The Rubric.

[Lord Anglekos]

Hear ye, hear ye, oh all Althanians.
I have been looking through the archives of all the threads that I've missed in the past year, and to my surprise, I've found that the Judging rubric and methods have been widely discussed in all sorts of different areas. Sometimes, they were criticized severely; other times, it was praised. All of you had great points and ideas, and despite the many instances of arguing and trolling I felt that all of it was worth it. After all, Althanas wouldn't be Althanas without all of that.
In any case, it's my goal to bring all those ideas and opinions here, into one thread. As you can see, I've put up a poll that is very much like our current scoring rubric; based on a number of 1-10, what do you feel about it? Would you like to see it changed? Do you want it to stay the same? Anything about the judging system that you want to say should go here, including opinions about the judges themselves and their specific judging methods; as long, that is, as you keep it relatively clean and to OOC rules.

[Hysteria]

I'd vote for 'Its ok, it has some flaws but any change would just result in different flaws of at least equal severity'.

I like the comments the judges make rather than the rubric that draws out those comments.

[Amaranthine]

I personally haven't been judged yet, as I've just now joined Althy. But I have had the pleasure to read over Lord Anglekos' shoulder for quite some time now. Thus I've experienced Althy's unique judging aspect to a certain level. I think the concept is rather interesting; it was one of the reasons why I was eventually drawn to this site. But at the same time I feel that there's some issues that need to be addressed.

[Saxon]

In any case, it's my goal to bring all those ideas and opinions here, into one thread. As you can see, I've put up a poll that is very much like our current scoring rubric; based on a number of 1-10, what do you feel about it? Would you like to see it changed? Do you want it to stay the same? Anything about the judging system that you want to say should go here, including opinions about the judges themselves and their specific judging methods; as long, that is, as you keep it relatively clean and to OOC rules.

This ought to be good.

I'd pencil down my thoughts about this, but I'm in a bit of a rush. In a word, judging is what is, putting your threads through the workshop is a crapshoot, and the rubric has gone through more changes then a lot of new members realize.

Some areas of the rubric could use tweaking in how much weight they should have in the overall score, but other then that, you can't really expect the best of judging without losing touch with reality.

Maybe look into expanding on some of those points later, but I've gotta run.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Its flaws are numerous. My only basis for giving it a 4 is that the whole endeavor is inherently flawed and I think no rubric could exist that would warrant a 9-10.

[Lord Anglekos]

Its flaws are numerous. My only basis for giving it a 4 is that the whole endeavor is inherently flawed and I think no rubric could exist that would warrant a 9-10.

Why do you think it's "inherently flawed"? Is it because of the human factor?
And Saxon, if you could further expand on it later, that would be great. I'm interested in what else you have to say.

[Amber Eyes]

The rubric is fine for the most part. It serves its purpose of giving judges a way to score threads. I don't see it being a problem that needs fixing but at the same time I don't think it's an accurate measure of how good or bad a quest is. I've seen threads that I personally loved make poor scores. Sometimes a simple quest doesn't have everything the rubric asks for, but that doesn't mean it's not a ton of fun to read and overall a good piece of work. Isn't that really the point for a writer? I've seen threads score really high that I can't even get through, seriously some of them put me to sleep in two posts.

Overall...I think the rubric has a purpose and it serves that purpose pretty well, but I think it's silly to see your score as an accurate depiction of how good you are.

BTW, I am in no way saying this about me in particular ( I know I'm about worth a 50) :)

[Lord Anglekos]

Although Amaranthine and I have very different opinions on the actual usefulness of the rubric, we both agree on one thing. One of the rubric's most significant issues is not truly the rubric itself, but how judges use the rubric to judge threads. Amber, as you were saying, we've all seen threads that we feel should have had higher or lower scores, based on their content; this is obviously because of the fore-mentioned "human factor", and that isn't really something that can be "fixed". Perhaps if, say, the Judging rubric had a rubric itself for it, but that's a separate idea that can be talked about later.

No, instead of "fixing" the "human factor", Amaranthine and I agree that the way the threads are "graded" could be changed. From what we've seen, Judges use a "guilty until proven innocent" method; start from zero in all the categories, and award a general score at the end based upon what they've seen. Judge get a decent visual of the setting? Award a six. Character felt kind of dry? Give 'em a four. That kind of thing.

This may or may not be completely true; despite my previous experience as one, I can't presume to say I know exactly how all Judges grade their threads. However, I feel that this "guilty until proven innocent" method is how most do so, and while it's not a perfect method, it's worked for some time now.

However, she and I feel that the method should be flipped around; an "innocent until proven guilty" system, in other words. A judge should sit down to a thread and start with a 100/100 score for it; perhaps, even write it down on a piece of paper. Then, as he or she reads the thread, they can dock or give points as they go for the little details. For example, say a Judge was reading a battle thread in the Citadel between two swordsmen, and was using this method; They're reading, and the Man A says something that strikes them as odd for their apparent personality. Not too odd, but odd enough to give them pause; that's a point off dialogue. The score is now 99/100. The Judge then continues to read and docks a couple more points for dialogue here and there, but then Man A says something that strikes the Judge as really touching, or important. That's a point regained.

And so on and so forth. You get the idea. Again, I don't know how every single Judge grades their threads, and this may have already been brought up in the Moderator's forum, but Amaranthine and I project that this method will generate medium-high to high scores for those that earn them, and the only people that will really get any super low scores are those that don't really try. This method of generating slightly higher scores will also help, in Amaranthine's opinion, of leveling characters faster; and this will keep player's interests in Althanas easier, as their character's story is constantly evolving, rather than being forced, really, to stay at one point for an extended period of time. As in MMORPG's, no one wants to be stuck in one place for too long; not unless they have something to gain from it.

This is just one suggestion; I personally have a few others, but I'd like to hear what the moderators and fellow writers have to say about it before continuing on.

[Amaranthine]

Although Amaranthine and I have very different opinions on the actual usefulness of the rubric, we both agree on one thing. One of the rubric's most significant issues is not truly the rubric itself, but how judges use the rubric to judge threads. Amber, as you were saying, we've all seen threads that we feel should have had higher or lower scores, based on their content; this is obviously because of the fore-mentioned "human factor", and that isn't really something that can be "fixed". Perhaps if, say, the Judging rubric had a rubric itself for it, but that's a separate idea that can be talked about later.

No, instead of "fixing" the "human factor", Amaranthine and I agree that the way the threads are "graded" could be changed. From what we've seen, Judges use a "guilty until proven innocent" method; start from zero in all the categories, and award a general score at the end based upon what they've seen. Judge get a decent visual of the setting? Award a six. Character felt kind of dry? Give 'em a four. That kind of thing.

This may or may not be completely true; despite my previous experience as one, I can't presume to say I know exactly how all Judges grade their threads. However, I feel that this "guilty until proven innocent" method is how most do so, and while it's not a perfect method, it's worked for some time now.

However, she and I feel that the method should be flipped around; an "innocent until proven guilty" system, in other words. A judge should sit down to a thread and start with a 100/100 score for it; perhaps, even write it down on a piece of paper. Then, as he or she reads the thread, they can dock or give points as they go for the little details. For example, say a Judge was reading a battle thread in the Citadel between two swordsmen, and was using this method; They're reading, and the Man A says something that strikes them as odd for their apparent personality. Not too odd, but odd enough to give them pause; that's a point off dialogue. The score is now 99/100. The Judge then continues to read and docks a couple more points for dialogue here and there, but then Man A says something that strikes the Judge as really touching, or important. That's a point regained.

And so on and so forth. You get the idea. Again, I don't know how every single Judge grades their threads, and this may have already been brought up in the Moderator's forum, but Amaranthine and I project that this method will generate medium-high to high scores for those that earn them, and the only people that will really get any super low scores are those that don't really try. This method of generating slightly higher scores will also help, in Amaranthine's opinion, of leveling characters faster; and this will keep player's interests in Althanas easier, as their character's story is constantly evolving, rather than being forced, really, to stay at one point for an extended period of time. As in MMORPG's, no one wants to be stuck in one place for too long; not unless they have something to gain from it.

This is just one suggestion; I personally have a few others, but I'd like to hear what the moderators and fellow writers have to say about it before continuing on.

Mmhmm. <3

[Visla Eraclaire]

Why do you think it's "inherently flawed"? Is it because of the human factor?

Because the idea of objective "value" in writing is an inherently flawed concept.

Because there are different people applying a scale without meaningful standardization.

Because there is no unified vision of what the objective of Althanas writing is.

Because the idea of rating anything on a 1-10 scale is meaningless, especially art.

You can count up or you can count down, but how much is a "point" worth and what makes one story "better" than another is going to be a mess. There's a certain area of writing, largely consisting of mechanics and coherence, that can be objectively graded. Even that isn't properly graded via the rubric. Miss a comma or use a turn of phrase that some two-centuries-dead grammarian disapproves of (like the hyphenated adjectival phrase "two-centuries-dead") and that could be two points off, depending on your judge. But putting that issue aside, writing simply has different objectives.

Most of what I have to say is that the endeavor is doomed, but if you want somewhere you can improve on, other than standardization that's already recognized, it's in tailoring the rubric to the writer. There's never going to be such a thing as a "good" work in and of itself. The writer created the piece with an objective in mind. So long as that objective is stated in good faith, the judge should judge the work by its own goals. If the work was intended to be a series of journal entries with limited perspective, you shouldn't get docked on setting because your in-character author simply wouldn't stop to discuss the roses. If your work was intended to confuse and unsettle the reader with unanswered questions or leave a cliffhanger, this should not be cause to dock the score.

Obviously you can't cater to people who say "my objective was to write slap-dash crap, so I succeeded." People who set limited goals can get limited rewards, but the score itself should simply reflect how well they achieved what they set out to do. A person who scored a 100 with limited goals may very well be entitled to less XP than a person who scored a 75 attempting a grander project. That's fine. That makes more sense than the person who wrote a perfect short story losing points because it wasn't a tale of grand adventure, or more commonly someone who writes a thread that is merely part of a larger puzzle being docked because they didn't produce the whole in one fell swoop.

[We Despise The Wretched]

Visla already explained how I feel about this, for the most part, but I thought I'd say my two cents. I simply believe that none of us are perfect writers, therefore it's near-impossible for any judge - of any skill - to correctly pass judgment on another's writing. That isn't to say that a Judge can't touch on the gist of a player's pros and cons. So honestly, I'd say it's as good as it's going to get.

Though, one possible way that judgments can improve would be to have more than one judge convene on a single thread. That way, scoring won't be based on the eclectic views of one reader, but rather, a general consensus.

Addendum: But then again, that would just make things much more time-consuming, and we're all just a bunch of lazy-asses anyway. So I repeat, I think it's as good as it's going to get. :P

[Cydnar]

Workshop judging tends to work on a more collective basis, it was implemented to address similar concerns following previous endeavours to address the 'issues' with the rubric.

[Silence Sei]

Okay, well I'm not going to say whether or not I think the rubric is flawed, its just the system we currently have. You point me in the direction I'm supposed to judge, I'll use whatever tools I'm given.

As far as the guilty until proven innocent theory, I have hardwired it into all the new judges that we start all categories, with the exception of mechanics (Start at 10 and work down) and Wildcard (as that's opinionated) with a score of 5, and go either way. I assume the writers are average and not poor or excellent at the start of the story, and woprk from there, and I believe Rev and Zerith do the same (Least I've told them to a couple of times)

[Saxon]

I really have like this urge to take the hook and run with some kind of argument against the methods used here, but in reality, this is a fight that has been hashed and rehashed more times then I can remember. And I don't really have time right now to stand around and beat a dead horse. Especially when nothing is going to come of it.

Visla made a lot of good points and I agree with most of them. Writing is not an exact science, and the methods we use to treat it that way are not only wrong, but the reasons why we do it are wrong to. We use judging as a way to score and apply experience to a person's account so they can run through the gambit and keep up the illusion that Althanas is a game and to treat it as such. Don't get me wrong, while the idea of peer review/editing of other people's work is a brilliant idea, I've never gotten behind the whole campaign of treating Althanas as a roleplaying game and claiming it to be a writing workshop as a front.

