Tweets VII: Tweet Child of Mine

19192949697393

Comments

  • EveriineEveriine Wise Old Swordsbird / Brontaur Indianapolis, IN, USA
    I, too, have used precedent in the past to explain why I designed things the way I did. Now I know not to do that. That's helpful information.
    Everiine is a man, and is very manly. This MAN before you is so manly you might as well just gender bend right now, cause he's the manliest man that you ever did see. His manly shape has spurned many women and girlyer men to boughs of fainting. He stands before you in a manly manerific typical man-like outfit which is covered in his manly motto: "I am a man!"

    Daraius said: You gotta risk it for the biscuit.

    Pony power all the way, yo. The more Brontaurs the better.
  • Sylandra said:

    And the Charites are human, sometimes they too make mistakes. 
    Not just the charities. Check this out. 

    In U.S. law[edit]

    In the context of legal usage, American lexicographer Bryan A. Garner writes that "The phrase is comprised of is always wrong and should be replaced by either is composed of or comprises."[19] (Mark Liberman points out that the The U.S. Code "apparently includes some 1,880 instances of 'comprised of', and changing them will require many acts of Congress…".[20])

  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    I'd like to expand that that continues even if when you requested minestrone, the waiter returns to inform you that the restaurant doesn't have the proper stock to make a minestrone. 

    Or to break out of the analogy, if you propose a design that pushed the rules and the response was that it was out of line, then argue a case politely, but be prepared to gracefully accept that it's just not possible or not appropriate.

    (I will forever regret your absence, my voltaic earrings...)
  • SylandraSylandra Join Queue for Mafia Games The Last Mafia Game
    edited February 2016
    Hah, @Kaalak!
    Daraius said:
    "Oh yeah, you're a naughty mayor, aren't you? Misfile that Form MA631-D. Comptroller Shevat's got a nice gemstone disc for you, but yer gonna have to beg for it."
  • My issue was not at needing to change something. My issue is the lack of documentation and clear resources, especially on something that is stylistic (Which, yes, this instance is. Literary sources and scholars do not agree on and still debate, and the rejection in itself not really covering bases. If there is a specific rubric in these instances, a specific source or website we are to follow in cases that are still debated, that needs to be listed and intuitive to find). 

    If you want to make that into something other than it is, that is your own projection and entirely on you.
  • I want an adaptation of a brutal military boardgame but instead of armies on the field the plane is the English language with satrapies of Law, Science, Media etc. where grammarians and scholars fight and bleed out from a thousand pen strokes on the hallowed planes of Culture.
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    edited February 2016
    Kaalak said:
    I want an adaptation of a brutal military boardgame but instead of armies on the field the plane is the English language with satrapies of Law, Science, Media etc. where grammarians and scholars fight and bleed out from a thousand pen strokes on the hallowed planes of Culture.
    That sounds like a Mafia setup.

    EDIT: Also, it's Charites. Much like the Oneiroi and Furies, They are a collective personality based on Greek mythology.
  • SylandraSylandra Join Queue for Mafia Games The Last Mafia Game
    Ranah said:
    My issue was not at needing to change something. My issue is the lack of documentation and clear resources, especially on something that is stylistic (Which, yes, this instance is. Literary sources and scholars do not agree on and still debate, and the rejection in itself not really covering bases. If there is a specific rubric in these instances, a specific source or website we are to follow in cases that are still debated, that needs to be listed and intuitive to find). 

    If you want to make that into something other than it is, that is your own projection and entirely on you.

    Sure, and that is really frustrating! But they've made their stance on this clear to you, even though we can debate that stance should have been clear earlier. Ball is now on your court. Designing is a lot of fun and I hope this hasn't soured your experience with it in Lusternia. I'm sure that was no one's intent.

    For what it's worth, the Charites are very approachable. I message them from time to time to check if something is ok, like referring to "prima donna" in a design. It's not as nice as having a cheat sheet handy, but they do answer questions if you have them.
    Daraius said:
    "Oh yeah, you're a naughty mayor, aren't you? Misfile that Form MA631-D. Comptroller Shevat's got a nice gemstone disc for you, but yer gonna have to beg for it."
  • ShaddusShaddus , the Leper Messiah Outside your window.
    What Sylandra said. It should also be noted that the Charites may be susceptible to bribery via well designed deserts. Don't tell them I told you.
    Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    Is that why my sandwich got through scot-free on the second go-round?
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    Actually, while we're here discussing this, does anyone know offhand if mortal reviewers/Charites have access to a design's history when they re-review it? ie: Can reviewer B see that reviewer A rejected a design for not wearing pink on Wednesdays if the trademaster deleted the comment?
  • SylandraSylandra Join Queue for Mafia Games The Last Mafia Game
    Want to say yes as long as you don't delete the comments?
    Daraius said:
    "Oh yeah, you're a naughty mayor, aren't you? Misfile that Form MA631-D. Comptroller Shevat's got a nice gemstone disc for you, but yer gonna have to beg for it."
  • And this is why Leo lets @Lavinya do all the designing.

