mods can join in a discussion. When they set a positive example, I think it affects the quality of the discussion in the threads. Obviously, mods can't post every day in every thread. They have other lives. But if each one could participate in at least a few different threads every week, I think that would have a positive effect. I have noticed more active participation by the mods recently, and I think that's a very good thing. I'd also like to say that when mods do need to delete posts or remind folks to get back on topic, if it's done in a friendly or humorous way, that might promote a better atmosphere too. For example, I noticed recently that Keralys had to lock a thread of a new poster. But he did it in a really kindly way, welcoming the poster to the boards, but explaining exactly why he had to close his thread, while at the same time encouraging him to make another. Of course, there will be times when the mods will need to be more forceful if posters just don't get it or don't comply. But I think most of the time, gentle or humorous reminders will suffice with most posters. Keralys, I agree with you that Karen Traviss; the direction of the Big Three of the OT in the NJO, DN and LotF; and canon issues are probably the three that generate the most negativity. However, I'm not sure you can do much about that. I don't think you can expect people to be positive about something they feel passionately disappointed about, and I think they should be allowed to express their feelings. This is a Lit discussion board; it's not just a board for those who love everything that is being published. You won't have much of a discussion if everyone agrees with everyone else. As others have said, it's not as if everyone is being negative about everything. If people are pleased about something, as most are with KotOR and Legacy, you'll get positive comments. When fans are unhappy about what they're reading, there will be more negative comments, and I don't think that can be controlled. As of LotF, more fans have become disenchanted with the direction that Del Rey has been going with the Post-RotJ story and OT characters, so there have been more negative comments. If that direction changes, the pendulum will swing back and there will be more positive comments. Jedi Ben : If anything the NJOCC was very much a creation of its time when the Lit board was very pro-NJO and was not being friendly to dissenting views, so NJOCC got created over in EUC and worked well, BUT due to the way NJO developed and the further twists added by DN and LOTF, the hostility to those who didn't care for these stories in the main - generally the negative points outweigh the positive - pretty much evaporated. In effect DR smashed its pro-fanbase to pieces! Exactly! Lord_Hydronium : But that's assuming that continuity and story are something inseparable, or that the latter is the only preferred topic of discussion. To me it's like saying "people are too bogged down in characterization instead of the actual story" or "people are too bogged down in whether it's written well instead of the actual story". And it also strikes me as somewhat self-centered to say "No, you can't talk about those things that everyone is talking about; let's only talk about the things I want." You can't make people talk about things they aren't interested in, Well said, LH! I agree with you about that. I too feel that you really can't completely separate story and continuity. You're also right that if one or two posters are bogging down the discussion by posting the same things over and over again, that can be taken care of by a mod. I also agree that if a discussion continues for a while, it indicates that people are interested in it. So if I as a poster am not particularly interested in what's being discussed at the moment in the official book thread, I can just bring up my own topic in it or I can wait until the topic in the thread changes to something I am interested in posting about. Not everything that is discussed has to be something that I care about. Master_Keralys : Actively seeking to develop posting habits focused on IU discussion, including a number of oft-batted around ideas (RF's IU trial threads being one of them), and just generally posting and contributing in an IU rather than OOU direction. This sounds very good. Creating a separate continuity thread where we can direct all those things so they don't take up everything else. As LR said though, you can't always separate continuity from the story, especially when the story is told in a series format, so I would hope some continuity issues could still be raised in other threads. Possibly implementing an actual policy regarding IU discussion, the details of which we're hammering out, but which would very firmly direct but not eliminate OOU discussion so it doesn't take over so many threads. While I very much favor more emphasis on IU discussion, I do think that some OOU discussion sometimes affects the IU discussion, so I hope this won't be too restrictive. Active moderation on negativity of a non-productive variety - And in general, the kind of intellectual snobbery that we do all agree is present, even if we differ on the "fanboy" side of things that Lex brought up. Dealing with derailing. Just generally more aggressive moderation. I think this will help. However, again, I'd like to suggest that the tone of the moderation be "friendly", at least at first. Otherwise, you might get some resentment. For those who refuse to comply, more 'aggressive moderation' may be necessary. More aggressive moderation of book release threads in particular, to emphasize discussion of the book in those threads, rather than other things like how much the series rocks/sucks, continuity, etc. Please don't take away all of our spoiler thread fun though. Planning a Lit Year in Review thread with voting for best-of-the-year awards for books, comics, authors, etc., and highlighting some of the top events of the year and some of the top threads and developments in Lit throughout the year. I REALLY like this idea! This is something that will be positive! ETA: Hydro hits on the mark, I think, though I do think we can keep the continuity discussions from overwhelming the thread. Perhaps having some discussion in such threads, but without it being the primary topic for most of the thread? Okay, that would satisfy my concern above. And on a side note, what about Sin's suggestion? As I said in an earlier post, I would prefer not to separate the boards. However, if you feel that would be beneficial, then I think Jedi Ben's suggestion to split it into two boards, one for NJO/DN/LOTF/FOTJ/Legacy and the other for everything else.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