But, for the sake of argument, lets forget the glaring philosophical and ethical argument of using literature to lure people into a bad game. Lets focus on instead the flaws of Althanas' judging system;

1) There is little standardization in how judges apply the rubric in judgments. There is no form of training or level of expertise required to be considered for becoming a judge. And while that's a little ambitious for a site like this, I think its a fair argument to make since judges are protected inherently by site rules from public scrutiny or reprimand for the methods they choose to use to judge your threads and mine. I think if you'd like a better rubric and better commentary, I'd suggest trying to build some sort of program for judge trainees to become accustomed to judging and to learn how to do it right as well as ethically.

As far as I know when I was a judge, there was a thread you could use for formulas when calculating experience and gold, a little pamphlet from an old member over the philosophies he applied to judging, and your hand could be held for awhile by other judges during your first couple of judgments until they decided you were fit to go off and peruse the backlog on your own. That's all. Other then that, your requirements for being a judge were that you needed to be able to form an opinion of your own and have a pulse. You'd be amazed on how hard it is for some people to have BOTH of those things at once.

I'm just saying. Throw in a bit of an orientation for judges, construct a program to teach new judges how to judge and provide a little more oversight, and things might run a bit smoother. The sink or swim method for handpicking judges is and has always been a terrible idea.

2) The weights of the points assigned in particular areas of the rubric needs fixed. For no reason should something as fundamental as setting weigh the same as something as subjective as continuity. As it stands, a lot of the rubric follows the method of 10 points across the board from what I can remember. And it implies that all things in the rubric are equally important. They're not. While I'd argue that Setting, Mechanics, and Action should all have more weight of some where around 12-15 points a piece, things like Clarity and Continuity should be worth around 5 a piece.

The reasons for this is while having a good setting, knowing proper grammar and being able to control the tension in your story are all very important to a good story, a person's ability to tether there thread to other adventures is less so. And being able to write clearly is entirely dependent on the judge that you have. They just do not seem like the cornerstones to writing here when evaluating someone.

3) The Wild Card. I didn't lump this in with # 2 because this area of the rubric is so absurd it deserves its own time in the spotlight. It has a special place here because from the time I joined, the time I judged, to the time I left the staff I have never figured out why anyone on this site would need 10 bonus points in order to get a perfect 100 score. It really takes the bonus out of it, now doesn't it? While arguments have been made for this area to be used at the judge's discretion as a way of letting the player recoup points he or she lost in other areas, I think this area of the score just sucks up other points that could be weighted in other areas.

Lets also not forget that you as a member are also entirely dependent on the person judging your thread to find something he or she enjoyed in your writing to assign nonbonus bonus points to you in order to balance out the fact you sucked in either grammar or continuity. Because God help you if they don't and you're stuck with 0 points in Wild Card because at your absolute best all you will ever get is a 90. I think that alone breeds subjection and gives Judges a little too much power in determining your score. These points would be better served if they were redistributed else where.

If we'd like to have a judge have the authority to award bonus points, instead of devoting an area of the rubric to it, make a clause. Allow X number of free points to be awarded to the score for a legitimate reason. At most 5. That way a member can still achieve a 100, they have the option for bonus points for exceptional work, and the judge's judgment is kept in check. Everybody wins.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Just as a point to how different people view things, I think Saxon picked the wrong items to weight. That's because we clearly have different writing styles and emphasize different things. A computer can be programmed to write in mechanically proficient English. Mechanics is just an area for judges to knock points for typos and bad editing. Guess what? Editors do editing. Writers do writing. Action is also one of the more poorly judged areas. Not every story has action in the literal sense and it's rare for someone to recognize that a lack of action can be deserving of a good score.

This isn't me attacking Saxon, this is just me pointing out that even between people who agree a lot there's a lot of disconnect on weighting. I don't think there's a one size fits all weighting for threads. That's why I'd emphasize the objectives of the thread. Honestly, I'd scale back the rubric to fewer areas that are more general and applicable to all threads, put them at 20 a piece, rather than trying to get into too much granularity.

We can throw ten areas out but that's really just obfuscating a failed system.

Also, I'm reading the descriptions that follow the numbers in the poll and don't feel they represent the numbers. That's what you get with a ten point scale trying to encompass subjective impressions. 6 and 7 seem backward as do 3 and 4.

[Lord Anglekos]

Also, I'm reading the descriptions that follow the numbers in the poll and don't feel they represent the numbers. That's what you get with a ten point scale trying to encompass subjective impressions. 6 and 7 seem backward as do 3 and 4.

Actually, I have to agree with Visla on this. I re-read my poll options, but only after I'd posted them, and some things just didn't sound the way they did in my head. So yeah, this further proves his point on the ten-point system. So would it be better or worse if there were, say, 20 points for each selection? Setting, continuity, etc...

[Saxon]

Actually, I have to agree with Visla on this. I re-read my poll options, but only after I'd posted them, and some things just didn't sound the way they did in my head. So yeah, this further proves his point on the ten-point system. So would it be better or worse if there were, say, 20 points for each selection? Setting, continuity, etc...

I think trying to tailor your error to his argument of adjusting the rubric is a dangerous undertaking. Rather then weighing down the bandwagon, I'd say take your lumps and move on.

[Lord Anglekos]

I think trying to tailor your error to his argument of adjusting the rubric is a dangerous undertaking. Rather then weighing down the bandwagon, I'd say take your lumps and move on.

I have. I simply agree with Visla's point, and seeing as he used my own poll to prove it, I don't see the "dangerous undertaking" of voicing my agreement. If you believe it is such, then congratulations. We are now all forearmed to the dangers of agreeing. And we thank you profusely for that.
In any case, I ask the same question from two posts ago. If the numbers were raised from 10 to 20 points, and the number of "categories" were reduced, would it be better, worse, or the same?

[Hysteria]

Scales should opperate on an 'average' point in the middle. So on a 1-10 scale the 'average' make should be 5, with anything 0-4 being below average and 6-10 being above.

The poll has 3 and 4 as 'alright' so you only get two options if you don't like it. The standard scale of 1 to 5 that is always used for survays has 1 (Strongly dislike) to 3 (neutral) to 5 (strongly like) with 2 and 4 being dislike and like without the 'strong' aspect.

Whatever the number that is picked as long as the spaces between each number are equal and the 'sides' of the rating are equal (you can be just as 'good' as you can be as 'bad') then it should be alright. Your poll doesn't offer opposing points for all the options and the space between each one is not the same (it really doesn't matter in this sort of poll, but for the rubric it would).

Someone before (can't remember and can't be bothered looking who it was) said that they started everyone from a 10 and if they made mistakes it moved down. Thats alright, i'd start at a 5 and go up and down, but meh. In the end the rubric is just there so I can lvl up.

[Visla Eraclaire]

In the end the rubric is just there so I can lvl up.

This is another major problem. Althanas still serves two masters: gamers and writers. Judges have to make sure gamers get enough exp to keep their grind moving along while writers get enough feedback and legitimate criticism to keep them satisfied.

I think 5 twenty point categories would be better. I brainstormed what those five might be with Saxon last night. The problem is, this won't really solve anything. There are a lot of problems and solving any one of them isn't going to make a big impact. That's why much of Althanas gets shuffled around and painted over every now and then without significant improvement. The foundation and core construction are flawed and without a unified fix to that, all the small fixes are pointless.

Althanas lacks a singular goal and direction, it lacks dedicated staff, and it lacks a sufficient member base. You won't get dedicated members without decent judging. You can get good judges without a large pool to pull from. You lose significant numbers of both if you choose a single goal for Althanas instead of having it be mediocre at two things.

It's intractable. You cannot tract it.

[Rayse Valentino]

Workshop judging tends to work on a more collective basis, it was implemented to address similar concerns following previous endeavours to address the 'issues' with the rubric.

Workshop judging has ended up being a few people giving their opinion and then ultimately a judge comes in and does the same thing they always do. It is no different no matter how fancy you make it look. Although I guess it does make it easier for judges to give non-commented scores and hide in the comments of the actual contributors to make it look like they actually read the thread they're judging when they clearly did not.

Anyway, I'd like to see some top-down support for change. Bottom-up doesn't happen in a totalitarian organization.

[Saxon]

I think regardless, adjustments to the rubric really need to be put on hold while more fundamental problems of Althanas need to be solved first. It'd be great if we have a better grading system that had less bias and more room for members to grow in it, but the facts are that what Althanas needs is drastic improvement in other areas first before something like this could be considered useful. Visla went over a lot of them, and I do have a couple to add, but I'd also like to point out the good that has already been done first;

1) Site consolidation. Max has gone to some length fixing up the site and making things easier to find which for newer people has probably been a breath of relief because it took me awhile before I could find my way around here when I first joined.

2) Writer's Workshop. Though it hasn't been the roaring success everyone has wanted it to be, lets be honest. For years people have talked about how Althanas is a writer's workshop to help other writers grow, but until the making of this its been pretty much all talk. It'd be interesting if the workshop were further developed and more input was put in through members, because at this point in time its more of a crapshoot where choosing this judging option is a role of the dice on whether or not people will even read your stuff.

At the very least, it gives a member a taste of what judges go through when trying to judge threads, because not all of them are outstanding or great reads, and the hardest lesson to learn when starting out is to just take it for what it is but try to help anyway. In that aspect, I think the workshop has helped a great deal.

3) Acceptance among Old and New Members. I know this isn't exactly something someone has implemented, but there is definitely a cultural shift that has occurred in our site. Unlike in previous years, I've noticed less of a division between older veterans of the site and newer folks coming in. That could just because I'm so busy I don't have time to look around and talk to everyone, but the word 'newbie' and viewing people as outsiders for just joining seems to have dissipated. Its become easier to gain acceptance and become one of us without your interest in the site really falling into question. This is important because newer members need to be given a hand in getting used to the site, and it makes it all the harder when having to actively work your way in socially.

Perhaps that's because attitudes have changed or our older memberbase has changed and become less centrically focused, but its still a good thing and we should keep it up and continue to embrace newer members.

----

These were just a couple things I could think of off the top of my head, but all of them are good examples of how our site has changed for the better. But, why I wanted to mention them first prior to the problems is to let members know that regardless of where most of us stand on the degrees in which Althanas needs to be improved, it can be done. But, instead of little things, we also need to solve bigger problems.

1) Althanas' identity crisis. Althanas has been a community that has fallen on the fence between being gamers or writers for years, even before I joined. I think it would be beneficial for this site if we pick a direction for it to go and stick with it, regardless if it happens quite the way I want it to. I know some people will get angry and others will leave, but you have to think of the greater good here. If Althanas is a writer's workshop and it decides to become that and accept that as its mission, it could shed the gaming aspect and focus on that part of the site and utilize a lot of the opportunities its missed out while trying to cater to gamers as well as writers. The same could be said if Althanas decides to be a roleplaying game.

The important thing to note, however, is this sort of decision in cultural identity of Althanas could only benefit this site. The cost would be some members, but instead of having a site that has stagnated and existed for years without coming to any real decision on where it should grow, it'd actually be able to do that. People would also have less hoops to jump through in order to get what they want out of the site, whether its to write or roleplay.

2) Staff organization. Most of this won't really apply to a lot of the members here, but those of us who have been on the staff can sort of identify this. While there are some things that can be done while on the staff that could be beneficial for the site, a lot of it revolves around being role models on the site and policing up other members. If you want to judge, that's fine, or if you want to help with a tournament or function that's all right too, but other then that much of it, at least in my time, was all discussion with little implementation. And at the end of the day, the way the staff functions was more disheveled and disorganized then it should be.

Either give better training to different staff members so they can learn their job and be able to do different tasks in their area so that they can remain busy without having to wander around and look for work to do. It could also be something as simple as regular staff meetings where administrators and staff members sit down together either in a chatroom or a thread and view their current mission, the goals the administrators have, ideas from staff members, and the different tasks the staff needs to accomplish in order to meet these goals. Its a bit simplified, but this is kind of fundamental in having a staff when in a managerial or leadership position because it keeps people on the same page and lets the people who are working for you to understand what you want of them other then to just keep on keeping on.

This is more of a gripe for when I was on the staff, but whether or not it rings true today, it'd be a good idea to look at this. Because on this site and to implement changes to better this site, it needs to happen from the top down. Members here cannot implement these changes ourselves because we do not have the power to do so. And largely the staff may talk of things and implement some things, but it'd be very beneficial for the staff and the site as a whole if there was a consolidation of leadership and management of its tasks were better handled.

3) Recruitment. Largely Althanas grows in membership by word of mouth, but I think once we decide what kind of product the site could offer people, it'd be a decent idea to look into some sort of advertisement whether it be electronic or not in order to get Althanas' name out there and draw in more members. I don't really want to get too deep into this given where we are right now, but I think as a part of the to-do list in the future, some sort of improvement in our recruitment of members needs to be looked at, but only after the re-organization and focus of the direction of the site.

[Hysteria]

Althanas lacks a singular goal and direction, it lacks dedicated staff, and it lacks a sufficient member base. You won't get dedicated members without decent judging. You can get good judges without a large pool to pull from. You lose significant numbers of both if you choose a single goal for Althanas instead of having it be mediocre at two things.

Thats just silly. Goals don't need to have one target, and the two are not exclusive and Althanas has the most dedicated staff i've seen on an RP board. Maybe that is not saying much given the quality of most RP boards, but meh.

I know you're going to fight me tooth and nail on this, but the game aspect and writing aspect are not contradictory. I know the argument and I agree that there are some things that can interfere with a pure writing exterience (eg limited skills of a character can interfere with the story you are trying to tell). But our current 'hybrid' system is a writing game. They are only a dichotomy if you call it such.

Instead of looking at people as 'writers' or 'gamers' why not focus on creating a good experience as a writing game? The reward for good writing is exp and gold which then increases the 'fun' of the game when you have a more powerful character. A good storyline, easy to follow rules (seriously I still have no idea what I can and can't do when I lvl up), a rich world and good community would do a lot more than the old focus on writing vs gamming.


Workshop judging has ended up being a few people giving their opinion and then ultimately a judge comes in and does the same thing they always do. It is no different no matter how fancy you make it look. Although I guess it does make it easier for judges to give non-commented scores and hide in the comments of the actual contributors to make it look like they actually read the thread they're judging when they clearly did not.

If you see workshop's goal as to provide feedback from a few different sources to help improve the RPers writing then it is a success. You have 2/3/4 people's imputs than than one.

[Visla Eraclaire]

My simple response to you, Hysteria, is the lessons of experience. Your view of the two as fully compatible displays an ignorance of the experience of this board for oh so many years. The reason why the board is not great as a game is because it is shackled by writing-based constraints. The reason why the board is not great as a writing symposium is that it masquerades as a game.

The two are not totally exclusive. Althanas inhabits the middle ground between them, but it will never be truly successful at either and the vast majority of people seek one goal or the other. Relatively few seek the hybrid. For those people, Althanas is really the only game in town, but there aren't enough of those people for Althanas to prosper with them as its only fully satisfied members.

[Scrotus]

I think the 11 people who selected options 1-5 should take a stab at jointly creating, or coming up with, solutions to what you think is wrong with the rubric. I know some of the aforementioned problems aren't patchable, but you guys are a smart bunch (the ones I'm guessing selected options 1-5, seeing as most of you are probably site veterans).

[Lord Anglekos]

I think the 11 people who selected options 1-5 should take a stab at jointly creating, or coming up with, solutions to what you think is wrong with the rubric. I know some of the aforementioned problems aren't patchable, but you guys are a smart bunch (the ones I'm guessing selected options 1-5, seeing as most of you are probably site veterans).

Several have already, Scrotus; including the people who voted options 6-10, as well. That's what this thread is for. So what do you, personally, feel should be done about the rubric? If the decision lied upon you and you alone, what would you do to fix it's issues?

[Saxon]

I think the 11 people who selected options 1-5 should take a stab at jointly creating, or coming up with, solutions to what you think is wrong with the rubric. I know some of the aforementioned problems aren't patchable, but you guys are a smart bunch (the ones I'm guessing selected options 1-5, seeing as most of you are probably site veterans).

I picked 2. And I've rehashed many of the arguments I've made over the past few years as well as recommendations on how to improve the site. However, I've always found myself hitting a wall. Either someone isn't listening or they don't care. Regardless, I don't think anything will become of this regardless of how much we talk it out. Someone may eventually peruse the thread and cherry-pick the reasons why they want to implement an answer they think is right, but overall I very much doubt anything becomes of this.

But, hey, all walls can be broken with the right amount of pressure, right? If you think that ideas like this have some kind of merit, keep talking about it. Many of us older members aren't going to be around forever, so if you want some sort of change to tip Althanas off the fence so it can move on, I'd say keep the idea alive. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but eventually somebody with some kind of authority will listen.

[Scrotus]

If the choice were up to me, Anglekos, I'd resort to creating a voting thread (like this one) and take into consideration the most suitable suggestions. The good thing about Althanas is that it's a community, and while everyone doesn't always agree, it should be everyones input, not just one person's. ;)

I voted a 9, because it's my favorite number (and the option I most agreed with...of course...). Truth is, I don't think the rubric itself is a failure, or even that bad for that matter. I would suggest changing some aspects, but if the changes were never made it wouldn't kill me.

I think strategy should be put back on the Rubric, so what do I know?

[Caysim Winters]

Alright...I'm new, but for the ones who know me, they can tell anyone that I do my research before actually just spitting some nonsense out. On a sidenote, i've missed you in chat for the pass few days Lord Angelface.

One, the system of the rubric can be consolidated immensely. Too many things that are in it, that create points, are simply repeats of previous categories to create points.

Second, the system is based on completely WHO judges it. I may like books by Tom Clancy, Lord Angelface may like Ann Rice, and Sei may love Dr. Suess. They are completely different styles of writing, but niether are poor or bad. Each writer has sold millions of copies of books to billions of different types of readers who like different types of genres. Just because I don't like that one style doesn't mean it's horrible. Theres been plenty of books that I have read that have gone down in history to be world renown and famous, but I couldn't finish the first chapter, so my points would be lower to someone if I went by the rubric.

On that note, the oppisite effect can occur. The judge may give extremely high points simply because they love that style or genre of writing. That is the immediate sign to label the system as broken.

*deep breath*

With all of that being said, the changes in the rubric should be little as a whole, but dramatic in what is done. Here is my suggestion...

First, the categories should be consolidated. There is no sense in so many that just reflect on the same shit. The categories will be brought down to 4 simple ones. Entertainment, Creativity, Realism, and Grammar.

I'll break them down for you, so that you can get a feel of what I'm saying...

Entertainment will be a 10 point system. You would find it lower than the rest, but that's only because if that genre isn't quite your cup of tea then it shouldn't just be horribly slandered for it.

Realism will be done on a 30 point system, because realism is something that should be done in any writing, no matter if it was entertaining or not. When the word realism is used, that means the way it was written could define the things that happened. Its basically that flow that was maintained.

Creativity will be done on a 30 point system, because every writer should be creative. This doesn't mean completely establish things that hasn't been done before. No, this is how well your story evolved. It is how well things had developed and prospered through the actions that made up the story.

Grammar will be done on a 30 point system, because lets face it, if you can't even do a proper spell check on your work, you shouldn't be rewarded. A writer should hold this as one of the most highest qualifications for a story. Does my work make sense and can be read? Its simple.

*breaths deeply*

Now, the judges who should take the system in, should be selected and given to people who are known to be fair and enjoy most anything. They should be someone who can look at that Dr. Suess book and laugh, or that Ann Rice book and feel chills, or the Tom Clancy novel and simply wonder how and why. These Roleplayer Moderators should be strict and stern to the system that is given.

I'm done for right now. If you respond with interest, then I may continue.

[Scrotus]

I agree fully with everything Caysim said above

[Caellach]

Grammar will be done on a 30 point system, because lets face it, if you can't even do a proper spell check on your work, you shouldn't be rewarded. A writer should hold this as one of the most highest qualifications for a story. Does my work make sense and can be read? Its simple.

If you were only dokced for misspelling docked, then I wouldn't mind. If you accidentally write "its" instead of "it's" (as you did at the end of the quote), then spell check won't find that and even grammar check may miss it. When I proofread something, I look for glaring typos, sentences that make no sense, and words that need to be replaced (either because they aren't well suited or because I've overused them). I don't check every word to make sure I didn't accidentally put in a homophone or forget an apostrophe -- If I notice a mistake like that I'll fix it, but I don't spend a lot of time on it.

Does this mean I'm a terrible writer? Do I not deserve to be rewarded? I prefer to spend more time attempting to improve my writing either by changing ideas or rewording something... I'm not a grate writer, and I don't have infinite time to spend on every thread, so I prefer to put my thyme wear I'll receive the most benefit, rather than fixing homophones. (...see what I did there?) I understand that frequent homophones (he wears thyme? wtf?) can make a thread very difficult to read, but I think mechanics should be based on consistency.

If there are horribly misspelled words throughout, then I agree they should receive a reduced reward, but if there's a comma splice in post 2 and a run on sentence in post 7 out of 10 posts, who cares? I would guess half the sentences in this post were not grammatically correct, but I doubt anyone will have great difficulty reading it.

(I'm not attacking you, Winters, I just think mechanics should be for consistent errors or errors that significantly impede reading, not for getting docked points for not noticing an error here or there while proofreading.)

[Caysim Winters]

Run on sentences are not correct, though, and should be towards a reduced point since it isn't correct.

[Lord Anglekos]

If you were only dokced for misspelling docked, then I wouldn't mind. If you accidentally write "its" instead of "it's" (as you did at the end of the quote), then spell check won't find that and even grammar check may miss it. When I proofread something, I look for glaring typos, sentences that make no sense, and words that need to be replaced (either because they aren't well suited or because I've overused them). I don't check every word to make sure I didn't accidentally put in a homophone or forget an apostrophe -- If I notice a mistake like that I'll fix it, but I don't spend a lot of time on it.

Does this mean I'm a terrible writer? Do I not deserve to be rewarded? I prefer to spend more time attempting to improve my writing either by changing ideas or rewording something... I'm not a grate writer, and I don't have infinite time to spend on every thread, so I prefer to put my thyme wear I'll receive the most benefit, rather than fixing homophones. (...see what I did there?) I understand that frequent homophones (he wears thyme? wtf?) can make a thread very difficult to read, but I think mechanics should be based on consistency.

If there are horribly misspelled words throughout, then I agree they should receive a reduced reward, but if there's a comma splice in post 2 and a run on sentence in post 7 out of 10 posts, who cares? I would guess half the sentences in this post were not grammatically correct, but I doubt anyone will have great difficulty reading it.

(I'm not attacking you, Winters, I just think mechanics should be for consistent errors or errors that significantly impede reading, not for getting docked points for not noticing an error here or there while proofreading.)

I have to disagree with you on this one. Grammar is a term that encompasses all aspects of it - including said comma splices and run-on sentences. Yes, your sentences could be read easily enough, Caellach, as per your example, but simply being able to be read it and understand it isn't enough to say it is grammatically correct, even in general. I have to say that if a judge were to use a category as vague and all-encompassing as "Grammar", I believe that they should focus on all aspects of it; not settle for simple understandability.

Caysim, I have to say I like your idea. A simplified rubric such as that appeals to my personal tastes. While it may not be "perfect", I believe it is a sound rubric.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Caysim. Damn it.

[Caysim Winters]

Thank you. That's all I really have to say at the moment. That was simply a rough draft for a Rubric, so farther kinks can be worked out. As you can see, however, the rough draft itself is already a better idea, so imagine a more defined and perfected one based off of the ideas of this Rubric.

[Hysteria]

My simple response to you, Hysteria, is the lessons of experience. Your view of the two as fully compatible displays an ignorance of the experience of this board for oh so many years. The reason why the board is not great as a game is because it is shackled by writing-based constraints. The reason why the board is not great as a writing symposium is that it masquerades as a game.

(Pst... my start date is a year earlier than yours.)

I may not have been active on Althanas as long as you, but I have been on other boards that operated just the same for quite a while.

The last point is on the mechanism of delivery. Would you attack a game because it was on an xbox? Well maybe, but then people stop listening.


The two are not totally exclusive. Althanas inhabits the middle ground between them, but it will never be truly successful at either and the vast majority of people seek one goal or the other. Relatively few seek the hybrid. For those people, Althanas is really the only game in town, but there aren't enough of those people for Althanas to prosper with them as its only fully satisfied members.

Can you provide evidence to support this? Non-theoretical evidence? Like maybe an example of where it worked having just a game or just writing.

I think you should remember that each consumer has a different reason for the product he/she chooses. For example, Bob might by an Apple Computer because he wants to be cool, then Chris buys one because he is a graphic designer, then Clare because she has always used one and so on. The Product is the same mutlifacted device, but the reasons for using it are different.

You apply that thinking to this website and you get: Bob because he likes the setting and having a cool character, Chris because he is a professional writer and Clare because she likes the people on the board.