    image

    06/30/2014 19:37 Silvanus channels the power of the Megalith of Doom for you, stripping you of your Vernal Ascendant status.......bastard!!

  • LavinyaLavinya Queen of Snark Australia
    Luce said:
    Actually, while we're here discussing this, does anyone know offhand if mortal reviewers/Charites have access to a design's history when they re-review it? ie: Can reviewer B see that reviewer A rejected a design for not wearing pink on Wednesdays if the trademaster deleted the comment?
    I'd be surprised if the Charites couldn't see all of it. Reviewers cannot see the reasons unless you leave them in the comments.



  • Christ, you people will argue about anything...

  • I've got over 150 designs and I can't say I've ever had to delete a design that was rejected. Especially this last year, where I've just been crazy prolific, I haven't even had that long turn around on rejected items, unless it's rejected 2-3 times. Heck, even since @Ranah posted the initial complaint, I had a design rejected, fixed, resubmitted, and approved. This "you have to delete and make fresh" thing, while I know it's an option that has probably worked for some people, hardly seems like a requirement right now. Maybe it's just my luck?

    I've always wondered about deleting comments, though. Is it bad practice to fix something and then remove the comments telling you what to fix? I hate pulling up designs and seeing that stuff in the comments, but if it's better for whoever gets it the next time to know what happened before, I might can stop. It'll be hard, though.
    The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure pure reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog!
  • Stratas said:
    I've got over 150 designs and I can't say I've ever had to delete a design that was rejected. Especially this last year, where I've just been crazy prolific, I haven't even had that long turn around on rejected items, unless it's rejected 2-3 times. Heck, even since @Ranah posted the initial complaint, I had a design rejected, fixed, resubmitted, and approved. This "you have to delete and make fresh" thing, while I know it's an option that has probably worked for some people, hardly seems like a requirement right now. Maybe it's just my luck?

    I've always wondered about deleting comments, though. Is it bad practice to fix something and then remove the comments telling you what to fix? I hate pulling up designs and seeing that stuff in the comments, but if it's better for whoever gets it the next time to know what happened before, I might can stop. It'll be hard, though.
    I always deleted the comments post-approval (the designer can do so if it's public, or the trademaster can do it for the cartel)
  • @Stratas I had one rejected and it sat there for 3-4 days after I resubmitted. Starting fresh with the same content but on a new design had it approved within like, 4 hours. Not as much a problem for somethings, but for that, and with this armband, they're items to put runes onto, rather than just permanencing/sticking them on some random thing found in a store (when it costs so much to remove them and place them on something different later on). 
  • SylandraSylandra Join Queue for Mafia Games The Last Mafia Game
    Yeah, when something gets rejected the people who saw it before can't comment on it again iirc. Hence why rejections can be kind of slow.
    Daraius said:
    "Oh yeah, you're a naughty mayor, aren't you? Misfile that Form MA631-D. Comptroller Shevat's got a nice gemstone disc for you, but yer gonna have to beg for it."
  • edited February 2016
    Stratas said:
    I've got over 150 designs and I can't say I've ever had to delete a design that was rejected. Especially this last year, where I've just been crazy prolific, I haven't even had that long turn around on rejected items, unless it's rejected 2-3 times. Heck, even since @Ranah posted the initial complaint, I had a design rejected, fixed, resubmitted, and approved. This "you have to delete and make fresh" thing, while I know it's an option that has probably worked for some people, hardly seems like a requirement right now. Maybe it's just my luck?

