|
Post by adrini on Jul 27, 2014 11:27:47 GMT -5
Firstly I get the Ollie is a popular due to Arrow right now but at present he's a giant red lantern shrimp who is taking over Oa. As interesting as that is I don't see it happening. If we need examples in the future could we start using someone else? As Python would say this is getting rather silly. (Ending in a heroic speech after, about how the whole time he's been nothing more then a prawn. Of course.)
No one is "anti-freedon", just anti-abuse. Making a mess that someone else has to clean up after, even in the name of "freedom" is still a generally douchie thing to do. So we use rules to avoid that happening.
Also "we" couldn't make shrimp Ollie go red lantern anyway. I could make shrimp Ollie take over Oa, and only if the Green Lantern writer said it was okay. We have a collaborative effort going and that's fine.
I'm 99% sure the Waynes are claimed by the batman writer, so yes, killing them would be an issue. Also cities have generally been regarded as claimed as well. When I wanted my characters to travel to Gateway City I cleared it with DOB first. Not because I was going to blow anything up, but because it's the polite thing to do. I'm considering a visit to Gotham in arch 3, if I get more attached to the idea I will contact the batman writer before setting that in stone. Again, just the right thing to do, I hope to work with both these people again. Being polite now is a good idea.
If person A does something that sets back other writers....that's a problem. I, personally, would be wary of working with that person ever again if I had the memory of having to clean up after his/her mess. And if someone decided, for shits and giggles, to just blow up part of Star City when I wasn't looking that, well, there would be an issue. I'll put it that way.
Part of me doesn't get the breaking out the flag and marching on Washington tone you have here. Alt universes can jump back and forth easily, time travel is even easier to work with. Dr, Fate, for instance, has fingers in pies all over space and time. I intend to use and share that. Still a part of the core world. It may garner a little more creativity but I've seen your work. You have no reason to the sweating over this, you are more then up to it.
|
|
|
Post by C_Miller on Jul 27, 2014 11:39:11 GMT -5
In the admin thread I made one point. A thesis if you will. And ultimately it comes down to, if you can't trust the writers to not be total morons, rules will do absolutely nothing because the site has already failed. It either says something about the administration who want their hands in all the kettles or it says something about the inferior group of writers. That's all there is to it. No sense in arguing, that's just a fact.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Jul 27, 2014 12:08:24 GMT -5
I agree with Miller.
I would like to respond to Adrini's last paragraph. I'm not 100% sure what your argument is if you said that time travel and alternate universes are easy to work with and a core part of the world? If it's a core part of the world, that would be like placing restrictions on the concept of Superheroes. Superheroes are just as core a part of the world as time travel/AUs, and you yourself just said they are easy to work with. So I'm not sure why this discussion is here?
You think I'm up to the challenge (which I am. I actually like challenges like this, they make me a better writer) but not every writer is capable of overcoming these challenges, likewise that also puts more challenges on this group of writers than the writers whom you are hoping to remove challenges from. Do you see that? It isn't a "breaking out the flag" it's really trying to get you to see what I'm saying.
If your goal is to eliminate challenges, then you're only doing a job half-way.
Writer A is writing Batman (see, no more Green/Red Lantern Shrimp Overlord Arrow) and he's going along his story when, Writer B (who is writing Legion) does something that can potentially hurt Writer A's story. Despite trying and trying, Writer A can't figure out how to get over the hump, drops his title and leaves the site forever. I understand that's what you're trying to avoid, but you have to think of the flip-side of things, because everyone on the board is Writer A, I think you're all having trouble seeing things from Writer B's standpoint. View this scenario:
Writer B wants to write a Legion story. He starts writing it and is told that something he wants to write he can't write because Writer A wants to write something different, and we are trying to avoid conflict with Writer A's story. Writer B, being now forced to change his story, can't figure it out, drops the title, and leaves the board forever.