To Paraphrase mysef: No one activly seeks the hybrid. One seeks fulfilment of other needs which are personal and many. The product they then choose has to fill those needs.

This false dichotomy thats going on is silly. By all means pick a direction, but make it an educated choice and not the product of years of siloed arguments.

[hr]
Anyway:


Lord Angelface.

lol


Grammar will be done on a 30 point system, because lets face it, if you can't even do a proper spell check on your work, you shouldn't be rewarded. A writer should hold this as one of the most highest qualifications for a story. Does my work make sense and can be read? Its simple.

I think the term you should use is 'Writing', dealing with negatives of 'bad' writing such as spelling, grammar, etc mistakes as well as good use of writing techniques such as metaphores, similes, assonance, alliteration, etc.


Entertainment will be a 10 point system.
Realism will be done on a 30 point system
Creativity will be done on a 30 point system
Grammar will be done on a 30 point system

One of the problems we have with a new Rubric is that there will always be someone who comes along and picks the whole thing apart. Like for example there is no where in this that you encourage writers to describe the world around them. The use of 30 for the last three wouldn't work because the individual number of each is too low to be meaningful. There would be little to no differeance between 11, 12 or 13 to a reader for say, Grammar. If you lower the point number you can find a spot were it is more meaning full.

[Saxon]

(Pst... my start date is a year earlier than yours.)

Trying to throw around your seniority to get places is cool and all, except when you do it to a person who has been around far longer then you. Kinda like this.

Not really as intimidating as it is cute.

[Visla Eraclaire]

(Pst... my start date is a year earlier than yours.)

Psst, this isn't my first account ;) Whoops!


I may not have been active on Althanas as long as you, but I have been on other boards that operated just the same for quite a while.

Please link me to a board that works "just the same." I would love to see it.



The last point is on the mechanism of delivery. Would you attack a game because it was on an xbox? Well maybe, but then people stop listening.

I don't understand this one. The mechanism of delivery is the fucking internet. I think your metaphor is a non sequitur.


Can you provide evidence to support this? Non-theoretical evidence? Like maybe an example of where it worked having just a game or just writing.

I think you can look at any actual writing symposium or fanfiction or any sort of website like that. Game-wise, I'd cite any actual game, or a play-by-post site that doesn't rely on scoring. I personally enjoyed the IV. Wow, that was hard.

The remainder is just nonsense. For someone who talks about "actual" examples and not "theory" you really are just reasoning by analogy and not referring to the genuine, long standing conflicts that have been happening on the site for years. Res ipsa loquitur.

[Caysim Winters]

If you're all just gonna bicker about nonsense, start a flame thread. No more posts of either one of your ignorance needs to continue here. Get back on subject, both of you.

[Visla Eraclaire]

If you're all just gonna bicker about nonsense, start a flame thread. No more posts of either one of your ignorance needs to continue here. Get back on subject, both of you.

Excuse me? I missed the point where you got to declare by fiat what's helpful and what's not.

I'm telling you the problem that's behind the rubric is more than how many categories it is and how many points you give and whether you start from 1 5 or 10. I'm not going to be snarked at and let some flimsy poorly thought out analogies counter that. If looking deeper than the bare surface of numbers and arbitrary designations is nonsense to you, then you're precisely the reason that we have such a failed situation.

If you can't handle the idea that this topic isn't going to be just a series of ideas with no one debating eachother's position on the issue, then I'm not sure if you understand how a forum works.

[Melancor]

Yeah. Because debate has always been about self-professed intellectuals masturbating their ego by condescendingly dismissing opinions outside their clique.

[Atzar]

I'm not an admin, so what follows isn't an official reprimand or anything. I'm just a normal member, calling some people out for trolling, hypocrisy and the general derailment of what was turning into a debate with some potential to be productive.

Melancor, I hope that comment wasn't just aimed at Visla. He responded with exactly the same attitude that Caysim displayed, and prior to that he had been one of the most productive voices in this discussion whether you agree with him personally or not. Setting that aside, your comment in no way contributed to the thread - it didn't respond to the topic at hand, and it didn't help to put the thread back on track.

Caysim, you said yourself that you're new. Don't you think it's brash of you to come to a site and start ordering people around? Not to mention that you're off-base in your demand; there are many aspects to this discussion, not just the one that you raised. What Visla and Hysteria were arguing about was well within the bounds of this topic.

Visla, try to filter some of the venom out of your responses. It's no wonder arguments get personal when you're involved - you have a habit of attacking people when you debate. I frequently find myself agreeing with or at least understanding your perspective, but you have the tact and delicacy of an enraged elephant.

Maybe it's not my place to try to restore order. I don't really care. I'm not saying this for my own benefit, because I have only passing interest in the argument at hand - enough to keep tabs on the thread but not enough to interject my own opinion. I'm saying this for you. If you expect this thread to get anywhere, then stop killing it. People habitually complain that none of these discussions ever amount to anything. What you're doing now is as important a reason as any.

[Scrotus]

"Ladies and gentleman, this train has officially left its tracks..."

Thanks for the insight and all Atzar, but your post is only going to further the distance travelled down this road of trollicism. (Which is why I'm totally trollicizing you right now, man.)

Back to the real topic, please, because I'm guessing that's what should really be discussed here.

[Lord Anglekos]

...Scrotus, again, that's what's already been said. One reiteration was enough, thank you very much.
To DO put things back on track, we've already heard from several members what they think. All of you have put several things on the plate for the moderators to stew in, as I know they'll be keeping close track of this thread. I'm curious to hear just what the administrators and other moderators think (besides Sei and Amber Eyes, as they already stated theirs) about the system, seeing as they're the ones currently running it.
Although Caysim's simplified rubric may not exactly fix things, it certainly does appeal to quite a few members' tastes I feel; including mine. Getting rid of the 'Wild Card' and replacing it, basically, with 'Entertainment', though; how many feel that this would be basically the same thing? I've been thinking about it, and I can't decide whether it would be just a fancier word for the 'Wild Card' category or an actual change.

[Hysteria]

I don't understand this one. The mechanism of delivery is the fucking internet. I think your metaphor is a non sequitur.

The mechanism (in my example) is writing. Someone playing halo uses a game controler, we write. The better he controls his character the more he advances, the better someone 'writes' the more they advance. The internet allows us to do it together... just like xbox live.

[hr]

Visla's point is that without picking a direction we want to move in then we can't make a rubric. I agree with him on that, we are just arguing over the direction.

To be honest though, I am not sure that changing the rubric would have that much effect. Probably the best thing we could do is clean up the site and actually make the rules readable. Again I don't understand the restrictions on characters or how much I can improve with each level up. That is a big problem isn't it? Bigger than not thinking the rubric is complete.

[Visla Eraclaire]

The mechanism (in my example) is writing. Someone playing halo uses a game controler, we write. The better he controls his character the more he advances, the better someone 'writes' the more they advance. The internet allows us to do it together... just like xbox live.

That's a real stretch. The problem with your analogy is that writing isn't at all like using a video game controller. There are objectively judged results of playing halo. There are well understood rules and clear objectives. What's the writing equivalent of "winning" or of "getting a kill"? People would not agree. Gaming has objective goals. Writing doesn't. That's kind of the whole point.


Yeah. Because debate has always been about self-professed intellectuals masturbating their ego by condescendingly dismissing opinions outside their clique

Debate is about advancing your own position vigorously and countering your opponents points, which I do. The rest of what you said is just your feeble attempt to put it in a negative light.


Visla, try to filter some of the venom out of your responses. It's no wonder arguments get personal when you're involved - you have a habit of attacking people when you debate. I frequently find myself agreeing with or at least understanding your perspective, but you have the tact and delicacy of an enraged elephant.

Subtlety gets you nowhere on the board, just like most of the internet. People always say "I agree with what Visla's saying but he says it so brashly" or whatever. You know the alternative isn't "I agree with Visla"? It's actually "blah blah blah blah (I didn't even read what Visla said)"

[Duffy]

Ladies and gentlemen, the last three pages is precisely the reason the last three (four, five?) inexplicably long discussions regarding the nature and intent of the rubric didn't deliver any long standing change, improvement or lasting benefit to the community as a whole.

Opinion is simply too divided, and even with the introduction of the 'humanised' Writer's Workshop, without internal training and group balancing of scores - something logistically impossible to do given activity levels of staff, members and their real world counterparts, isn't something that's ever likely to happen.

Whilst part of me thinks the categories could be serviced with better clarification, and the judging process could be 'rubric judgement with effort' or not at all, there are other areas that need our collective attention before conducting any deep-rooted upheaval. I am not against change, I am merely suggesting we focus on activity and maintaining an adequate level of role-playing to suffice.

Sure, some of you will equate the drop in activity with the rise in disagreements with the rubric or any number of factors, but that is a cyclical affair that neither 'party' will win. For the record, whilst Atzar doesn't have any 'official' stance (whatever that means, he has just as much right as any member of this community to attempt to stabilise a discussion before it is once again derailed), please keep this civil, as you have done for the most part, and let's see if we can finally get to the bottom of the issue at hand.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Duffy, your plea for activity while admitting flaws of the system seems very strange.

"I know you see the beams are rotting and I know you've heard rumbling. I know that several people have died from black lung. However, what we need to focus on right now is mining. If you mine enough, maybe I'll have enough money to fix these things!"

Yes, it is correct. You do need activity to justify the improvements, but who wants to pour their effort into a broken system.

[Duffy]

Duffy, your plea for activity while admitting flaws of the system seems very strange.

How so? Purely out of curiosity, and feel free to respond via personal message or AIM if you feel it detracts from ongoing discussion.


"I know you see the beams are rotting and I know you've heard rumbling. I know that several people have died from black lung. However, what we need to focus on right now is mining. If you mine enough, maybe I'll have enough money to fix these things!"

Yes, it is correct. You do need activity to justify the improvements, but who wants to pour their effort into a broken system.

That's about the sum of things. Stuck between a rock and a hard place, both as a member and member of the moderating team. On the one hand, I just want to get on with things, on the other, I want to see Althanas succeed, yet don't possess the acumen to ideologically see the best solution for the majority.

It's a two way process, though. The more active the site is, the more drive we have to improve to maintain that activity. If we spend X amount of time painting up an old shack for a summer ball and nobody turns up, we'll start asking why we didn't spend the time advertising and cooking scrummy food and getting a decent band to have had a ball with hundreds in a shitty location anyway.

My metaphor fails, most likely, but I hope it put my point across.

[Tainted Bushido]

With all of that being said, the changes in the rubric should be little as a whole, but dramatic in what is done. Here is my suggestion...

First, the categories should be consolidated. There is no sense in so many that just reflect on the same shit. The categories will be brought down to 4 simple ones. Entertainment, Creativity, Realism, and Grammar.

I'll break them down for you, so that you can get a feel of what I'm saying...

Entertainment will be a 10 point system. You would find it lower than the rest, but that's only because if that genre isn't quite your cup of tea then it shouldn't just be horribly slandered for it.

This is already in the rubric as wildcard. Wildcard is the judges chance to talk about how entertained he was with the thread.


Realism will be done on a 30 point system, because realism is something that should be done in any writing, no matter if it was entertaining or not. When the word realism is used, that means the way it was written could define the things that happened. Its basically that flow that was maintained.

The problem with Realism is tenfold. For the first part we are a fantasy website. Realism is going to be a rough category for everyone, as now we have to identify what is real, and what is considered too fantastic to allow for points in this category. Is it realistic for me to suddenly sprout wings and fly when my enemy charges at me with a sword? If my profile says yes, why should this category give me a big flaming no? The amount of discussion on what is and isn't acceptable starts going into a grey ethical area, as you are then talking about using realism to cover instances of power gaming. Realism in fantasy writing is expected to a point, however the mode of writing we are going for, is the suspension of disbelief.


Creativity will be done on a 30 point system, because every writer should be creative. This doesn't mean completely establish things that hasn't been done before. No, this is how well your story evolved. It is how well things had developed and prospered through the actions that made up the story.

However creativity IS entirely based on what came before as well. If I decided to be a sword swinging ace who's sword transforms as I delve into the depths of my power, how the heck am I going to get originality points, when there are a million other people doing the exact same thing, including a rather popular anime? Sure, I could be focusing on what differentiates my Ichigo Kurasaki from the millions of other wannabes, but even that could get old hat, real fast. The problem with Creativity is that it actually becomes extremely subjective. If I had to deal with a shinigami clone, I'd be looking for plagiarism, where as someone else might be looking at it at face value. How do you explain to the judge who's looking at a direct translation of material to Althanas, that he has to be more leniant, or more strict, because his opinion cannot change this category at all.

