main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

My Retirement As Your Mod: The Final Prophecy (now discussing how to fix the Lit forum)

Discussion in 'Literature' started by dp4m, Apr 1, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The2ndQuest

    The2ndQuest Tri-Mod With a Mouth star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Jan 27, 2000
    Darn.
     
  2. JohnJacksonMiller

    JohnJacksonMiller Mastermind: KOTOR, LTotS, Knight Errant star 3 VIP

    Registered:
    May 24, 2005
    I wrote a comics review column for Comics Buyer's Guide back when it was a weekly for something close to a year in the 1990s. It was a bear ? in part because I pledged to myself that if a creative team took a month to put out a book, the least I could do was put an hour into thinking about the book ? in addition to the time spent writing the review itself. But with a stack of books to go through each week, that turned out to be impractical time-wise ? and I finally owned up to the fact that I was too much in solidarity with the creators to critique them. So I figured I might as well go write comics myself, and put whatever theories I had about them to the test.

    I am sure many reviewers online, including here, put the same kind of time or more into their thoughts. Unfortunately, there's a competing drive on the Internet to get one's thoughts out there first, which militates against that kind of consideration. I recall one longish online interview I did years ago (somewhere else, and not involving Star Wars) in which the first hypercritical response post had a time code just seconds after the interview was posted ? I'm surprised the poster had time to scroll to the bottom, much less read what I had to say!

    I think all any creator looks for in feedback is fair play, which requires a fair reading and a little time for consideration. That's a good policy for responding to anything one reads, in forums, e-mail or anywhere else! [face_peace]
     
  3. ATimson

    ATimson Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 19, 2003
    You want fair? But this is teh interwebz! The series of tubes doesn't do "fair". :p
     
  4. jfostrander01

    jfostrander01 Writer: Dawn of the Jedi, Agent of the Empire star 3 VIP

    Registered:
    Oct 26, 2001
    I wish.

    No, I don't get paid for being here -- which is a good point. I make my living off my writing -- but I don't make any here. I come because I LIKE coming here. I am also a fan.

    -- John
     
  5. jfostrander01

    jfostrander01 Writer: Dawn of the Jedi, Agent of the Empire star 3 VIP

    Registered:
    Oct 26, 2001
    It CAN but it slows download time to dial-up levels.

    -- John
     
  6. Lord_Riven

    Lord_Riven Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 13, 2001
    1. I said it was a stuff up - a mistake on their part. That's my opinion, and that's what it looks like.

    2. Well, if they said that they wanted to kick off Legacy era with two works with Legacy in the name and explained it then it would be fine. Is there any sort of indication given? Nope. In fact, this has been asked/pointed out numerous times and no one's answered.

    3. And FYI, the first two do imply something negative cos' if that's what has happened it is a mistake. The third option does leave it open to a legitimate reason - though it does imply some arrogance on their part IMO that they didn't do something to explain it.

    It's only lazy in my belief, if they knew about it and couldn't be bothered to do anything about it. It would be like an editor noticing a spelling mistake and going to himself "I can't be bothered," and just letting it slide through to publishing. That's what I meant, and I don't really see how that's not laziness if they realised it and just thought to themselves, "we can't be bothered to do anything about it and we'll just let it slide."

    But semantics and sentence structure aside:
    Again, is there any indication of intention to name both series Legacy on purpose? I haven't been given that impression or any evidence of that at all. This question has been asked many times and all that's been given are evasive answers and non-answers which leads to the presumption that someone made a mistake as opposed to it was deliberate. If it was intentional then come out and say that it was and put the issue to rest. But no one has done that at all which leads us to think that they are hiding something.

    I would have to say with the lack of any evidence the stronger assumption - the presumption, is that they screwed up given what we have been able to glean from the official statements, posts from Insiders that have been reported etc...

    Again, how realistic is the assumption that they did it intentionally? What evidence is there to back that assumption up? I've yet to see anything concrete.

    It for me is just seeing what is out there and making a judgment based on what I know. If they put information out there that did contradict my opinion especially in something like this well, I'm going to have to revise my opinion aren't I? ;) But until then, I'm going to stick to my opinion and my findings based on it.