No matter if you allow free reign of Time Travel or if you restrict, you hold the same outcome: flustered writers leaving the board, weakening the board. The only difference is that, in the second scenario, the writer leaves the board because of the rules of the board, where in the first scenario, the writer leaves the board because of a single other writer. The second scenario presents a strictness of the rules that not only stifles creativity but also forces writers to leave, while the first scenario allows writers a chance to tell their stories and, if something does conflict with another writer, then they can find a way to work it out. The board looks more inviting with fewer restrictions and, overall, by the time that Writer A leaves, Writers C-F will have joined. It's 1000 successes for every 1 failure. It's bound to happen. There are going to be problems that must be dealt with. I think setting more restrictions and writing down unspoken rules is really just a bad way to go, personally.
|
|
|
Post by DiscipleofBob on Jul 27, 2014 12:32:35 GMT -5
Okay, Jordan, I'm going to try and address this bit by bit. Yes it is very different. Writing in the future sets thing in stone. It's saying "This already happened and there's nothing any writer can do about it. Everyone now has to work towards this future." You're deciding things for every other story, character, and writer without their consent or permission. Now for the Gotham bombing example... Let's say we're talking about Demon Knights and Batman since those both took place in Gotham. If part of Stardrifter's story involved bombing a building in Gotham, that's perfectly fine. It would be polite for Stardrifter to contact the Batman writer beforehand, but not completely necessary. If Stardrifter decided to bomb the entire city without the Batman writer's consent, that would absolutely be a problem because it screws over the Batman writer's plans. If Stardrifter decided that aliens destroyed North America and didn't talk to the rest of the site beforehand, that would be a major problem as it would screw over everyone. If Adrini wants to make Green Arrow a giant shrimp Red Lantern and take over Oa, that's between her and the Green Lantern writer (and arguably Aquaman jk). At no point could a writer tell a storyline in the future OR present saying that Green Arrow became a giant shrimp Red Lantern without Adrini's permission. The future, however, is constantly shifting depending on the writers of the site. No one writer can define it for everyone because everyone's working to shape it. If you literally got the consent of every single writer on the site, it might be a different story. But that's never been the case with time travel stories. The "future storylines being alternate worlds" is a proposed compromise so that writers can still have their future plotlines if necessary, but it doesn't write the rest of the site into a corner. That's perfectly fine. I expect and welcome any critiques on the suggested rules and their wording to make them more acceptable for everyone. Ignoring the fact that no one's currently proposing a Legion title anyway, the problem with titles that take place solely in different futures/worlds is that they add nothing to the site, and encourage writers to go off into their own worlds and contribute nothing in return. If that's the case, then those titles really don't have any place in a shared universe like this one. They don't want to be part of the shared universe then why are they making claims and writing here? That's not worldbuilding in the least. Writers who choose only distant future storylines or parallel universes aren't worldbuilding. They're not making dots to connect, they're making dots that purposefully can't be connected ever. Writer freedom means freedom for every writer, not just the first ones to define the future/multiverse for the rest of the site without other writers' consent. This example doesn't work. We're not trying to change the content or direction of existing titles. We're trying to make a set of guidelines so that both Writer A and Writer B have clear expectations of what they're getting into. If Writer A claims his title first and is working on it, and Writer B comes along but presents something that would be a clear, direct conflict with Writer A, then Writer B is SOL. Let's say Writer A is writing Batman and Robin and Writer B wants to do a Nightwing story. Writer A shows up the first month and claims the title with Dick Grayson and publishes two chapters. Writer B shows up a few months later and wants to do a Nightwing story. Well, that's up to Writer A. Writer B might be able to use Jason Todd or Tim Drake but keep the Nightwing title. Writer A might want to keep the Nightwing mantle for his own title, which would still be his right at that point, so Writer B might want to try a different character to fit the same idea. But if Writer B can't reconcile his ideas with Writer A, then Writer B's story would never be approved in the first place. We have rules regarding claims and who or when certain characters are available, and when you need permission from an existing writer. It's a restriction, one that writers on this site have chosen to work with to make a more cohesive shared universe. The only difference between an unspoken rule and a written rule is that unspoken rules are more likely to be broken and then refuted that no actual rules were broken since they were, by definition, unspoken. In the admin thread I made one point. A thesis if you will. And ultimately it comes down to, if you can't trust the writers to not be total morons, rules will do absolutely nothing because the site has already failed. It either says something about the administration who want their hands in all the kettles or it says something about the inferior group of writers. That's all there is to it. No sense in arguing, that's just a fact. Miller, if you can't trust the admins to make sound, fair rules which protect the interests of all writers on the site, then the site has already failed.
