Magus Variant
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 730
Submissions: 389
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Magus Variant
Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:28 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

i see recently that magus variant was accepted as a weave. this was previously denied as one of my weaves called "nereid chain." it is actually on my website under this name. so, what do we do now?





Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 730
Submissions: 389
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:30 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

it was denied by narrina because of stability issues. it doesn't want to stay in shape. it's still a weave to me, but i had to accept her decision.



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 734
Submissions: 18

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:51 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

mithrilweaver wrote:
it was denied by narrina because of stability issues. it doesn't want to stay in shape. it's still a weave to me, but i had to accept her decision.


”Stability issues”...

I have lost submissions to the same fate. I agree that that doesn’t make it less of a weave.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer.

Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1942
Submissions: 577
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:07 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I had no way of knowing this. It’s currently impossible for me to access full website updates. I should have waited until DL got me that info, but I got excited when I saw it in the queue and understood it, and found it to be valid.

This hardly has stability issues. If anything, Nereid Lock Chain, with the added large rings starts off unstable. I actually wondered why you hadn’t considered this more basic version. I see now that you did.

I feel terrible about this. I suppose I’ll have to put together an editor note.

I’m ceasing all weave approval activity at the very least until I get access to a complete record of all updates and can start piecing things together.

You might notice too that it already has an associated gallery image. I found that literally the day after this item was approved.


There is no such thing as weave ownership. If someone produces a weave sample, they own that physical piece of mail, but not rights to the weave pattern itself.
Chainmailbasket.com (2019-01-01) - 376 + 79

Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1942
Submissions: 577
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:32 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

To clarify:

All submissions and approvals/denials are logged here: http://www.mailleartisans.org/news/
However, if I click on View All Updates (warning - takes a long time), it times out and I get a gateway message. Is anyone else able to access this?


There is no such thing as weave ownership. If someone produces a weave sample, they own that physical piece of mail, but not rights to the weave pattern itself.
Chainmailbasket.com (2019-01-01) - 376 + 79

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3119
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:37 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

This has happened in the past. And will happen in the future.
There’s something to the tune of 10,000+ declined weaves over the years. Fresh eyes will always find something someone else misses.
Dave, don’t beat yourself up. Even with access to that information, there’s no telling you would have noticed that spreadsheet line.
We also don’t base current approvals on past declines. So even if you had noticed it, what’s the policy procedure? Quietly ignore the submission in-queue, and have mithrilweaver submit a duplicate?

This is precisely why MAIL records “Original Submitter” and not “Weave Creator” as the “who’s is this?” Field. We can’t possibly be the authority on who came up with the idea. Weaves get resubmitted with better descriptions, or with new information. It happens. And a new weave admin may approve something that a prior one did not.
Narrina herself brought an entire new “Weave Family” into existence. Including previously declined weaves that ended up resubmitted by other users.

In the past, descriptions have been appended to include this information. That’s likely the route to take here as well.

This sort of thing is also why I lobbied early on to have “Additional Weave Images” appended to existing submissions.



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 730
Submissions: 389
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:18 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

i think the best thing to do, it to politely let the second submitter know that there was a mistake and reject their entry. then, accept the first submitter. it happens all the time that we find duplicates of weaves and we accept the first one. so, why not do the same here? delete the second weave and accept the first. easy.



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 734
Submissions: 18

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:35 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

mithrilweaver wrote:
i think the best thing to do, it to politely let the second submitter know that there was a mistake and reject their entry. then, accept the first submitter. it happens all the time that we find duplicates of weaves and we accept the first one. so, why not do the same here? delete the second weave and accept the first. easy.


The problem is that your submission, being denied, is not in the weave system anymore, If I understand Everything correctly.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer.

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 730
Submissions: 389
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:52 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

and that's okay. it doesn't have to be in the system anymore. there is evidence that it was and that's all that's needed.



Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 730
Submissions: 389
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:55 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

see, here's the thing, when there's a duplicate weave entry of mine and another person's, and i'm the second submitter, what do i say? what do i do? dave can attest to this. i tell him to delete my entry because that's the right thing. now when i want the same treatment, i get told sorry, no. that's pretty crappy.



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 734
Submissions: 18

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:58 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

mithrilweaver wrote:
see, here's the thing, when there's a duplicate weave entry of mine and another person's, and i'm the second submitter, what do i say? what do i do? dave can attest to this. i tell him to delete my entry because that's the right thing. now when i want the same treatment, i get told sorry, no. that's pretty crappy.


This is a bit of a different situation.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3119
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 4:25 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
mithrilweaver wrote:
see, here's the thing, when there's a duplicate weave entry of mine and another person's, and i'm the second submitter, what do i say? what do i do? dave can attest to this. i tell him to delete my entry because that's the right thing. now when i want the same treatment, i get told sorry, no. that's pretty crappy.


This is a bit of a different situation.


This.
It is a completely different situation.

If, every time a weave was submitted, a weave admin had to go through 10k+ declines just to safely double check that a previous Admin hadn’t turned away a similar weave, and instead contact that submitter... The task would be entirely onerous.

Again, this is why we record SUBMITTER and not “Weave Creator”... Because we’re archiving the individual submission.

This is also why I lobbied to have multiple images attached to a weave submission.
And why I pushed for a wiki-style weave DB where multiple users would be able to have input on a given weave.

This was shot down hard, due to the “This is MY WEAVE” sentiment surrounding submissions.
Sadly, it would have helped situations like this.

Again, this is not the same as a duplicate submission accepted only to be removed after-the-fact. Nor is it concurrent submissions in the queue.
This is a new submission that was viewed by fresh eyes being accepted, where a previous submission was declined.
Conflation aside, it’s an issue to be sure, but not identical to the situation you suggest.

Moreover, nobody told you “No, sorry”... In fact, I merely suggested how it could be handled. Please don’t put words in my (or anyone’s) mouth.



Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1942
Submissions: 577
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:00 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I’ll explain the approval process I used to shed more light on the situation.

I’m in and out of the queue often. I notice and acknowledge what is in there, including items I don’t understand, or wouldn’t bother with*.

I decided earlier this month, completely regardless of what was in the weave queue, that I would try out some Mage weaves. I see Magus Chain in the library and find it to be a good starting point, due to its simplicity, planning to try out Magemaille next. When I started stitching together Magus Chain, my immediate thought was, “why don’t the pairs of rings connect 2 4-ring Magus units together? Why are there two sets of dividers?” At this moment, -I- independently discovered what is now called Magus Variant. I remembered that it is the same as what was in the queue. I checked and rechecked the library thinking this had to be in there somewhere, but no, so I approved it. The closest thing in the library was a version with an added ring going through each set of four: Nereid Lock Chain. It never occurred to me that this version without those added rings would have been declined if it were submitted; I found it to be -more- stable than the Nereid Lock version. Mind you, in hindsight, this could be because of the ring sizes I chose.

This chain is basic beyond basic. I’m sure it’s been independently discovered hundreds of times. It can’t not have been. I know that is besides the point, but it’s just my view.

*bother with:
I know this can be read as having a bad attitude, but it’s not meant that way. I only have so much hands, so much eyesight, and so much wantingness to weave. I do and will pick and choose, and some things are too messy, convoluted, or just not interesting to me. This is not a reflection of quality, only my view.

Also important of me to mention is:
I’m not the weaves admin

I don’t want to be the weaves admin even, but am not against the idea of being on a committee. I certainly like being able to see the queue, and leaving comments to help out others. I (reluctantly) started to help clear the weave queue after Narrina retired because I knew I could at least deal with the simpler items until we find a solution.

One of the bottom lines is that MAIL needs to get a weave admin/committee. But it also seems that MAIL needs to establish policies too. We still haven’t even come to an agreement over what a weave is.


There is no such thing as weave ownership. If someone produces a weave sample, they own that physical piece of mail, but not rights to the weave pattern itself.
Chainmailbasket.com (2019-01-01) - 376 + 79

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 734
Submissions: 18

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:30 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Chainmailbasket_com wrote:
I’ll explain the approval process I used to shed more light on the situation.

I’m in and out of the queue often. I notice and acknowledge what is in there, including items I don’t understand, or wouldn’t bother with*.

I decided earlier this month, completely regardless of what was in the weave queue, that I would try out some Mage weaves. I see Magus Chain in the library and find it to be a good starting point, due to its simplicity, planning to try out Magemaille next. When I started stitching together Magus Chain, my immediate thought was, “why don’t the pairs of rings connect 2 4-ring Magus units together? Why are there two sets of dividers?” At this moment, -I- independently discovered what is now called Magus Variant. I remembered that it is the same as what was in the queue. I checked and rechecked the library thinking this had to be in there somewhere, but no, so I approved it. The closest thing in the library was a version with an added ring going through each set of four: Nereid Lock Chain. It never occurred to me that this version without those added rings would have been declined if it were submitted; I found it to be -more- stable than the Nereid Lock version. Mind you, in hindsight, this could be because of the ring sizes I chose.

This chain is basic beyond basic. I’m sure it’s been independently discovered hundreds of times. It can’t not have been. I know that is besides the point, but it’s just my view.

*bother with:
I know this can be read as having a bad attitude, but it’s not meant that way. I only have so much hands, so much eyesight, and so much wantingness to weave. I do and will pick and choose, and some things are too messy, convoluted, or just not interesting to me. This is not a reflection of quality, only my view.

Also important of me to mention is:
I’m not the weaves admin

I don’t want to be the weaves admin even, but am not against the idea of being on a committee. I certainly like being able to see the queue, and leaving comments to help out others. I (reluctantly) started to help clear the weave queue after Narrina retired because I knew I could at least deal with the simpler items until we find a solution.

One of the bottom lines is that MAIL needs to get a weave admin/committee. But it also seems that MAIL needs to establish policies too. We still haven’t even come to an agreement over what a weave is.


Regarding the last paragraph, Would the BOD give a call to action?


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer.

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 730
Submissions: 389
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:46 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

even if it is a different situation from the duplicate weave scenario, i think we can all agree that it's not a good feeling to see a weave rejected and then someone else gets the same weave approved. it's the kind of thing that makes people not want to come here. and i want people to want to come here. that's my goal. i want this site to be awesome and attractive to people. these policies alienate people and discourage them from the art of chainmaille.

i'm not putting any words in anyone's mouth. you are saying no, i won't fix it, right? when the people in charge of this site are not willing to do anything to fix a wrong or adjust the policy, then they are responsible for the outcomes. i mean it's very clear to me.



Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 1 of 5. Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Dec 05, 2019 7:40 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: