State of the Board of Directors, Forum Rules, etc.
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> League Business
   
Author Message

Joined: March 29, 2005
Posts: 500
Submissions: 26
Location: Plumstead, London

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:02 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

"simplicity is the hardest thing to engineer" Very Happy

I fully concede that some weaves may have been submitted with a certain amount of "TAKE THAT YOU BUNCH OF C***s!" Floating in the air when the enter key was pressed.

A drunken "link flute" doesn't a weave make. But as you have said; a place for everything and everything in it's place; after careful group discussion.

What about a "rogues gallery". Where things sit. They can be sent up to weaves and things that are not considered so can be moved down. That way you keep an area that's "worthy of note" but not worthy of weave.

Just an idea.

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:08 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ClymAngus wrote:
"simplicity is the hardest thing to engineer" Very Happy

I fully concede that some weaves may have been submitted with a certain amount of "TAKE THAT YOU BUNCH OF C***s!" Floating in the air when the enter key was pressed.

A drunken "link flute" doesn't a weave make. But as you have said; a place for everything and everything in it's place; after careful group discussion.

What about a "rogues gallery". Where things sit. They can be sent up to weaves and things that are not considered so can be moved down. That way you keep an area that's "worthy of note" but not worthy of weave.

Just an idea.


You mean, like a gallery for refused weaves and the like?

Anyways, text is a bad medium. Were you serious when calling me skilldd, or simply joking?


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:10 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
ClymAngus wrote:
"simplicity is the hardest thing to engineer" Very Happy

I fully concede that some weaves may have been submitted with a certain amount of "TAKE THAT YOU BUNCH OF C***s!" Floating in the air when the enter key was pressed.

A drunken "link flute" doesn't a weave make. But as you have said; a place for everything and everything in it's place; after careful group discussion.

What about a "rogues gallery". Where things sit. They can be sent up to weaves and things that are not considered so can be moved down. That way you keep an area that's "worthy of note" but not worthy of weave.

Just an idea.


You mean, like a gallery for refused weaves and the like?

Anyways, text is a bad medium. Were you serious when calling me skilldd, or simply joking?


Refused Weaves currently go to the Gallery via a "Redirect" mechanism implemented with MAIL 3.0, as opposed to the previous "erase and delete on refusal" mechanism.

I think he was more referring to a separate "Former Weaves" gallery... Which I'm on the fence about, leaning toward falling on the "I don't like this" side.
I am, however, all for adding a tag that indicates "Does not conform to current weave guidelines".



Joined: March 29, 2005
Posts: 500
Submissions: 26
Location: Plumstead, London

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:20 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:

You mean, like a gallery for refused weaves and the like?

Anyways, text is a bad medium. Were you serious when calling me skilldd, or simply joking?


More a stepping stone really. That way we don't "loose" stuff. "Bucket" items can be moved up. If they're voted in. Things in can be voted out. That way potential stuff isn't sitting in someones inbox "waiting" to be judged. It takes the weight off the individual whist logging anything that does come in. I think it's important that there is upward and downward flow in the process.


I do like your work. As people who still actually make thinks (we are rare) I don't think we congratulate each other enough.

Of course I realise that some people are uncomfortable about receiving compliments. They think something is going on, or there is an ulterior motive, they're some how being played, propositioned or some such.

From my point of view if someone has had the good graces to reply to something I've said, the least I can do is before replying give their gallery the once over. That's only gentlemanly.

It is unfortunate that (and I am guilty of it myself) that in this day and age we find ourselves forever looking for the trick.

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:39 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
ClymAngus wrote:
"simplicity is the hardest thing to engineer" Very Happy

I fully concede that some weaves may have been submitted with a certain amount of "TAKE THAT YOU BUNCH OF C***s!" Floating in the air when the enter key was pressed.

A drunken "link flute" doesn't a weave make. But as you have said; a place for everything and everything in it's place; after careful group discussion.

What about a "rogues gallery". Where things sit. They can be sent up to weaves and things that are not considered so can be moved down. That way you keep an area that's "worthy of note" but not worthy of weave.