beccatoria Title: Host: 181st Imperial Discussion Group Registered: Dec '06	Date Posted: 12/12/08 1:10am Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Nothing new to add, just wanted to second the opinion that a "Best of!" retrospective thread for the year would be a great idea; I'd really look forward to that. Also I don't think that banning discussion of Traviss is reasonable for the reasons already given by the mods, even though I agree that a very large amount of the issues in Lit stem from the various issues around that subject. Also I'd like to add that I agree with what sabs and Gabri_Jade say about the demographics. While everyone who knows me knows that I'll fight tooth and nail over gender stereotyping, and while I've seen mostly female communities with atmospheres quite similar to Lit's (I haven't personally seen mostly male communities with atmospheres more similar to Resource but I'm sure they exist), those have also been the exceptions rather than the rules. I'm not entirely sure whether the gender split is entirely pertinent to the discussion because the issue isn't whether posters are male or female but how they behave and whether they feel comfortable on a particular forum, but I guess I'd say it's at least relevant in that it provides one more example of how communities develop different cultures to appeal to their primary user-group, and that in itself isn't a bad thing. (Obviously, it can become a bad thing if the cultural environment is toxic/unhealthy but that's what's under discussion and I'm rapidly digging myself into irrelevancy so I'll shut up now.) Finally, CoW, HOORAY for Zayne! ANyone who DOESN'T love him is a heathen with no understanding of Star Wars, dagnabbit! ...Wait...what was this thread for again? -----signature----- legatus imperatoris britanniæ superior REMEMBER: X-WING: WEDGE'S GAMBLE DISCUSSION STARTS IN DECEMBER! Han's a girl, so I got a Golden Ewok.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 12/12/08 1:45am Subject: Lit discussion (continued from JC Suggestions thread)
	Havac, I think that you can generally fit that in under defining the topic and agenda of discussion, yeah. The thing is, if you can't -- if you're in a situation where you're setting up a thread where you go "How do you feel about NJO? Now, I'm tired of people saying they hated it because of Anakin, so no one talk about that," there you have a problem because you're laying out a general topic of discussion, and then forbidding certain people from weighing in because of their opinion. That's not the kind of rules I'd like to see, and I probably wouldn't allow that kind of mini-modding of what's permissible in your thread. * I'd to think I have more style and subtlety than that, but I can well appreciate what you're getting at and agree. However, if you created one where you delineated the topic carefully and said, "How do you feel about the NJO, aside from Anakin's death -- do you feel like the rest of it had merit, or that you would have enjoyed it without that?" you'd have a topic of discussion that's limited, not a wide-open topic where some people are told they just can't voice their opinions. * Quite so. Quest, There's always been fan divisions over what they prefer, but, with exception to a few key posters, they generally did not inspire such vitrol. I don't think Lit/EU fandom has ever had a Golden Age in regards to fan agreement. I do think the forum has had a general Golden Age, however. Things palpably changed After 3 Million from what they were Before 3 Million. * Ah, see I'd have placed the VP Wars as the most vicious BUT as a non-Mod, I exercised my option to not get involved in that nuclear fracas! I could tell then when it happened and we're still dealing with issues, at their core, that originated from that debacle. Things that have been brought up here as related issues such as Lit's perception as being so negative really came from there. * O-K. I think you've just convinced me that the 3 Million affair does get top spot, since it's what 3-4 years since it all blew up? The effect of the VP Wars saw the creation of NJOCC, but that was a case of posters moving from board to board with occasional forays into Li, so not as destructive as what you've laid out above. I still wonder how much different things would be right now if I had paid attention to that thread early instead of waiting to read the article for myself, and nipped that crap before it got out of hand. It wouldn't have stopped the TOS and blog problems related to it, but it may have dulled Karen's retaliations in her stories and blogs over the years and calmed some of the more current itterations of issues we're dealing with. * From what you've explained though, it was a schism of unprecedented nature - it's always easy to know in hindsight what you could have tried but at the time? Much harder. * Oh and Becc: re KOTOR: Although that raises an intruing Q of why so many fans of such wide background quite like KOTOR as much as they do? Hmm, might make for a good thread. JB -----signature----- Excellence: "You are the forum's Quick Ben." SW EU fans: John Ostrander needs your help! http://www.comix4sight.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 » - Previous | Next | Reload