    Now to something more constructive:
    Maybe if VIPs don't want to participate directly, we can do a regular VIP interview thread - where board members could post questions beforehand (in a thread - like a question taking thread), the
     
  7. SuperWatto

    SuperWatto Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Sep 19, 2000
    You know what, Riven?

    I tend to be very critical... Yet, I always assumed that having two series run concurrently - both with the word Legacy in the title - was intentional. There's even a term for it, if you can boil your concept down to one word... 'High concept'. Which you accuse of being no concept at all. :p

    Not saying that that's what it is... I'm not sure now... Just saying there's two ways of looking at it.
     
  8. Dingo

    Dingo Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 23, 2001
    It has been done before. It can work wonders, and I'm just disappointed that the one for Elaine Cunningham was canceled due to other commitments.

    BTW, "scared"? There's better and more appropriate words.
     
  9. JediWampa

    JediWampa Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Feb 2, 2000


    I hate getting down into a single-response deal, but this is another good example that I think folks have been trying to illustrate. The issue here is NOT the opinions expressed, but they form it was stated.

    It is a stuff up and a major one at that not "I think someone messed up" or "does anyone else think they messed up?". That quote is a declarative statement. Then, while you do say that it "implies" one of three options, you give options that you have nothing to show for. I believe having the series would the two names could very easily (and likely, in my opinion) imply that they said "we've got two series, let's tie them together".

    The issue here is that opinions are being stated as fact, and accusingly at that, and that's the problem. Folks are assuming bad-faith on the part of creators, and the minute they get to the keyboard, they start accusing and discovering ineptitude and conspiracy to unravel the fabric of the fictional universe.

    Other than the VIPs here, I don't know of anyone who gets to sit in on the staff meetings and creative huddles that go on inside LFL. LFL also does NOT have an obligation to discuss their thought processes. It's nice if they do, but saying that LFL MUST have screwed up because no one came out to refute the 'fact' that they screwed up is yet another accusatorial statement. "They won't talk to us, that just proves the point!"

    It all comes back to making assumptions and then declaring them as fact. That's where folks keep walking into walls and then wondering why their nose is out of joint....
     
  10. jfostrander01

    jfostrander01 Writer: Dawn of the Jedi, Agent of the Empire star 3 VIP

    Registered:
    Oct 26, 2001
    No explanation was offered because none was thought needed. It was the LEGACY era. The comic is called LEGACY and the first book series is called LEGACY of the Force. It's an attempt to brand and define an era which would seemed pretty obvious. Instead, Riven, you've decided it was a 'stuff up" and declared it one as a fact AND that it was a "major one". Is that your opinion? Fine. It's factually wrong. It makes assumptions and implies information that you don't have. Asked as a question it is legitimate; phrased as a fact, it's wrong and, IMO, bashing and an example of what I was talking about as negativity. It ASSUMES bad faith and/or incompetence on the part of LFL, the publishers involved, and possibly the authors.

    -- John

    PS An example of a "stuff up". In the most recent issue of LEGACY, Gar Stazi is stealing a ship called the Imperious. However, the enemy commander's ship is ALSO named the Imperious. THAT is a stuff up and one that neither I nor my editor caught before it went to print.
     
  11. rhonderoo

    rhonderoo Former Head Admin star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Aug 7, 2002
    The Lit mods have been discussing doing this in the VIP/Admin forum and in MS for some time. Hopefully, one will come about soon.
     
  12. Methodical

    Methodical Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Jul 19, 2006
    See, that didn't bother me. I just figured the name was so kriffin' awesome that they used it for two ships.

    I expect to see an entire Imperious fleet in future issues. [face_laugh]
     
  13. MistrX

    MistrX Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jun 20, 2006
    :oops: I cannot believe I didn't catch that.

    Uh, anyway, carry on...
     
  14. Darth_Hydra

    Darth_Hydra Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    May 14, 2001
    When LOTF was announced Sue Rostoni said that the era currently extended for 100 years and that there was a possibility for a comic series set sometime within that era. The exact quote being:

    Rostoni added this era would first only be explored in books, but she didn't rule out the possibility of comics exploring this new horizon. She noted that it has no specific "end point." It currently extends for a hundred years.

    You can read the official announcement Right Here. So I think it's pretty clear that both LOTF and Legacy were being developed around the same time.