    I've always wondered about deleting comments, though. Is it bad practice to fix something and then remove the comments telling you what to fix? I hate pulling up designs and seeing that stuff in the comments, but if it's better for whoever gets it the next time to know what happened before, I might can stop. It'll be hard, though.
    Yeah I think I deleted the comments when I was TM too. This was irl years ago. I was only thinking of 'well the comments don't look aesthetically pleasing' when I did so and the design was published. 
  • Okay, yeah, 3-4 days sounds about right. But, unless it's, like, an instrument I make for a newbie, I very rarely am making something I need right away (or ever) so that kind of turn around doesn't bother me. But things can be weird always. I had some splendour robes sit for over a week on first run, for some reason. Then they got hit with a rejection, I fixed it, and I got my approval same day. *shrug*
    The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure pure reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog!
  • Ranah said:
    My issue was not at needing to change something. My issue is the lack of documentation and clear resources, especially on something that is stylistic (Which, yes, this instance is. Literary sources and scholars do not agree on and still debate, and the rejection in itself not really covering bases. If there is a specific rubric in these instances, a specific source or website we are to follow in cases that are still debated, that needs to be listed and intuitive to find). 

    If you want to make that into something other than it is, that is your own projection and entirely on you.
    I think it's a little disingenuous to talk about "documentation" of rules while in the same breath complaining about the Charites not considering your "stylistic" preferences. If the Charites' prefer the stylistic application of "comprised" instead of "comprised of", then that's their right. There's no documentation to be had because it's a stylistic interpretation, every bit as stylistic as yours. You prefer oranges, they prefer apples.

    Who wins? The person who owns this game. (In this case, the administrators of the game - ie. the Charites)

    Designing has always been controversial insofar as the designers want to have their cake and eat it too - only when you acknowledge the fact that this game is IRE's game, and that how THEY want THEIR product to look like is the only judgement that matters (whether their judgement stays consistent or inconsistent over time is their problem), then will you find it a worthwhile expenditure of your effort. The Charites are as much creative creatures as you are, and they have their opinions on what is stylistically better. And at the end of the day, their judgement trumps yours, that's the nature of approval.

    Anyone who wants to do creative writing or work of any kind will know that trying to decide on a single "stylistic guide" or "stylistic documentation" is literally oxymoronic. Stylization is always unique to the person. Whoever you can find who shares exactly the same stylistic preferences as you, is a person whose preferences you've not understood deeply enough. Bonus points if you find someone whose stylistic preferences don't change over time, or even with their mood. You've probably managed to find an inanimate object and mistook that for a person. Documentation of the Charites' stylistic preferences? Yeah, it's in their brain. Go ahead and pull it out, just don't be surprised when it changes after they've had a bout of diarrhea.

    If you're complaining about the editorial opinion of a mortal reviewer, you probably have a better case to stand on. Even then, that case will probably be a ten year old plastic beer case that's breaking apart at the seams. Mortal reviewers had already gone through their own approval tests - and were deemed to have stylistic opinions similar enough to the Charites (or the approver's) that they can act as emulators and approximate representatives. Still, contesting a mortal reviewer's tastes is something that you at least have a chance to win with. Trying to contest a Charites decision? It'll go something like this:

    "Comprised of" is not wrong in your opinion. Fine. It's wrong in the Charites' opinion. End of story.

  • edited February 2016
    The Charities are not the owners of Lusternia or IRE ie Estarra. 

    They are appointed volunteer former players. And the problem is style preferences changes from person to person. 

    Sometimes Estarra will make a ruling as the Charities though. 

    It is not unreasonable for a very clear set of rules to be laid down. If they change, then you draft and post news rules before implementing them. 

    This is no different from patch notes or change logs.  
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    So, how about 'dem orcs?
  • CyndarinCyndarin used Flamethrower! It was super effective.
    edited February 2016
    An exhaustive guide to stylistic preferences is literally impossible. If they put one up, it'll just inevitably result in even more bitching. How about we just not make mountains out of molehills over the changing of one word. (It's also not stylistic, which can be discovered with. 7 minute Google search, but whatever.) I know Ranah wants to put on her sassy pants over it and people commenting on it, but it's really not a big deal
    image
  • Synkarin said:
    Lol

     I just went to @Lavinya's site

     Comprise - to consist of or to be made up of
     Compose - to ​form or make up something:

    Maybe I'm wrong here (I'm by no means a grammatical expert as several people like to point out when I misspell things, like @Maligorn) but 'to be made up of' and 'make up something' seem pretty damn similiar to me. 


    Hey, kummuppins or whatever is hilarious. I just wanted to know if you spelled it wrong on purpose or not.

    image
This discussion has been closed.