Let me tell you, the problem with having three categories, is that so far, two are extremely subjective, and subject to the more vicious forms of bias, as it relies entirely on the judges opinion to explain his scores.


Grammar will be done on a 30 point system, because lets face it, if you can't even do a proper spell check on your work, you shouldn't be rewarded. A writer should hold this as one of the most highest qualifications for a story. Does my work make sense and can be read? Its simple.

I daresay that this is he least subjective of the categories. However, this category exists in the Althanas rubric, as three smaller categories to show how we get to that thirty points. I think your interpretation of the rubric might be what's doing in your particular opinion of it. However that is neither here nor there. I'm here to talk about YOUR rubric, not MY rubric.


*breaths deeply*

Now, the judges who should take the system in, should be selected and given to people who are known to be fair and enjoy most anything. They should be someone who can look at that Dr. Suess book and laugh, or that Ann Rice book and feel chills, or the Tom Clancy novel and simply wonder how and why. These Roleplayer Moderators should be strict and stern to the system that is given.

I'm done for right now. If you respond with interest, then I may continue.

My problem is, that it is hard to get the "unbiased" person. Everyone has bias, and everyone will use their bias and experience to mold their experience with a thread. I personally cannot understand why Anne Rice focuses on details that don't matter, with mind numbingly long descriptions. Tom Clancy could be argued as being a bad writer for having to explain the science behind things ad nauseum, before finally being able to progress his story. I don't want to read a fourteen page treatise on nuclear weapons to understand why the agents are trying to use a pocket knife to rip open the plastic explosive layer of a nuke. Explain it real quick and move on. Dr. Seuss is a man who wrote many things in rich allegory and metaphor. His rendition of world war two is both entertaining and horrifying. He also is a very simplistic writer, and his appeal is lost the moment you turn thirteen. His books are read by the old to the young, and I daresay that few people have a complete collection of his works sitting on their bookshelf right this instant.

All of these Writers have flaws as well, what makes them able to sell, is that they write well enough for their target audience while giving the general masses something they can enjoy. However, you cannot create this system without accepting that your judges are biased. If we were to create the perfect unbiased judge, it would take centuries of hard work, because it would have to be a computer, with a strict amount of coding. The moment you begin to form an opinion of something, bias has occurred.

The problem isn't that people complain when the bias is in their favor. It is that some throw around slander and get angry when it doesn't. I won't name names, but i was insulted by someone's insistence that judges don't read work. When I get a thread I print it out, and I read it, writing in in pencil, pen, whatever is handy my notes. If I have to put it down, (either due to time constraints, or in particularly biased moments because I cannot stand to read anymore) I go back and read from a few posts back, to refresh myself on where it came from, and go back into the story. I actually enjoy a lot of the work that has come before me, and I try to make it make sense in my mind. If someone gets docked from my judging, it's because I found the mental exercise of making your story work, is beyond the effort a normal reader should endure.

Do I think it is perfect? No, by the gods I know it is anything but. I was angry when this new rubric was implemented. However, unlike Visla, i was actually happy with a rubric that brought more of the gaming aspect into your judgement, as opposed to the more technical and mechanical rubric, authored by former members think tank. I disagree with a lot of that former admin's decisions, and even a few of Dirks. Only now are we slowly beginning to realize how detrimental those changes became.

[Saxon]

Whilst part of me thinks the categories could be serviced with better clarification, and the judging process could be 'rubric judgement with effort' or not at all, there are other areas that need our collective attention before conducting any deep-rooted upheaval. I am not against change, I am merely suggesting we focus on activity and maintaining an adequate level of role-playing to suffice.

Low activity occurs during the school year every year, and isn't really a symptom of the problem here since its in the nature of the audience Althanas has always seemed to attract. Students. Instead of trying to re-incite the panic of low activity as somebody always does every year during this time of the season on this site, it should in fact be ignored for the purposes of this debate.

Further, I'd also argue that this is the same tactic that you, Duffy, have used in every conversation pertaining to some sort of fundamental change in the site. To return to the game and play. I don't think there is any sort of ulterior motive in the suggestion other then perhaps some sort of irrational aversion or fear to any sort of outcome of the discussion, which could potentially end in an argument, which it almost seemingly does when no action is taken. I think instead of trying to herd everybody back into trying to 'generate activity' to give the illusion that things are running well and even to the pompous idea that in doing so we could solicit the staff's help in our problems, we need to maintain the discussion. Maybe input from the staff as to actions on whatever the members have proposed, if any, could be shared with us? That'd be more helpful.


It's a two way process, though. The more active the site is, the more drive we have to improve to maintain that activity.

I disagree. I do not think that the site needs to be fueled with more contributions into a broken and flawed system in order for us to become motivated in order to solve the problem. In fact, its a bit unnecessary to suggest this, because if none of the members in this thread did not want to seek some sort of improvement for the site, this discussion wouldn't even be happening.

You don't need to motivate people to do something they're already doing.



Visla's point is that without picking a direction we want to move in then we can't make a rubric. I agree with him on that, we are just arguing over the direction.

Really? What direction are you in favor of? Nothing that I have read in your arguments shows any particular direction you want Althanas to go in other then it needs to move in a direction as long as it isn't in the way Visla sees it or in favor of years of siloed arguments. To sum it up, I think you're just arguing for the sake of argument and disagreeing with a potential solution because you either don't fully understand what it is being discussed or don't care to educate yourself about it.


Probably the best thing we could do is clean up the site and actually make the rules readable.

Like I just said, this shows all the signs of somebody who has no idea what they're talking about. Make the rules more readable? What's so hard for you to understand about them and what about this site needs to be cleaned up in your opinion? It sounds more like you're making excuses to back up your weak argument then actually finding substantial proof as to why a) revising the rubric would be bad, and b) Having Althanas decide whether it is a game or a writer's workshop is a problem.

Instead of wasting someone's time on trying to explain the argument to you on the hopes that you may understand it, I suggest you actually read this thread and look at what is actually being proposed here then immediately deciding which side you're on and calling those of us who've researched the problem and talked about it at length ignorant. If anything, all of your posts thus far have only served to show you as uneducated and self-serving.


Again I don't understand the restrictions on characters or how much I can improve with each level up. That is a big problem isn't it? Bigger than not thinking the rubric is complete.

What? Though politics of the RoG and the system it uses to delegate character updates and creation have always been questionable, they are not a pertinent issue here. This is another attempt to throw a blanket over the fact you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. All of the discussion so far has been about improving the rubric and trying to improve the site to facilitate that fact.

If you feel that the rubric is fine the way it is, alright. Say it and cite your reasoning behind it so that we can actually discuss it instead of having to cater to you and waste our time re-summarizing our arguments in a post so that you can read them at your convenience. But don't try to hide the fact you have read none of the arguments made here through muddled metaphors and weak, nonsequitor arguments that have no place here.

And, although I mentioned earlier I enjoyed the idea of new and older members getting together with less of a division between the two, perhaps I was mistaken to say this. Because so far all I have seen from the newer members trying to contribute to this discussion have been members who have jumped into the discussion without reading it, attacking older members on the basis of seniority and otherwise disrupting the conversation in the hopes of showing that they can play with everybody else.

Grow up. Learn the point of a public forum and act like you belong here, because nothing said by you, Hysteria, or most of the newer members participating in the discussion has shown me that any of you have an idea what the fuck we're talking about. If you're confused or don't understand some of the points we're making, ask us. Its a lot more favorable to help you understand what's going on and give you steps to educate yourself then pulling you off the fucking wall because you're confused and you figured arguing would be the best way to approach the situation.

[TwinCast]

Excuse Saxon folks, he gets a little cranky when he feels he's right, and you're blatantly wrong. Infact, his entire last post could be deleted, and almost have no bearing on the discussion.

Hint, hint, wink, wink Sax.

As for my feeling, I have had some time to compose my thoughts a bit more on the subject of the rubric to understand exactly where I stand on the issue. The main point of contention seems to be that while Althanas is a roleplaying game that works within the forum of a writer's workshop, that this hybrid has created a sort of Frankenstein's monster that shuffles along, barely mainting the functions necessary to survive. The going theory then posits that in order for this monster to do more than shuffle along, neither living or dead, we need to make a choice with what direction we wish to steer our beloved creation.

I call Bullshit.

The game was fine as a hybrid for more than three years. I saw a massive decline in the original talent, but we were still focused ont he goal. The differences? More than a couple...

1) The rubric changed and broke the balance between game and workshop. If you look at the categories they are heavily slanted towards the game being played from the writer's seat. Nothing the character does is taken into account, other than when checked against established character, and because of this, actions matter far less than they used to.

Findlefin implemented a change more towards the creative writing aspect of this site, and in doing so, has changed the fundamental nature fo the game. Now in order to succeed one has to do more than just play the game, you either must play it a whole fucking lot, or be more focused on the writing aspect, tot he point that the story becomes almost superfluous.

2) Spoils were granted to the point that they became the norm, rather than the exception. This methodology is made present and clear whenever Andrew(Visla Eraclaire/Aurius Mephisto/whatever other Eudaemonian he feels like crapping out this week) comments on the bazaar. There is no purpose to the bazaar if characters can merely quest for spoils, and expect to see them given out automatically. The time when a judge would change or flat out deny spoil requests has long since gone by.

Love you Andy...

3) The moderator Force has had to weather alot of bad publicity.

Back in the old days, moderators arguing was often kept off site. Moderators presented a unified front, and with the rare exception of a couple (Jess and Ed come to mind, and if you don't know who they were, perhaps its for the better you not ask) you rarely saw them argue between themselves, in a PUBLIC forum. The problem then became, that some moderators began to argue incessantly, to the point that people would just stop replying, because they knew the argument would go nowhere and further, they would just get headaches over the whole ordeal.

More than a couple of the mods/former mods know that this trend has continued through today. The moderator force lacks the ability to work together on things, because the possibility of arguing the same old things over and over again, has create a very old vs. new mindset. We just stopped arguing because some feel it has become a chore to do so, and they woudl rather do their work, and keep their heads down.

This is why things haven't moved, and further why arguments get siloed.

Because these arguments happened behind closed doors, and then if the mod loses, he tries to prove how right he is by taking it public. we have gone past the point of no return for some arguments, and it's generally made everyone involved bitter towards it. It is why the old mods and admins don't comment anymore. They feel they shouldn't have to, its been decided for no change fifteen times over.

Now, what did that last part have to do with point 3?

Who honestly wants to see the people running the forum argue and bicker abck and forth, claiming X Y and Z are ad hominim attacks, and that Fred hates George due to the fact that George stole his cookie for lunch? That so and so obviously has no right to an opinion because he doesn't read the other posts and therefore is an idiot?

And honestly Saxon, that last post REEKED of that attitude. Seriously? Grow up dude. I will say it over and over again, if your response to someone trying to get involved in althanian politics is to butt out and not get involved until you talk to the old guys, then you perhaps had better leave the conversation. People throw out ideas to try and help, they may not know their idea has been tried, or shot down previously. They may not understand the nature of the political beast that the Rubric, or the Bazaar or the RoG has become.

The only way they are going to get informed, is to keep doing what they're doing.

[Enigmatic Immortal]

I hate to jump in on this, cause i usually see lots of poop flying around, but your point about spoiling to get what you want instead of bazarring is just crap pat. I love you, but that's crap.

YOU were in the quest where i wanted to get a gun, was willing to pay out of the gold I made and had in reserve for it, and the spoil was NOT APPROVED. Task didn't let me have it, despite the numerous arguments I had. I even tried explaining it as a long, very long, bazaar thread, and he still wouldn't let me have it even if I PAID for it. So...nope, I think spoils are not just given. They can be denied.
- To note, I could have easily just opened a thread and bought the stupid gun if I wanted, but it didn't feel right to put in so much time and energy for nothing only to open another thread and buy it.

*covers head from poop*

[TwinCast]

I hate to jump in on this, cause i usually see lots of poop flying around, but your point about spoiling to get what you want instead of bazarring is just crap pat. I love you, but that's crap.

YOU were in the quest where i wanted to get a gun, was willing to pay out of the gold I made and had in reserve for it, and the spoil was NOT APPROVED. Task didn't let me have it, despite the numerous arguments I had. I even tried explaining it as a long, very long, bazaar thread, and he still wouldn't let me have it even if I PAID for it. So...nope, I think spoils are not just given. They can be denied.
- To note, I could have easily just opened a thread and bought the stupid gun if I wanted, but it didn't feel right to put in so much time and energy for nothing only to open another thread and buy it.