|
|
|
Post by Drake on Jul 27, 2014 13:32:45 GMT -5
I think we're all on about the same page here, so it's a bit amusing to me to see everyone losing their shit over this. Dob and Adrini don't want to restrict the use of time travel and AUs. They just want to make sure no one writer screws everyone else over, and frankly that should be the case anyway. We mentioned "let's be like Marvel/DC/etc" earlier....well, this is what they do. They don't let the Legion writer decide that Batman dies on November 30th, 2007 against Lex Luthor. Hell, no single Bat writer could decide that in comics. People have to work together. That should be fun. If it's not, then you're on the wrong site.
|
|
|
Post by Question on Jul 27, 2014 14:49:19 GMT -5
Perhaps the solution is to make time travel mandatory so if one person screws up another person's story, the second person can just fix it themselves using Black Canary's Time Sphere.
|
|
|
Post by adrini on Jul 27, 2014 15:28:16 GMT -5
As that would grant me so much power I'm not sure I'm allowed to agree with it. But I'm going to anyway.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Jul 27, 2014 16:58:29 GMT -5
I've said all I have to say. I think that setting restrictions against properties and concepts now is a bad precedent for the future.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Jul 29, 2014 19:07:34 GMT -5
So has there been any more progress on this?
|
|
|
Post by DiscipleofBob on Jul 29, 2014 19:28:35 GMT -5
Sorry for the delay, I'll post a more in-depth response soon, but I need to take some time to work on my titles.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Aug 1, 2014 16:46:08 GMT -5
I don't mean to nag, but the last real discussion on this was almost a week ago? Do you have any updates for us all?
|
|
|
Post by adrini on Aug 1, 2014 23:21:24 GMT -5
Life got insane. Common at the end of the month. People should be able to breath again.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Aug 2, 2014 17:40:06 GMT -5
And I'm just wondering if now there is an idea of these rules moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by adrini on Aug 2, 2014 18:54:46 GMT -5
Some form of them.
Like I said though, people had to get end of month stuff done. Once the dust settles we'll sort the last of this out.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Aug 3, 2014 0:37:53 GMT -5
Some form of them. Like I said though, people had to get end of month stuff done. Once the dust settles we'll sort the last of this out. No offense, but I'm more asking for an admin's opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Question on Aug 3, 2014 16:44:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by DiscipleofBob on Aug 3, 2014 18:05:57 GMT -5
Keep it civil, people. This is a touchy enough subject as is.
I would rather not post new rules if people still have strong objections to them.
At the same time, we have two opinions (and several between the two) on how to handle these issues.
The point is to avoid any writer being unnecessarily restricted, either by rules or by other writers. The only way to come to a consensus is to continue the discussion until some sort of compromise can be reached.
The phrase "don't be a douchebag" is something we can all agree on. But most problems arise when writers don't realize their plot ideas may have negative consequences on other writers. So the goal here is to make it completely clear on how to handle these sensitive subjects so that everyone on both sides of this issue can still write what they want and have fun doing so.
Writing In The Past
The only major guideline so far is that any major historical changes need to be run by an admin, possibly by the board depending on the severity of the change.
Writing In The Future
This seems to be the current major source of controversy.
My current proposal is this: that any future stories be technically considered alternate futures/parallel worlds. This shouldn't affect the content of any potential future stories either way. What it does mean that someone can write a future setting without other writers having to worry about conform to that future.
This does mean that we need to hash out exactly what's involved with writing in the multiverse.
Writing In The Multiverse
Issues with writing in the multiverse:
First of all, I don't see any one objecting to the idea that claiming a character includes all alternate versions of that character.
Next, this is a shared universe site, and stories that take place solely in their own worlds (or alternate futures) don't contribute anything. As interesting as they may be, it's pointless to write something for a shared universe if it in no way connects to the main universe, and yes there is a "main universe," the present where everyone's stories are currently taking place, give or take a few years. Writing something in the year 3000 or in an another world doesn't add anything to the shared universe. These can be good stories, but there's really no point in reserving claims for a title that has nothing to do with the main universe. Now if said future/otherworld story DOES have some connection (say a time traveler, dimension traveler, whatever) that's another issue.
Possible ideas. Not all of these are mutually exclusive:
1) Require all storylines involving time travel or multiverse to have some connection to the main universe. Something like "characters from the other world come to the main one" or "character from the main universe goes to the other world" or something else.
2) Allow stories set in parallel universes, alternate times, but only if the writer has another story for the main universe. This means if someone absolutely needs to write something for a different universe, they can do so but are still contributing to the shared universe in the meantime.
3) Have a thread dedicated to when people create these alternate worlds/futures. This way other writers can determine what they would want to happen to their characters in those universes. It also means that if very similar alternate worlds start cropping up, we may be able to point out existing parallel universes that can be used instead.
The end goal of these possible rules and this discussion is to make this a site everyone can enjoy. With no rules regarding time travel/multiverse, a lot of writers on this site are bound by the future that other people define. With too many rules, the site becomes restrictive in what can or can't be done. What's needed is a compromise that both points of view can agree on, rules that aren't so strict as to restrict perfectly legitimate story ideas, yet protect writers from having their work invalidated by time shenanigans.
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Aug 3, 2014 19:03:21 GMT -5
Just a few notes:
1. Can you clarify a major historical change? 2. I think keeping a catalog of alternate universes, what makes them different, where each hero is in it, is a good idea. 3. The "all futures are an alternate future unless otherwise stated" is already an unspoken rule, why write it down? It is assumed by everyone who has every touched the subject of time travel that the future isn't set in stone.
Onto your possible ideas:
1. I still don't see the purpose of this one. It can contribute in time to the shared universe, why must the basis of the story build onto the main universe? Not every story is going to have a massive affect on the shared universe, past present or future, so why force it on the future?
2. What if that writer has no ideas that contribute to the "main" universe? Or, even more so, what if they are writing both of these titles and because one title is, for all intents and purposes, considered pointless and noncontributing, what is to encourage readers to read and review it? It throws that title into a vacuum of decreed "pointlessness" and that writer is no discouraged to write that title, because no one reads and reviews it.
3. I already said that this is a fair idea.
Although, I do strongly, strongly disagree with with your notion of a main universe. It isn't your decision to make that the main universe is where all the current titles take place. It's the writers decision. If all of the writers want to start setting all of the characters in 1964, then that's their decision. Right now all of the stories take place in modern day. Will they in two years if this board even still exists? Right now the only thing keeping the "main universe" as the present timeline are your rules that they have to be. But if all the writers got together and decided we wanted one huge universe set in the year 2099, would you tell us all no? And, even if you say that you're an admin making the best rules to protect the writers, what are the opinions of the other admins? C_Miller doesn't really like the idea as he's stated above. I can't recall if buck has made a statement on this thread. There opinions should be taken with as much if not more weight than your own.
|
|
|
Post by Stardrifter on Aug 3, 2014 19:48:52 GMT -5
I've been keeping quiet about this because I haven't liked the tone this thread has taken, but I would like to make a few comments.
1. I do not like the idea that claiming a character gives you claim to every alternate version of that character. I had to deal with it when I tried to do Time Masters and it was a pain in the ass with some people. Having to get permission really limited my ideas when some people just couldn't accept an alternate version of their character being actually ALTERNATE.
if it's an alternate reality, what does it matter if someone else messes with a character? It's not your character, it's an alternate reality. As long as no one abuses it and sets a title in an alternate reality to get around not being able to do the main Batman title or something, I think it's a bit of a ridiculous rule.
2. An unspoken rule has to be written down BECAUSE it's unspoken. How are people to know about it if it's not spoken? And all future titles being alternate futures hasn't always been explicit in the past. Which brings me to...
3. Way back when, I hated what was being done with TKJ's future vampire Batman. And it WAS the set future, because anyone who wanted to use Batman in our "present" had to clear it with him and his plans for Batman in our time.
I eventually stopped reading it. Not because it was bad(which IMO it was), but because I hated how he was able to create our future. When the Jonah Hex series started in the same future time, I didn't read it either.
This is why we have to come up with guidelines and rules. It's why we're discussing them, so we can try to make as many people happy as we can. And it's why the admins CAN make these rules, because we need structure or this site would just be a bunch of writers doing what THEY want and the shared universe would be chaos.
Whatever they decide, it's not going to please everybody. It's the price we pay to be here. If you want to do whatever you want you can go write without restrictions for fanfiction.net or something. But being here means being in a community with a group of admins doing their best to please the majority, but not everyone.
I've not seen any statement saying anything in this thread is set in stone. Everyone is getting their say.
|
|
|
Post by adrini on Aug 3, 2014 20:56:43 GMT -5
Some form of them. Like I said though, people had to get end of month stuff done. Once the dust settles we'll sort the last of this out. No offense, but I'm more asking for an admin's opinion. Whatever. I have actual stuff to do. Carry on.
|
|