     
  15. Jedi Ben

    Jedi Ben Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Jul 19, 1999
    Re: Legacy(s)

    I don't recall having a problem with the notion of a comic and a book bearing the same name, it wasn't as if it was the 1st time ie. Shadows Of The Empire, no, my difficulty with LOTF was and remains with the central concept of Jacen Solo going bad, which would remain even if there were a different name.
     
  16. elfdart

    elfdart Jedi Grand Master star 3

    Registered:
    Apr 1, 2001
    Not as much as I used to.

    I'm not "attacking" anything. I'm pointing out that if you have a forum where people are expected to give their reviews of books, you are going to get some that are negative. If you ask a person for his or her honest opinion, you have no business getting angry when you get an answer you don't like.

    Is there a point to this ad hominem attack?

    Now this is funny. Parts of YodaKenobi's review are deliberately twisted into being a "personal attack" on the author, when it's obvious that what he wrote was no such thing. You claim that attacks against a person, rather than what they write, are illegitimate. Yet here you are resorting to a textbook example of the ad hominem attack: bringing up the number of times I've posted instead of addressing my point. Pot, meet the Kettle.



    As I explained, I don't come here as often as I used to, and some of the stunts that have been pulled recently only confirm my reasons.

    As far as criticism of books is concerned, if people could (or would) get it through their heads that when a reader says the writing style is awful and the author has a poor grasp of the source material, it's NOT a personal attack on the author. A personal attack would be panning the author for reasons that have little or nothing to do with the book under review.

    Let me put it this way: If a movie reviewer pans a Tom Cruise movie on the grounds that it's a bad movie, it's not a personal attack on Tom Cruise. If the reviewer points out that Cruise is a terrible actor and his other movies are also bad, THAT is not a personal attack on Cruise, either. Now if the reviewer starts bringing up Cruise's marriage, religion, ex-wives, etc then that most certainly IS a personal attack and a low-blow, since his family life, religion, political views and so on are not relevant to the movie, nor are they any business of the reviewer.
     
  17. LLL

    LLL Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 16, 2000

    If it does please ask NYCityGurl to help out.

    She's an excellent interviewer!
     
  18. Master_Keralys

    Master_Keralys VIP star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Hmm. Certainly the consensus of those in immediate response to your post was that it seemed hostile and unnecessary. *shrugs* That could be the internet's hindrances to communication coming through. It seemed like you just came in to bash what we were trying to do, and so I responded. Sorry if that was a false perception.
    Wow. I intentionally wrote that post as nicely as possible. I asked that question with genuine interest, and you turned it into an opportunity to accuse me of an ad hominem attack. It certainly wasn't meant as such. I specifically stated that I wasn't interested in dealing with your argument with dp4m, as it wasn't mine to deal with and this thread wasn't the place for it. This isn't a "discuss YK's review" thread, as has been made clear a couple of times. I was curious as to why you were so passionately upset about people trying to make Lit a better place. I still am.
    For the sake of productive discussion, could you elaborate on what this means? What are the "stunts" you're talking about, and why have they pushed you away? We really want to know, because we're trying to better the Lit community for everyone as much as we can.
    I'm pretty sure that those precise points have been made repeatedly by people arguing for change in Lit in this very thread, including our mod Havac and authors jostrander and JohnJacksonMiller. No one here is arguing against critical reviews of books. Quite the contrary. We want people to be able to give critical reviews in an environment that is nonetheless positive and enjoyable for as many people as possible. We've repeatedly clarified that there is a significant difference between a negative post or review and a generally negative attitude about things.

    There is, to bring up again an example that's been used, a difference between "I didn't like x because of y and z," and "X sucked, creator has no brains." There's a continuum between them, of course, but the ultimate goal is to get everyone to the former. We're dealing with a board where the announcement of new
     
  19. dp4m

    dp4m Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Uh, yes... yes it is. However! Taking that opinion and phrasing it as such:

    "I thought Cruise's acting in this film was terrible, which shouldn't surprise me as I am generally not a fan of his other films either."

    Isn't that a nice tonal shift?