*covers head from poop*

You are the first exception to the status quo in a long time.

That would make you, the exception that proves the rules dude. You know that.

[Visla Eraclaire]

It's Arius. He isn't made of gold.

Moderator solidarity isn't a good thing. It was never real and the only difference was how willing people were to admit it. The facade of unity served no real purpose. It was especially egregious when dissenters would be forced to agree publicly and shuffle their arguments into the mod forums, where discussions go to die. I guess the fact is discussion never goes anywhere regardless, around here, but it's even worse in the mod forum. Unless it's whining about whether a new mod is appointed or whether an old controversial one should be rehired, it's absolutely dead.

The problem is that there's no system for final resolution. It's just talk stuff down and no one's willing to do it because they don't know if they'll be supported. No one has any real authority except largely absentee admins who aren't necessarily trusted by their underlings. There's no mechanism for decision among the "leadership" so there's no leadership at all. There's just an elite cadre of the same fucking people there are out here having the same arguments but in a secret clubhouse. In the end fuckall gets done just the same. The problem is if someone tried to step up and lead, people wouldn't follow. There's no single person on the board respected enough and dedicated enough to pull people together. Honestly, if someone had a vision like that when I was still a mod, I probably would have followed it through just to see what happened, but such visions were short lived and usually ended up stillborn.

Also, I don't think the rubric is as writing focused as you think, but the loss of the "strategy" section was a setback for gamers. I guess I should say that the rubric isn't writing focused, but that doesn't mean it is game focused. "Action" is a big pile of shit for everyone. It's almost never properly applied and usually gets judged as "Did you do lots of stuff?"

[Hysteria]

If you feel that the rubric is fine the way it is, alright. Say it and cite your reasoning behind it so that we can actually discuss it instead of having to cater to you and waste our time re-summarizing our arguments in a post so that you can read them at your convenience. But don't try to hide the fact you have read none of the arguments made here through muddled metaphors and weak, nonsequitor arguments that have no place here.


I'd vote for 'Its ok, it has some flaws but any change would just result in different flaws of at least equal severity'.

I like the comments the judges make rather than the rubric that draws out those comments.

Thats the second post in the thread Saxon. Thats my opinon on the Rubric (I also responded to the suggested one if you'd like to go take a look).


Like I just said, this shows all the signs of somebody who has no idea what they're talking about. Make the rules more readable? What's so hard for you to understand about them and what about this site needs to be cleaned up in your opinion? It sounds more like you're making excuses to back up your weak argument then actually finding substantial proof as to why a) revising the rubric would be bad, and b) Having Althanas decide whether it is a game or a writer's workshop is a problem.

To the first part. Can you show me where in the rules it tells you what the difference between a lvl 1 and a lvl 2 is? What about limits to what you can request as items from quests (and how powerful they can be), or how it is judged if you do or do not recive them? Or can I own a shop? Can I recive money from that shop, or is it only money from the formula after a quest? Or heaven forbid I try and find some info on the thaynes everyone keeps talking about.


Really? What direction are you in favor of? Nothing that I have read in your arguments shows any particular direction you want Althanas to go in other then it needs to move in a direction as long as it isn't in the way Visla sees it or in favor of years of siloed arguments.

Same as TwinCast it seems.

The 'hybrid' or 'writing game' is fine (hence all the examples I gave for multi-use products over a single focused one *cought* amazon's book reader 'kindle' *cought*). It may need some more tweaking (like the rules, rubric, etc) but its the way to go to appeal to a large enough audience to ganer activity. Maybe I'm wrong, who knows?


The problem is that there's no system for final resolution. It's just talk stuff down and no one's willing to do it because they don't know if they'll be supported. No one has any real authority except largely absentee admins who aren't necessarily trusted by their underlings. There's no mechanism for decision among the "leadership" so there's no leadership at all. There's just an elite cadre of the same fucking people there are out here having the same arguments but in a secret clubhouse. In the end fuckall gets done just the same. The problem is if someone tried to step up and lead, people wouldn't follow. There's no single person on the board respected enough and dedicated enough to pull people together. Honestly, if someone had a vision like that when I was still a mod, I probably would have followed it through just to see what happened, but such visions were short lived and usually ended up stillborn.

So what do we do, other than pairing off with like-minded indivudals and creating a new website?

[Rayse Valentino]

So what do we do, other than pairing off with like-minded indivudals and creating a new website?

I think they want the admins to have a 'we've come to our senses!' moment and either try to implement real change or at least the cogs of change or give somebody the power to do so.

I've long since given up on such pipe dreams, but eh, the bigger the hope the bigger the payoff I guess.

[Visla Eraclaire]

I think they want the admins to have a 'we've come to our senses!' moment and either try to implement real change or at least the cogs of change or give somebody the power to do so.

I've long since given up on such pipe dreams, but eh, the bigger the hope the bigger the payoff I guess.

That's what needs to happen. I absolutely do not think it will.

[Max Dirks]

That's what needs to happen. I absolutely do not think it will. I'm fairly certain we had our 'come to our senses' moment long before the rest of you. Completely revamping the incentive system, including the rubric, EXP, judging and spoils, has been at the top of our list for Althanas 2.0. It's a shame that most of you guys stayed quiet in the 2.0 thread I posted in the RPC because I think Sei and Taskmienster pretty much have this section wrapped up already. However, I did briefly skim this thread though and I believe a lot of your concerns will be addressed in the new system.

[Visla Eraclaire]

I'll believe it when I see it. No offense, but you've had big dreams before.

[Rayse Valentino]

Not surprised that Dirks doesn't read threads, but Visla said:


There's just an elite cadre of the same fucking people there are out here having the same arguments but in a secret clubhouse.

Is there any rational explanation for why you have to have the condescending attitude of 'we know what's good for you' all the time? Haven't we long ago realized that having the decision makers ALSO be the sole idea makers is an unbalanced system? Think of how much faster your Althanas 2.0 would be (which is pretty ironic, considering that Web 2.0 has rendered the 2.0 attribute as a long-running online joke) if, gasp, the community could actually know what your ideas were before they are thrust upon them. Considering your time frame for this is, what, early 2011? Then that's 6 months where people could given their input before your little thought experiment becomes something everyone has to deal with. And considering how resistant Althanas is to change, I suspect any criticism, once implemented, will be gunned down without mercy using the convenient excuse of 'give it time'. Yeah, we gave the FQ plenty of time, didn't we? Oh, woops, I forgot that you haven't actually doled out the rewards for that yet. I guess that's on the list with Althanas 2.0.

[Silence Sei]

And if you had read what Dirks said, there has been an entire thread for the non mods since June 29th. You made one reply which was basically just to tell us that we needed to change the rubric (Which Atzar before you had already stated), and then telling us to update setting. You knew the thread was there, you did not ask us any questions (of which I would be more than happy to have answered), and you left it at that one post. I'm just saying, that thread's been open for a while and if you had genuine ideas or complaints, I would have done my best to answer them if they needed to be.

But you know, that's just me.

[Visla Eraclaire]

That just proves that he has to sense not to bother anymore. I don't believe I replied to the thread either.

We'll see what happens. I'd like it to work. I doubt it will. Kind of like my attitude about my old undergrad's football team.

[Max Dirks]

Just so you know, we're always looking for new (or returning) people to join the secret clubhouse.

http://www.althanas.com/world/misc.php?do=form&fid=2

[Visla Eraclaire]

Sorry, Max, if I wanted to work in my offtime, I'd just bill more hours for the firm. They pay.

[Jasmine]

Just so you know, we're always looking for new (or returning) people to join the secret clubhouse.

yeah... i've applied a couple times for things that I could do and always been told that you don't need me


Back to topic of the thread....

The rubric could use some help, yes. I gave it a 5, because it serves it's purpose well enough. Could it be better? Sure. There is almost always room for improvement. But it isn't bad either. I like the idea of condensing it quite a bit.

Most of the points against it that have been made are ones I agree with. I'll expound on them later when I have more time since I'm supposed to be walking out the door right now.

[Rayse Valentino]

And if you had read what Dirks said, there has been an entire thread for the non mods since June 29th. You made one reply which was basically just to tell us that we needed to change the rubric (Which Atzar before you had already stated), and then telling us to update setting. You knew the thread was there, you did not ask us any questions (of which I would be more than happy to have answered), and you left it at that one post. I'm just saying, that thread's been open for a while and if you had genuine ideas or complaints, I would have done my best to answer them if they needed to be.

But you know, that's just me.

It's not a simple matter of question-and-answer. You missed my point. I'm saying there needs to be transparency. The fact is, unless we get returns on our interest, we have zero indication that there is any progress. As long as you erect this wall between the decision makers and the community, this already-dwindling player base will continue to be un-enthused by any proposed Big Plans.

I mean, if you want to play that game, then my question is "What are the explicit changes in Althanas 2.0?"

[Silence Sei]

Now, keep in mind, none of this is the final work, but here are some examples.

We're revamping the system in which we introduce new judges.

We're dealing with the issue of the bazaar and GP

We're in talks over what to do with the rubric.

Those are the ones I can rattle off the top of my head.

[Lord Anglekos]

We're dealing with the issue of the bazaar and GP
Speaking of which, is there anybody running the bazaar lately? I've been taking looks at it and recently it seems...dead. For lack of a better word.

[Amber Eyes]

I'm trying to stay on top of it. I'm pretty new at it though and I'm still having to check with higher-ups on some things, which makes it take a bit longer. So yes, there is someone there.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Now, keep in mind, none of this is the final work, but here are some examples.

We're revamping the system in which we introduce new judges.

We're dealing with the issue of the bazaar and GP

We're in talks over what to do with the rubric.

Those are the ones I can rattle off the top of my head.

So this is an internal bureaucracy change, something being "dealt with", and something you are "in talks about"

Wow, this new Althanas surely will be a brave new world.

Here's a hint on how to run the Bazaar, Amber. Just do it. Don't ask questions of "higher ups" they are just making it up as they go along. You could do the same thing much quicker and much easier.

[Max Dirks]

The bazaar will likely become automated, so Visla will (sadly) be right soon enough. We probably won't be enforcing character knowledge on Althanas 2.0, meaning if you want your character to be a master swordsman have at it. However, we will be monitoring continuity to a far greater extent. Continuity, instead of its current convoluted definition, will essentially boil down to Althanas integration. In a quest that takes place in Alerar, did you recognize the aftermath of the Xem'zund War? If not, can you provide a timestamp or a reason why? More relevant, if you battled someone using mythril sword with only an iron sword, if the two metals met, did you acknowledge that mythril was the stronger material and chip your stuff. If not, why?

In short, this all puts greater emphasis on the bazaar. I'll be adding the vB credits hack to Althanas with three separate currencies, most likely. They will be GP (to purchase items, armor, etc.), AP (Althanas points) for custom user titles, etc. and CP (concept points) for participating in Althanas' concepts areas. Thus bazaar purchases will be almost fully automatic. If you want a weapon that's not on the list, you send a request to the system and we'll add it. There will be a player and a moderator auction. In the moderator auction you can get unique items that no one else will be able to have ever (unless you sell it). We'll also give out story vouchers as a result from a quest. If you receive a voucher, we'll use vB credits to create an item that only you can purchase using the voucher.

All in all, pretty simple.

[Lord Anglekos]

We probably won't be enforcing character knowledge on Althanas 2.0, meaning if you want your character to be a master swordsman have at it.

Explain this to me, please? Because from the initial sounds of it, it seems like you're saying there won't be any limit on characters, if created "right". I know I'm wrong, I just need to be told I'm wrong and why.

Will there at least be, for the bazaar, an option for moderator-character action for purchasing items? Beyond the auctions, I mean. I personally love the bazaar as it is; I'd hate to see that part of it go away.

[Letho]

Apparently, on Althanas, knowledge is not power. :P

[Max Dirks]

Explain this to me, please? Because from the initial sounds of it, it seems like you're saying there won't be any limit on characters, if created "right". I know I'm wrong, I just need to be told I'm wrong and why. It means that if you put things like "above average at swordplay" we aren't going to moderate it. However, if you put "can make a huge fireball or manipulate gravity" we will. In other words, skills, which are only linked to character knowledge and have an indirect affect on opposing characters, will not be moderated. Abilities, which can have a direct affect on opposing characters, will.

Remember the lockpicking debate? Everyone was like "lockpicking" is a skill that can directly affect opposing characters. Yes, I suppose that's true, but not without powergaming. Thus the system will correct itself for those rare dual use ability traits.
Will there at least be, for the bazaar, an option for moderator-character action for purchasing items? Beyond the auctions, I mean. I personally love the bazaar as it is; I'd hate to see that part of it go away.Probably so.

[Duffy]

I understand Max's point to be this, just to be annoying guy who adds further clarification to everything, even when not needed.

Duffy can sing to an Expert level.

Duffy is not a spellsinger, thus, he can start at level 0 with Expert in singing Scara Brae folk ditties because it can't have an affect on the opposing characters unless said character drafts that into their response.

Duffy is an Expert with his daggers.

He can excert influence on others and caus' harm, thus, he cannot start at level 0 with expert in this skill.

Knowledge and items with purtain to the IC world which do not possess innate ability to control or harm in themselves lose their restrictions, whilst those that do, are more rigidly controlled.

In effect, one of the largest sticking points to come from recent argumentative 'debates' has been address and resolved, even if it took time for this to be implemented by the admin body.

[Lord Anglekos]

Thank you both, Duffy and Max, for clarifying. Yes, I remember that debate. Wasn't personally here for it, but heaven knows I've read over the threads enough times. That sounds fair enough. And that sounds good, Max. I appreciate that you're trying to expand on currency, but some of us just like the feeling of going IC and purchasing things. I can name off two or three people for example, but need not to.
Well then, that's all the clarifying I need for now.
Well...except for one little thing.

Let's take Duffy's dagger example. Let's say that the character, by chance, read a book that taught him how to use daggers in an expert manner; but really, his experience and skill with them were below average at that point. So, he had the knowledge of how to use the daggers expertly, but his actual abilities with them ranged somewhere in the basic-skills range due to his inexperience.

Would something like that be allowed?

[Max Dirks]

You are incorrect, Duffy. If you're *just* singing, then you can be an expert no question. Similarly, if you're an *expert* with your daggers, you won't be moderated either. If you can use your singing to enhance the effectiveness of the daggers in some way, like casting an enchantment, you will be moderated.

The measure isn't harm, because anything can cause harm. It's whether it has a direct affect (can directly harm) or an indirect affect (can indirectly harm). Using your dagger example. Duffy can be an expert with daggers, but the opposing writer can similarly chose to be an expert or ignore it. However, if Duffy enters into a fight with a steel dagger against an opponent with a mythril dagger, you cannot ignore the greater strength of the mithril without losing points.

Basically, I'll say this. Adding things like "Duffy is an expert swordsman" into a profile is unnecessary because its irrelevant under anything except continuity and character. But that has to do with your own writing, it has nothing to do with the writing of another.

[Jasmine]

.

[Max Dirks]

I think you're being a bit premature with your "leave Althanas" comments, Jasmine.

Let me try to explain a bit more here. Your level two profile says that Jasmine is an "accomplished" sword fighter, but what exactly does that mean? Does it mean "accomplished" compared to something? Well, tell me, "accomplished" compared to who or what? You could mean accomplished compared to another level two, 21 year old Mori female on Althanas or something else entirely. Put simply, the adjective "accomplished," like all other adjectives used on Althanas to describe skills, is ridiculously subjective. To actually enforce it properly, we'd have to have a standard (or a permanent definition) for each possible adjective. That's far too time consuming, plus it's huge strain on creativity. If I want to make a war veteran (which would indicate that he'd be above average at most combat and survival related things) then I'm going to make a war veteran. You don't have to make ignorant newbies on Althanas anymore following the switch.

What will be enforced is abilities. A good way to split the two is using the terms subjective and non-subjective. Non-subjective, predictable, tangible powers are going to be moderated. That's strength, endurance, speed, spells, etc. So are stacked abilities (enhanced skills that become abilities). A good example of a stacked ability is a character that can put someone to sleep with their singing. Why? Because my character can be an expert mathematician and a fire mage. He can think of geometry instantly to set the proper trajectory of a fireball. But that doesn't change the fact that a fireball is still coming at your character's face. A level 1 fireball at a perfect trajectory can still be easily dodged. A level 15 fireball 20 yards in diameter is probably going to hit its target. Skills are all related to knowledge, which has only a subjective affect on an opposing character. Besides, you can say your character is an accomplished swordsman, but you're probably not. Isn't character knowledge ultimately limited to player knowledge anyway?

Finally, don't think that we aren't moderating "skills" at all. No, that's quite wrong. Only abilities are moderated in the RoG, but skills and abilities are moderated in judgments. If you power game either, you'll be punished. What's different is what categories are affected. Skills will affect continuity and character whereas abilities will affect action.

[Max Dirks]

Oops, missed the second part of your post. CP can be traded to develop your own concepts on Althanas. So basically, if you've got a sweet idea and you've been an active member of the site, you get to see your idea implemented.

There are a lot of underlying problems with the bazaar. It's not just that it's been inactive or hasn't had an active moderator. The value of money isn't what it used to be due to changes in the incentive system (basically allowing spoils for quests). Sadly, we haven't enforced continuity like we should have either. With 2.0, the judges will be recognizing the value of items and enforcing their use accordingly.

[Lord Anglekos]

Oops, missed the second part of your post. CP can be traded to develop your own concepts on Althanas. So basically, if you've got a sweet idea and you've been an active member of the site, you get to see your idea implemented.

There are a lot of underlying problems with the bazaar. It's not just that it's been inactive or hasn't had an active moderator. The value of money isn't what it used to be due to changes in the incentive system (basically allowing spoils for quests). Sadly, we haven't enforced continuity like we should have either. With 2.0, the judges will be recognizing the value of items and enforcing their use accordingly.

And what if said person has a sweet idea, but doesn't have the CP and hasn't been here that long? Are you just going to blow them and their idea of with the excuse of "I'm sorry, but you lack the necessary funds to implement this idea. Please try again"?

I'm just going to say that honestly, that's a really stupid idea if that's the way it's going to be. Not only us "oldbies" are going to be turned off by it, but think of the new members; the virgins of Althanas. They make their first character, step into the world of Althanas with big ideas and big dreams, only to be told that they're "too new" to truly implement them. Then whoops! There they go. And they'll spread the word, and then those friends will spread the word, and sure, maybe a few will try Althy out for themselves, only to be turned away for the same damned reason.

Seems kind of self destructive, don'tcha think?

About the bazaar. Yeah, there's an "incentive system" in place now, but people still have togo and actually quest for the items; hell, I was denied a chainmail suit in one of my threads that I got a 70 on, because I only had five posts. I could have gone out to the bazaar for it, but I simply didn't care that much; but that's one of the best things of the bazaar. Accessibility. You say there's a lot of underlying problems, but the biggest problem that we as the member base see is lack of moderator activity in it.

No offense, Amber Eyes, but Max, she's just one person. Hell, I would personally love to help run the bazaar; I love the entire concept of it. And I'm sure several others would love to pitch in. There's problems with it? Fine. Lay out those problems, and we'll find ways to fix them, if just for the sake of returning the Bazaar to it's former glory.

Look, this is just my personal opinions. I can't speak for the rest of Althanas. But from what I have read, I'm not the only one.

[Max Dirks]

And what if said person has a sweet idea, but doesn't have the CP and hasn't been here that long? You join staff. CP rewards participation and loyalty for those not interested in joining staff. It's a way for us to say thanks. And by concepts, I mean Althanas systems and events. That would include things like a freeform RPG, a bounty system, black market, a feature quest. Those sorts of things. I'm not talking about adding new races or locations, which are things you are always welcome and encouraged to do.

The bazaar isn't going anywhere. You're just losing the RP aspect of it (and, inherently, the ability to haggle). The accessibility isn't going anywhere. If anything, it will be enhanced by instant transactions.

Bear in mind, nothing I've said in this thread is 100% final yet. Althanas 2.0 won't be released until January 1st and the staff is still developing alot of stuff.

[Lord Anglekos]

You join staff. CP rewards participation and loyalty for those not interested in joining staff. It's a way for us to say thanks.

The bazaar isn't going anywhere. You're just losing the RP aspect of it (and, inherently, the ability to haggle). The accessibility isn't going anywhere. If anything, it will be enhanced by instant transactions.

Bear in mind, nothing I've said in this thread is 100% final yet. Althanas 2.0 won't be released until January 1st and the staff is still developing alot of stuff.

Fine. I won't push any more on the bazaar issue. My stance still stands on it, but as long as I have the option of roleplaying it out, I suppose it could theoretically work.
But saying, simply, to "join staff" as the other option to CP sounds very...well, it sounds like bull, to put it plainly. Normally, I agree with the staff on things, but this stretches the limits.
Before I go on, answer me this; how do you plan for members to gain these points? Is it going to be like normal GP, where they gain it through quests/battles and such? Or will they have other options of gradually gaining CP? Because I can see how this idea could potentially work, if CP is generally easier to gain than GP and the other system.

[Max Dirks]

I edit ninja'd you, man.

We haven't decided how CP will work yet. It might be a per post program.

[Lord Anglekos]

I would suggest that. Sure, there will be the idiots who will try to spam posts just for the CP, but I'm sure that's an easy problem to avoid. Perhaps, throw up a thread, and people can request such and such amount of CP for such and such amount of posts. Yeah, this isn't without it's fair share of problems, and I'm just brainstorming. The reason I'm so worked up about this is that Stella herself just had a great idea to help make Akashima more cultural, and then I come along and read this and here it hits me like a slap in the face. Especially seeing as I encouraged her to expand upon her idea, saying "Yeah, the mods will listen to ya, they listen to people's ideas". Really kills me to tell her I was wrong.
Problem is, Max, that when you say "join staff", you're making it sound like the easiest thing in the world. When in reality, you have to wait at least a month to two months for the staff to make sure you're not going to make a character and disappear for two years before returning unexpectedly. I'm a hypocrite, I know, seeing as I did that exact same thing myself, but just further proves my point; you guys aren't just going to hire any bum off the street to help run the system. But y'know, maybe those bums have some pretty good ideas.
I know, I know, you're going to give me the "CP fixes that" response. I'm just ranting here.

[Caysim Winters]

Perhaps CP should be a reward option in the Rubric. A decent example, how well did they actually do this roleplay? Does it deserve CP?

[Jasmine]

.

[Melancor]

CP can be traded to develop your own concepts on Althanas. So basically, if you've got a sweet idea and you've been an active member of the site, you get to see your idea implemented.

CP rewards participation and loyalty for those not interested in joining staff. It's a way for us to say thanks. And by concepts, I mean Althanas systems and events.

We haven't decided how CP will work yet. It might be a per post program.

If that system is something that would apply strictly to IC posts it would make more sense. But I still see how that could affect people like me. Lurkers. It basically makes me question if people regard participation and "loyalty" the same way. I simply saying this because I think there are some people like me that are not as prolific as most of the other "oldies" of the site but are still active even if not participating. And mind you, writing, perhaps ever so slowly, but steadily.

So just to be clear, because since it's just being brought up it seems hazy, this is a participation reward system. When you say events and systems, are you, for example, referring to something like the vignette contests? For the sake of this example: would everyone who participates be rewarded with CP and then there would be the winer? But how does that relate to a per post program? Is it going to work much like how the Writer's Workshop reward system work at the moment?

I'm likely misunderstanding something very basic about the idea, please let me know.

[Atzar]

Not understanding some of the ire aimed at the proposed CP system. As I'm understanding it, CP can be redeemed to set up features based on the wishes of the buyer. You guys seem to be jumping to the conclusion that you'll need CP to get the mods to listen to your ideas, but not once have I seen Dirks say the staff will no longer accept or consider suggestions submitted the old way.

It's a way to leave a larger footprint on Althanas, not an excuse for the staff not to pay attention to you.

[Lord Anglekos]

Not understanding some of the ire aimed at the proposed CP system. As I'm understanding it, CP can be redeemed to set up features based on the wishes of the buyer. You guys seem to be jumping to the conclusion that you'll need CP to get the mods to listen to your ideas, but not once have I seen Dirks say the staff will no longer accept or consider suggestions submitted the old way.

It's a way to leave a larger footprint on Althanas, not an excuse for the staff not to pay attention to you.
Let me put it this way to you, Atzar. The CP system, that way that I see it, is very much like this cheesy in-character example.

