The Pub Discussion Board

Neitherspace wrote:

IRc dosen't work very well on macs in my exp

Since IRC is nothing more than a protocol, I would say that is the fault of the program(s) you were using.

Net Wolf

That's what my computer says it is.  Congratulations on remembering it.  I'm not sure I would have remembered mine after two years.

Neitherspace wrote:

Unworthy thats the beauty of macs you can load windows onto em and cross boot into either OS (course I've been a mac-o-phile for almost a decade now so it would be jut as expensive for me to switch as it would you)

Yes and no.  I think you are talking about Boot Camp and you need to be running the systems with Intel CPUs

i got on sol just fine so it might just be you

Net Wolf wrote:

but adding authors just for the sake of adding authors puts us right back where EWP was when I left it in 2005...

Just regarding this - if it hadn't been for EWP, I'd never have got off the ground.  Perhaps a system where people submit a case as to why you should accept them, which is then put before the current donors for a vote, would work?  After all, it's unlikely that the relatively small number of people currently within the system are going to know of a substantial proportion of the potential out there.

That said, I'm not pushing for you to get more authors.  I rather like it how it is.

CSquared

Well, this is getting interesting.

I was only asking about posting here because there are a few people on this site whose opinion I value but this is really starting to sound like pure snobbery to me.

I can understand wanting to keep the numbers low from an administrative point of view, to keep them low to maintain community etc which was how this section of the discussion started out but now...

Who decides what the standard should be? What would you base it on? Are we talking about writing ability? Story telling ability? Spelling ability? Maybe it should be based on who can suck up the hardest?

I am under no illusion about my paltry offerings and I doubt that I could live up to many of the standards that some feel should be in place here, however; EWP was the reason I started to write and now that site is apparently on the decline where else should an aspiring or frustrated wannabe author go for help, support, guidance or constructive criticism?

Setting a minimum standard is one thing but to do it to the exclusion of many other considerations smacks of elitism and in my opinion would kill this site as surely as picking the ten worst stories you can find and making them your headline acts.

I don't mean to be overly confrontational about this but that's just how it appears this discussion turning

Net I wasn't having a pop at you. I understood from the other thread and from your previous comments about what you are trying to achieve and your reasons for it. I'm sorry if you felt my previous post was a personal attack.

All I was doing was pointing out that this particular discussion was becoming more and more "cliquish" and more "Us and them". I hadn't felt that this was the case before but it just seemed to be headed that way.

CSquared wrote:

Net Wolf wrote:

but adding authors just for the sake of adding authors puts us right back where EWP was when I left it in 2005...

That said, I'm not pushing for you to get more authors.  I rather like it how it is.

CSquared

acctually so do I and im not even on the site its forced me to try to bring my work up to the lvl net wants on this site

Not that my opinion counts for much, but I don't think it's actually an "us versus them" mentality.
Like it's been pointed out several times, if you don't have standards then you have chaos. Sure, chaos can be fun in certain things, but look at sites like asstr. I've been there and there is a LOT of shit, sure there are some gems, but damn it's a mess sifting through the shit to find them.
So, do you let any and all post, thereby increasing the shit count and the webmaster work load? Or do you set standards to limit both?
The logical, and sane, choice is to set standards.
It isn't exactly an elitist or clique based attitude, it's desire and practicality.
Here's a thought...Publish your IM info all across the net. You might find some great people, but chances are you'll find a lot of dipshits. Instead you only give your IM info to people you want to have on your IM. Should that be considered snobbish?
Or maybe post your home address and invite whoever to stop by, because that's what this is. Net's house.
Now I can't speak for anyone else, but if you're in my house then you play by my rules. Doesn't matter how snobbish you think said rules are.
They are the rules, period.

Okay, I'm done rambling.