    Saying "Tom Cruise is a terrible actor" is pretty much a personal attack, much like "dp4m is a terrible writer" (however true this may be -- and it is, hooray!). But applying the negative opinion as an opinion and applying it to the work in question as well as taking the extraneous information (which is COMPLETELY extraneous and negative for the purpose of being negative and no other reason) and phrasing it in the form of opinion on the rest of the body of work while relating it back to the original body of work seems to work a little better, eh?

    What kills me is that, despite saying multiple times that I've intentionally attempted to preserve everyone's ability to voice negative opinions for YEARS within the Mod Squad (and to the Head Admin and the owner), people are thinking this is some fight against the ability to voice a negative opinion. Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! I just want people to voice a negative opinion positively. That is not an oxymoron.
     
  20. Emperor_Time

    Emperor_Time Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 31, 2007
    That is the truth since the Legacy Era covers from 40 ABY to 140 ABY which means it covers both LOTF and Legacy as well as any other series in between the two series as well. :D
     
  21. MistrX

    MistrX Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jun 20, 2006
    And probably beyond...
     
  22. The_Flargg

    The_Flargg Jedi Youngling star 2

    Registered:
    Jun 29, 2004

    Not that this really has anything to do with the discussion, but some prefer to write their reviews in the declaritive form, as it lends them (as I see it) more force. Probably a byproduct of schooling teaching many not to use first person in the expository/persuasive essay mode. Just because it doesn't use a personal pronoun doesn't make it less of an opnion, and obviously one at that.

    In other words, it's semantics.
     
  23. JediWampa

    JediWampa Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Feb 2, 2000


    Now, while I'm always up for semantics, the problem here is that tone of semantics is exceptionally hard to convey in a pure-text mode. What's read by by one as witty with a touch of snark can be read by another as scathing and insulting.

    Hence my earlier point. Write whatever you want, but before you hit that "post reply" button, you should do one of two things (or both):

    Read what you wrote and think of how the subject of what your writing would feel if/when they read it

    or

    Replace the subject with yourself and imagine if someone had written it about you....


    I think that's a pretty simple formula for getting that whole "golden rule" thing down....


    ...and if that doesn't work, that's what the mods should be for....
     
  24. dp4m

    dp4m Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    As a note for Wampa's point, here's the breakdown of communication method / information transmission:

    IN-PERSON: 85% body language, 10% words, 5% tone.
    VOICE-ONLY: 80% words, 20% tone.
    TEXT-ONLY: 100% words.

    It's important to know that sarcasm and tone can't translate for most people across an only-text medium. I know when most of the mods and people I've hung around with on the forums are being sarcastic *some* of the time because I've been hanging with them for 5-6 years in many cases. But most people have ZERO idea what you're saying other than what your words literally state.
     
  25. elfdart

    elfdart Jedi Grand Master star 3

    Registered:
    Apr 1, 2001
    OK

    Welcome to the club. Maybe now you know what it's like to see criticism of the works of an author twisted into a personal attack. Get it now?


    Then why did you butt in? If you have nothing to add to a discussion other than sifting through my post history, why did you bother?



    One, you work from the baseless assumption that squelching hostile reviews will somehow make a Lit Forum a "better place". I've got news for you: It won't. If you want a good example, check out AICN every time New Line Cinema releases a movie. No matter how bad it is, the site will not trash it or give hostile reviews. They will also edit, delete and ban those who do. Grand Admiral Jello says that there's no quid pro quo at TFN (squelching bad reviews in exchange for access), but if that's the case it's actually worse! If you're going to shill for someone you might as well get something in return. At least Harry Knowles gets "pwesents" from those he shills for.

    Two, the idea of negative reviews being stifled or put under such ridiculous constraints make me less likely to take part in this forum. Now I'm sure nobody is going to have to cry themselves to sleep when my posting goes from "once in a blue moon" to "never", but I'm also sure that I'm not the only one fed up with the nonsense.


    I'm taking them up with the Admins and probably shouldn't comment any further until they look into it. If you're truly curious, I also post at StarDestroyer.net, among other places.


    When a review that criticizes a writer's style is bent and twisted like a pretzel and misrepresented to be a "personal attack" and personal attacks aren't allowed, that is exactly what is going on. It's nothing more than a game of Three Card Monty.



    It's a problem when the mods themselves can't be clear on the subject.


     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.