Just an idea.


You mean, like a gallery for refused weaves and the like?

Anyways, text is a bad medium. Were you serious when calling me skilldd, or simply joking?


Refused Weaves currently go to the Gallery via a "Redirect" mechanism implemented with MAIL 3.0, as opposed to the previous "erase and delete on refusal" mechanism.

I think he was more referring to a separate "Former Weaves" gallery... Which I'm on the fence about, leaning toward falling on the "I don't like this" side.
I am, however, all for adding a tag that indicates "Does not conform to current weave guidelines".


Such a tag may have to work different than current tags; depreceated weaves are the ones that should be tagged, but ticking the checkbox could produce several versions of behaviour.

1. Include only
2. Include with nontagged
3. Don't include

Are just three behaviour versions.

How Much work is it to implement such a tag?

clym, sorry for distrusting you.

Anyways, even if it's a bad idea, I like the idea that certain objects in the gallery should be grouped, such as the recent disapprovals. Someone might like the inspiration such a raw image gives. As I am quite bad at submitting My projects, all My "gallery" submissions originated in the weave queue. When I get around to submitting my real work, I would dislike having My refusals next to My beloved work.

I wonder what Will happen with My current weave submissions. Haven't heard anything for a while.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: March 29, 2005
Posts: 500
Submissions: 26
Location: Plumstead, London

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 11, 2015 4:38 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

That I can see. That said it does depend how you spin it.
Having a "link rogue" badge wouldn't necessarily scream "Fail". More that your an active part of the process.

Main point is a system like this involves people and gives them hope. I submitted a couple of weaves (derivative works) a few years ago they didn't make the cut and I can see why. I fully understand that you can't pander to people "just" because they submit a weave.

I just think the system might be tweakable to involve people more. "It's a good weave but it's staying in the rogues galery until you submit the tutorial"

That sort of thing pushes people to excel, whilst filtering the library so it can be best possible use to the wider community. Plus side is (if implemented) it stands a good chance of being less of an admin headache that it currently is.

As I said before, I'm just throwing ideas around here. It would be nice to get more for less, but I totally understand that it may not be possible. My specs are somewhat "rose tinted" at times.

Joined: March 25, 2002
Posts: 84
Submissions: 30
Location: Selden, NY

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Sep 13, 2015 4:44 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:

I wonder what Will happen with My current weave submissions. Haven't heard anything for a while.


It probably doesn't hurt at all for you to post some info about your submissions into the weave discussion forum if you haven't already. I, am curious to poke at them.

The formal process of curation and organization is secondary to, "Hey, you did something interesting/cool, let's play with it!". That whole joy of the art thing, eh?

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Sep 13, 2015 4:57 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Cinnibar wrote:
Karpeth wrote:

I wonder what Will happen with My current weave submissions. Haven't heard anything for a while.


It probably doesn't hurt at all for you to post some info about your submissions into the weave discussion forum if you haven't already. I, am curious to poke at them.

The formal process of curation and organization is secondary to, "Hey, you did something interesting/cool, let's play with it!". That whole joy of the art thing, eh?


I haven't posted yet, but OK. I Will post a topic.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: March 29, 2005
Posts: 500
Submissions: 26
Location: Plumstead, London

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:47 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

This is quite interesting actually. I remember past issues with weave posts whilst the submission process was still going on.

It can get a touch political. The entire "are you posting this to put a rocket up the ass of the weave checkers" that kind of thing. Also posts like that can be a magnet for people who's weaves didn't make the cut if their still feeling a bit sore about the whole thing.

This is a pity, it would be nice to see how the community might handle a peer reviewed submission. See if we can be trusted to deliver a fair appraisal without releasing the drama lama. Very Happy

Joined: February 8, 2013
Posts: 737
Submissions: 61
Location: Australia

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:48 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

ClymAngus wrote:
This is a pity, it would be nice to see how the community might handle a peer reviewed submission. See if we can be trusted to deliver a fair appraisal without releasing the drama lama. Very Happy


Well... with Archimedes the discussion came first, and the submission afterwards, because I didn't realize I'd made a new weave, so I posted in the weaves forum saying "does anyone know what this is?" and the folks there suggested I submit it as a weave. So in a way, it was a kind of peer-reviewed submission! No drama lamas at all.