But Net, without rambling, how many posts would there be on the forums? XD

CSquared

Hi, everybody, I'm... well... me. ~to self: there, the introduction's made; guess I'd better get to the point before I start rambling ~
What about editors? Is there anything in store for them at The Pub? And if so, is it at all possible to couple a set of trusted editors with a set of potential authors (if such set of potential authors should ever come into existence) for an evaluation? A group of evaluating editors could set individual scores for 'pilot' stories, and judge literary competence. Because the judgment came from a group of people, it wouldn't be 'snobbish;' while the entire process of evaluation would 'sort' authors of competency and work ethic from those without either. Instead of making decisions such a group would only work properly in this setting by making recommendations.
    Because a council, group, board, or gaggle of editors would only judge literary ability, such a group should not be allowed decisis. Ultimately a judgment for entry to The Pub (to the best of my knowledge, according to previous discussion) comes from the ability of the person requesting entry to create ‘art,’ something completely un-mechanical, and non-tangible.  Such a flock of evaluating editors (Ha! Alliteration!) would only set a ‘standard’ of competency for writers; a standard with no relation to the potential authors’ personalities, the aesthetic (try spelling that one) qualities of their stories, or any of a thousand other things relating to their acceptance.
    As to the feasibility of getting such a swarm of editors together, I say only this (and at this point I think it’s enough- this post is getting a touch blustery): A determining council of editors would be able to function with any amount of editors between five and nine. Any more editors would cause the process of becoming an author here to last forever, and any less would allow personal feelings to get in the way of evaluation. Once again: it’s best to have trusted people fill positions like these to which I refer- not because of personal feelings clouding the credentials of applicants, but because otherwise such a group might make recommendations based on an ‘I like the warm fuzzy feelings in this story’ basis.
That said about entries to authorship here (whew!), I have only two more paragraphs I promise!
    From creating a competence sentry from editors it is but a small step to creating a guild of editors. From previous conversation I have seen that the ideas of establishing a guild of writers and of helping new writers are still floating around somewhere. An editors’ guild would go nicely with both of these things, as well as allow for a greater pool of people from which to select said sentry (Again!). A test similar to that NW has mentioned previously for editors could easily be used to govern membership.
    There, (finally) last paragraph; and I don’t think I could’ve outlined my suggestion better without a Venn diagram! I would like to (in keeping with the apparent tradition around here) now flinch and remind all ‘listening’ that this over-inflated bit of wind was only a suggestion; one probably not needed at this particular moment in time due to the fact that a thousand and one things press on all of us at each second, screaming for attention. My thinking, however, is that if I am to make a suggestion, I will do so completely, and not simply point in an arbitrary direction and say ‘I wanna go now! Now!’

With assurances that I’m not in the least as formal-sounding in real life, and thanks for listening,

The N Storm of Justice

I don't usually sign that way either, but this is the first time (I think) all of you have heard from me.

Last edited by TheNStorm (2007-07-31 02:59:03)

I never was any good at starting posts, so I'll just launch in.

Reply:

1.    It's true that people lack interest, and it’s completely true that a project like the one I suggested isn’t feasible right now, but as an eventuality it could develop with a combination of community and growing authorship.
2.    Average ‘American English’ may suck. However in all of the net someone must exist with both knowledge and interest… I think. I hope. I… never mind, you could be right. Still, though, if numbers start picking up there may be sufficient numbers to gather at least five such people together. I don’t see the glass as mostly empty, it’s just only one fourth full.
3.    Maybe guild isn’t the right word: repository seems more appropriate. Still, within a guild, editors could improve their abilities to deal with the English language. ‘Younger’ editors could ask ‘older’ editors about story sections they’re not sure of. Perhaps (I might be a touch optimistic here too…) eventually editors could look at editing as a learning experience, a communication thing that goes on between authors and editors. Perhaps such an organization could eventually take the mindset away from editors of knowing everything there is to know about writing… and perhaps that change could do much to improve both editing and writing overall.
     And now for the five words that everyone seems fond of saying in story forums (at least when they’re in danger of finding someone that might possibly disagree with them): it is only a suggestion. I hate to make suggestions like these when I have almost no knowledge about operating a web site, or about how much work I’m proposing for other people , but I have little else to offer than my own skill at editing. In any case, this suggestion isn’t meant for the now, exactly. As I said in the suggestion itself, I have no idea of timeframes for implementation, as they depend on a thousand things I don’t know about. Suggestions are made for consideration and thought; they are not fully fledged plans or decisions- these I cannot make here.
Umm… something that sounds awesome as a closing for this post
The N Storm

Last edited by TheNStorm (2007-07-31 19:09:01)

Too true, I suppose. Optimism and coffee go hand in hand, and when the caffeine gets low I can't help but disbelieve that there might be enough editors. Still, who can tell what the future holds? (as somewhere in a secret base an alarm sounds due to the corny nature of that last comment) Ehh...

So...

How's it going?

     -The N Storm