Let's say a guy is heading to the castle to speak to his king. He's not your high-strung, arrogant noble, he's just a poor guy who happens to love his land. However, he sees things falling apart all around him, so, in best interest of the land, he goes to the king to talk about these problems; and perhaps, he has a way to fix them. His "idea". However, when he gets to the front gate, he's told he can't even SEE the king without paying a little up front to the big bad guard. When he tells the guard he doesn't have the money, the big man turns the little guy away, saying to come back when he does.

And about the last part of the first paragraph; If Dirks and the staff still is, then the very concept of these CP is obsolete. They mean nothing, truly, other than a figurehead for people to wave around. Or, if they truly mean to make use of it, then the only way that both Caysim and I see it as (despite our general disagreement on the actual usefulness) is a way to bribe the staff, thus ushering a new era in of corrupt bias.

Which brings me to another point. Rather than retype it all out, however, this is the conversation that Caysim and I had. Some parts have been edited out.

codyislost13 (11:59:17 PM): posted an idea in the rubric
codyislost13 (11:59:23 PM): i swore i was gonna stay out of it
codyislost13 (11:59:34 PM): but reading some of your shit brings out a better part of me
codyislost13 (11:59:37 PM): wanting to help
codyislost13 (12:00:14 AM): i believe it shall be a good implement
Anglekos (12:01:19 AM): All I'm gonna say is that people better get a shitload of CP per thread then, or it's not going to be worth it. Some people want their ideas implemented before they make a character, just so they can make the character according to the implements. yeah, there's a way to get around that, but making a pseudo-character just to get the CP to get that idea implemented is lame. Just lame.
codyislost13 (12:02:31 AM): CP's worth will be calculated soon
codyislost13 (12:02:39 AM): it may only take 1 to get implememntation
codyislost13 (12:02:48 AM): plus, CP may not always be rewarded
codyislost13 (12:02:57 AM): there may be certain qualifications
Anglekos (12:03:01 AM): It definitely just sounds like bribing, the whole concept of CP, to me.
codyislost13 (12:03:04 AM): such as no solo rps to obtain it
codyislost13 (12:03:20 AM): it is bribing. its been discussed how activity is low
codyislost13 (12:03:32 AM): people do things for things in return
Anglekos (12:04:19 AM): Then it's bull in general. That's just going to prove, then, that the system is corrupt, and going to justify everthing the pricks like Saxon and Visla have said. The staff is digging it's own grave.
codyislost13 (12:04:34 AM): i don't beleive so
Anglekos (12:05:09 AM): Well then, let me ask you this Caysim.
codyislost13 (12:05:17 AM): okay
Anglekos (12:05:39 AM): Should one idea be implemented over another, even if the latter is better, simply because the mind behind the concept happened to have more CP to spend?
codyislost13 (12:06:21 AM): you are seeing it as if people will be rewarded CP like candy from a machine. the idea that you will get candy IF you deposit that quarter
codyislost13 (12:06:25 AM): it will not be as such
codyislost13 (12:06:35 AM): CP won't be given, it'll be earned
codyislost13 (12:06:41 AM): the idea of CP is that quarter
codyislost13 (12:06:51 AM): you had to earn that quarter to get that CP
Anglekos (12:07:54 AM): That's not answering my question. The process is still the same, and eventually, through either them "earning" or having it "given", someone's going to have more CP than someone else. It's inevitable. The more CP they have, the more Influence they have to spend. The end result is still the same.
codyislost13 (12:08:21 AM): but look at who will have it
codyislost13 (12:08:39 AM): do you think some prick who runs around fussing and arguing the system, such as visla, will have that CP
codyislost13 (12:08:44 AM): no people like you will have that CP
codyislost13 (12:08:58 AM): those people with the initiative to actually progress the site and enjoy the site
codyislost13 (12:10:20 AM): and the implementions won't be something that will just run around effecting the system as a whole. it's not like if I have 150 CP i will be able to re arrange the battle system or the rubric, it'd be less that that. such as CP may buy items that are rare, or CP may get that featured quest for your PG
Anglekos (12:11:07 AM): Then that's a biased, corrupt system on it's own; Visla is a prick, but he's a smart prick. He's got great points, and great ideas. Who's to say that his points are any worse than mine? Sure, he may not be liked, but at least he says something. The way you're putting it, the system sounds just like the way others have been complaining it's been like for years; an elitist society. And only a very, very few want to be part of a system like that.
codyislost13 (12:11:59 AM): so you believe those people who put forth effort shouldn't be rewarded?
Anglekos (12:14:04 AM): No. This will be my last say. I believe anyone, and EVERYONE, who puts forth effort, should be rewarded. If it's something small, then fine; but at least it's an acknowledgment. But it doesn't matter who that effort came from; to prevent the system from being biased, one has to treat CP like GP; the more you have, the more Influence you have. Which brings up a whole new level of corruptive bias on it's own. So that's a problem that has to be fixed as well. Like I said, I'm done. I'm burnt out from this whole ordeal. And i have to go. So bye.

That's 'bout it. It pretty much sums up the concerns I have with the CP system.
And I'm hoping, praying, that someone can tell me that I'm wrong, and give me a legitimate reason why.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Recommendation:

Don't call anything CP. You're on the internet.

Additional comment:

All this stuff about "skills" with weapons not being tangible abilities is a little short-sighted. Swinging a sword or blocking a swing is something that I doubt anyone would consider a "tangible ability." What is a "tangible" sword ability? Remember, it cannot be magical. I want to know what separates Joe Peasant who found a longsword from a Grandmaster Duelist. Aside from "stats" like reflexes and strength, it's just "knowledge."

Consider instead Bob Hedge-Wizard who just picked up his first magical tome and the High Wizard of some society. What separates them? Probably a lot of spells. All "tangible" abilities. Probably no stats at all, since Althanas doesn't have the concept of spellpower or intellect affecting spells.

There's significant lopsidedness in magic vs non-magic characters. One side has the advantage over the other in a lot of ways. That's fine. What isn't good is that they're rarely intentional and they aren't especially balanced against one another.


This is all from a "game" perspective, obviously.

[Rayse Valentino]

I, for one, plan to acquire a great deal of child pornography (mostly from Godhand), and I thank the staff for allowing me to use that as currency for new and exciting changes.

[Saxon]

It's a way for us to say thanks. And by concepts, I mean Althanas systems and events. That would include things like a freeform RPG, a bounty system, black market, a feature quest.

If anyone proposes another featured quest and gets rewarded for it, I'm going to stab them at the nearest taco stand and stay long enough to watch them bleed out.

Forewarned.

The CP system sounds kind of silly, but whatever. I sat around while the incentive program and the gold-for-judgments plan was being talked about. I didn't support either of them and tuckered myself out arguing about it.

However, I do propose a new and enticing incentive program if you are willing to reward those of us who contribute with ideas that you'd actually use in the form of payment. In an agreement, legal mind you, if my idea were accepted, for example, I could receive a nice sum in the form of what we like to call money. Dollars for ideas!

What a grand and novel idea. I know if I were paid, you could buy my loyalty easily.

[Duffy]

If you were paid for pulling ideas out your arse Saxon, we'd all be millionaires :p.

[Lord Anglekos]

Now that Max has the new rubric updates up officially, what does Althanas think?

[Atzar]

I like it. I've never been a fan of the Continuity category, but whatever. I like the changes in general, and in particular I applaud the decision to do away with Technique.

I'd caution the judges to make sure Creativity isn't just treated like a second Wild Card; the way Dirks worded it could leave a lot of room for it to be a very subjective category.

Aside from that, I don't have anything to add until I see it in action.

[Atzar]

...yyyep...

[Letho]

http://www.hollow-hill.com/sabina/images/care-o-meter.jpg

[Duffy]

I hate it when someone steals my Lolcatz idea...

[Elrundir]

I agree with Atzar. The changes look mostly promising to me, but as with any change to the rubric it'll be time and experience that tell us how it's actually doing.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Creativity is one of the most blithely subjective categories to date. I always hated Strategy back in the day and I think Action was already a problem. Renaming it isn't going to help. That concept should have been merged in elsewhere. It simply doesn't make sense in a solo. That's fine I guess, but you really should make a generally applicable rubric. Strategy harkens back to when the rubric was a battle rubric.

Continuity as it stands is just a stupid name for what the category represents. I'm not sure if the category itself is retarded yet. How well "integrated" into Althanas something is seems bullshit subjective to me given that what is and isn't canon is generated every day.

My Eudaemonians are planeshifting technocrats from an alternate future of Earth. Does that jive well with Althanas? Not really, but I've been using them so long that several people acknowledge them. So does that count for Continuity? Is it just "do people buy it"? Does it help that I portray them as outsiders with significant problems?

I think that is a good example of what could go wrong with Continuity. I don't care about the answers vis'a'vis my own writing. I just think it shows the problem well.

[Saxon]

I think the rubric should be open for restructuring if this doesn't work out well.

I still don't see the necessity of the wildcard since the entire rubric is meant to give the Judge an area of discretion by design. If a judge likes something that I wrote, he can mention it and apply the appropriate amount of points in the area it pertains to at his discretion. There is no need for an area of the rubric to allocate bonus points that aren't bonus points at all considering they are weighted by the overall score anyway. But hey, if giving 10 points to a judge makes them feel empowered or some shit that they can tack on a plus 10 making my score jump from an 80 to a 90 regardless of what their reasoning for it is, go for it. I suppose in the end, I win either way.

I think action and dialogue were pivotal points to the rubric we used, and removing them or dare I say.. relabeling them under new definitions in an effort to strengthen the fight in The War On Bunnying, was a very bad mistake. Honestly, how often do we deal with powergaming on this site? Really. It seems like it would be common sense to those who have been on this site long enough that blatant bunnying or powergaming would be detrimental to one's score, so doing so would be against one's interests and avoiding the matter entirely in favor of better scores, experience and favorable judgments is incentive enough.

It just seems to be an application of blatant paranoia over circumstances that are fairly uncommon in most threads, and only really relevant in tournaments or battles. In which case, it is a substantial argument to make that there should be two rubrics instead of just one. One for quests which focuses on the story elements and how well the member achieved in those different areas, and another as a battle rubric that could be used to regulate and manage powergaming/bunnying while also focusing on scoring in a way that is favorable to competition over development.

Right now, I think the rubric as it stands is a combination of both and will do either job poorly. Considering battles and quests are two seperate mediums, some thought should be put into this idea of two seperate rubrics instead of trying to shoehorn all the elements of both of them into one rubric and try to make it one-size-fits-all.

[Tainted Bushido]

I think the rubric should be open for restructuring if this doesn't work out well.

I still don't see the necessity of the wildcard since the entire rubric is meant to give the Judge an area of discretion by design. If a judge likes something that I wrote, he can mention it and apply the appropriate amount of points in the area it pertains to at his discretion. There is no need for an area of the rubric to allocate bonus points that aren't bonus points at all considering they are weighted by the overall score anyway. But hey, if giving 10 points to a judge makes them feel empowered or some shit that they can tack on a plus 10 making my score jump from an 80 to a 90 regardless of what their reasoning for it is, go for it. I suppose in the end, I win either way.

Mehtinks you missed the point of wildcard. There should be no discretion, there should be no bias in the judging, that is entirely what wildcard is for. If I don't like a character and abhor him, then they still get points in character, because the character brought about an emotional reaction from me the reader.

I think too many judges forget they aren't supposed to let their views get in the way of honestly critiquing the works, creating a situation of "I didn't like it so I'm going to slam it in the judgement"


My Eudaemonians are planeshifting technocrats from an alternate future of Earth. Does that jive well with Althanas? Not really, but I've been using them so long that several people acknowledge them. So does that count for Continuity? Is it just "do people buy it"? Does it help that I portray them as outsiders with significant problems?

Pretty much nailed it. That would get you points in continuity, because you aren't forcing a merging of the two. You are ackonowledging althanian canon by making your character have to overcome the differences in culture. That is why you would score higher in continuity than some rip off character that magically knows the language.

[Christoph]

I think too many judges forget they aren't supposed to let their views get in the way of honestly critiquing the works, creating a situation of "I didn't like it so I'm going to slam it in the judgement"


On one hand, I agree entirely with what you just said. On the other hand, the new rubric for 3.0 adds a second category that, if not actively encourages judges to "let their views get in the way", definitely makes it far easier for that to happen. Judging will always be subjective, but that doesn't mean we should exacerbate the situation. That's why I'm not fond of Creativity.

Beyond that, aside from some of the category names not making a lot of sense, I'm generally okay with the changes.