Craft isn't cheaper than therapy, but it's more fun.
http://www.essence-of-eclectic.com

Joined: March 25, 2002
Posts: 84
Submissions: 30
Location: Selden, NY

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Sep 14, 2015 5:50 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ClymAngus wrote:
This is quite interesting actually. I remember past issues with weave posts whilst the submission process was still going on.



If the site ever reaches the point where censorship is preferable to posting information, IE: you can post about something during the submission process, I suggest we take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

But seriously... posting information for peer review is absolutely the type of thing I'd expect to encourage. It is not a slight on a weaves admin. If anything, it is additional resource for them to so their jobs.

Additionally, I'm unsure about the policy whereby existing submissions/discussions are done behind an admin curtain. For maximum dissemination of information, shouldn't that information be public? Right now, people sit in the dark with no knowledge of process, timing, or activity... stuff wither appears in the gallery or weave sections with no warning.

Partly I want to eliminate any perception by the public member that the admins are doing some sort of judgemental process that includes personal evaluations. It is, as far as I know, fair and unbalanced evals based on the weave itself. Several others have mentioned a perception of elitism which I find unnecessary... I've interacted with enough of the admin crew to know it isn't the case.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:38 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Cinnibar wrote:
Additionally, I'm unsure about the policy whereby existing submissions/discussions are done behind an admin curtain. For maximum dissemination of information, shouldn't that information be public? Right now, people sit in the dark with no knowledge of process, timing, or activity... stuff wither appears in the gallery or weave sections with no warning.

Partly I want to eliminate any perception by the public member that the admins are doing some sort of judgemental process that includes personal evaluations. It is, as far as I know, fair and unbalanced evals based on the weave itself. Several others have mentioned a perception of elitism which I find unnecessary... I've interacted with enough of the admin crew to know it isn't the case.


I assure you, the entire "evaluation process" is quite dull...

To give you an idea:
Kaunis O wrote:

Submitted by: lbraunbe [Profile | Send PM]

Comments
lorraine: "I'm not familiar with Renki and I'm not going to look it up right now. However, this needs to be a picture of the weave. Not a picture of a bracelet." [June 15, 2015, 11:19 pm]
Nárrína: "Agreed. I'll PM for a better pic." [June 25, 2015, 1:15 pm]
lbraunbe edited their submission on June 25, 2015, 4:24 pm


Flat Full Persian with a Twist wrote:

Submitted by: addisont [Profile | Send PM]

Comments
lorraine: "So Spiral FP with large rings making it flat?" [March 31, 2015, 1:55 am]
lorraine: "Or something like that?" [March 31, 2015, 1:59 am]
Nárrína: "Not necessarily. It could be the spiral form of Flat Full Persian. There is more than just an AR difference between FP FFP, some of the rings are offset in. I'll have to look closely to see if this has them." [April 28, 2015, 5:20 pm]




Joined: March 25, 2002
Posts: 84
Submissions: 30
Location: Selden, NY

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Sep 14, 2015 7:44 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Yeah, but I hear you guys have a private bathroom. And it has a couch.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:33 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Cinnibar wrote:
Yeah, but I hear you guys have a private bathroom. And it has a couch.


Yeah, but it's got some questionable stains on it Surprised



Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 4610
Submissions: 106
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:09 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Cinnibar wrote:
Yeah, but I hear you guys have a private bathroom. And it has a couch.

Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Cinnibar wrote:
Yeah, but I hear you guys have a private bathroom. And it has a couch.


Yeah, but it's got some questionable stains on it Surprised

EXACTLY! *lounges on the pee-couch with a stogie*


"I am a leaf on the wind." ~ Wash
Lorraine's Chains
Gallery Submission Guidelines

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 5 of 7. Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Wed Sep 18, 2019 6:21 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> League Business
Display posts from previous: