Suggest Topics Here!

[Serack]

Just noticed that Prove Guilty Mysteries isn't in here. Been going through my Emporium to make sure all the links got migrated.

(Sidenote-- Serack, I did think of an answer to your Two Mantles Problem with regard to the Time Travel Harry theory, you know besides my Unstuck Harry theory. In The Flash, the Speedforce can only be claimed by one speedster per universe. We see this with Jay Garrick this season on the show, which reminded me of that arcana. The Mantles might work the same way: with Lloyd Slate holding the Mantle, Future Harry will have to do without.)

Also missing is The Starborn Conspiracy, and The Lady and the Knight, which is lost forever. That latter was post about Venus, Adonis, and the Goddess's Champion.

Could you also please unlock my Emporium so I can archive my Thor=Vaderrung and Faith=Free Will Gifting posts somewhere they won't eventually be eaten?

Rut ro.

I did some boo boo's transferring those.  The first one I accidentally sent to an area of the boards that I'm not allowed to move it back out of, and the 2nd I accidentally hit "remove" instead of move.

Just in case it's not recoverable, I was able to archive most of the first 2 pages of content via the "back" button on my browser.  I already indexed both... but we will have to see what happens to the 2nd once the admin's get back to me.

[Griffyn612]

Maybe I'm missing it, but I think a WAG topic where everyone can list a summary of their WAG's would be good.  Everyone would only post one reply to the thread, and update it when they come up with new WAG's.  No-one would reply or debate the WAG's themselves in the thread; it's only an archive. 

Then we can link to our own reply in our signatures so that others could review our thoughts if they like.  And the thread could be locked to preserve them.  And with one reply per member, it'll force everyone to keep their theirs succinct.  If more detail is required, or debate is required, a new thread can be created.

[Serack]

Maybe I'm missing it, but I think a WAG topic where everyone can list a summary of their WAG's would be good.  Everyone would only post one reply to the thread, and update it when they come up with new WAG's.  No-one would reply or debate the WAG's themselves in the thread; it's only an archive. 

Then we can link to our own reply in our signatures so that others could review our thoughts if they like.  And the thread could be locked to preserve them.  And with one reply per member, it'll force everyone to keep their theirs succinct.  If more detail is required, or debate is required, a new thread can be created.

Interesting.  I'm not sure about the locking part, but on the other hand, I wish such a topic would have a way of tracking when wags were proffered.  Also, it would be encouraged that you add links to any discussions you've generated on your wags...

Elegast's theory index sticky tries to approach this from the opposite direction by collecting significant wags and collating them, but maintenance is a bitch.  I've also got my own response in that topic that I try to use in the way you describe here, but the topic isn't dedicated for that and the responses haven't been limited to 1 per person...

Mention it in the general spoilers discussion to see if it could gain traction because participation would be what matters for it to be relevant.  Then, if you get positive feedback, start one with a general list of instructions (I.E. one post per person) and formatting suggestions.  If it works, I'll transfer it to the DFRC and we'll enforce the 1 post per person thing.

[Quantus]

From a backend standpoint, would it be possible (and easy to implement) to have a thread that automatically restricted each member to a single post, in the same way it can restrict each member to a single vote in a poll? That would significantly reduce the maintenance required, as well as auto-enforce the whole "Do Not Debate Here" mandate. 

[Serack]

If such an option exists, it does not seem to be available to the curator level of moderation.  I suspect it doesn't exist, and from what I have seen of the admin's paradigm for forum modification it wouldn't be added.

[Tami Seven]

From a backend standpoint, would it be possible (and easy to implement) to have a thread that automatically restricted each member to a single post, in the same way it can restrict each member to a single vote in a poll? That would significantly reduce the maintenance required, as well as auto-enforce the whole "Do Not Debate Here" mandate.

Best bet is to do it as an Honor System, which has worked for me in the past on other forums but only with small groups. The biggest problem comes when you have someone who has a Ton Load of WAGs, so they don't all fit on one post. Then, you have Members needing multiple pages at odd times.....ultimately ending up no different than a normal thread.

My real suggestion, create a Thread in Spoilers, then have someone curate and consolidate the end results...which, actually,  is kinda what we have already.

[Serack]

Best bet is to do it as an Honor System, which has worked for me in the past on other forums but only with small groups. The biggest problem comes when you have someone who has a Ton Load of WAGs, so they don't all fit on one post. Then, you have Members needing multiple pages at odd times.....ultimately ending up no different than a normal thread.

My real suggestion, create a Thread in Spoilers, then have someone curate and consolidate the end results...which, actually,  is kinda what we have already.

The curator staff can bounce posts that discuss rather than utilize the topic for it's stated purpose. 

As for the size, unless the wags come with massive descriptors (something I feel would be better off in stand alone topics that are linked to) there won't be a problem.  Not too long ago the character count cap was increased from 20k to something like 50k. 

[Quantus]

If such an option exists, it does not seem to be available to the curator level of moderation.  I suspect it doesn't exist, and from what I have seen of the admin's paradigm for forum modification it wouldn't be added.

Ya, it definitely doesnt appear implemented currently (Id expect it int he New Thread options) and would need some amount of Fred-Time to get going, if not a pre-packaged plugin of some kind. 

[Griffyn612]

Okay, I started one here.

As I mentioned in the thread, it's just to compile the basic list of WAG's people prescribe to.  As I was creating it, I realized a thread for each major WAG topic might be the solution to long-term storage of theories. 

For example, a thread could be created for Proven Guilty Time Travel theories.  Rather than saving a thread with one theory and all of the debate around it, each poster could just post one reply with their own theory, and then link that post to the compilation.  No-one discusses each other's theories in that thread. 

That way, if a new member wants to see what theories exist around a particular topic, they can read the one thread, rather than reading a dozen.  And as people refine their theory, they can edit the one post.

[Quantus]

Okay, I started one here.

As I mentioned in the thread, it's just to compile the basic list of WAG's people prescribe to.  As I was creating it, I realized a thread for each major WAG topic might be the solution to long-term storage of theories. 

For example, a thread could be created for Proven Guilty Time Travel theories.  Rather than saving a thread with one theory and all of the debate around it, each poster could just post one reply with their own theory, and then link that post to the compilation.  No-one discusses each other's theories in that thread. 

That way, if a new member wants to see what theories exist around a particular topic, they can read the one thread, rather than reading a dozen.  And as people refine their theory, they can edit the one post.

Good idea in theory, but I fear it would run into complications when you try to classify each theory into those broad categories when they apply to multiple ones.  It's the age old Dewy Decimal conundrum 

[Griffyn612]

Good idea in theory, but I fear it would run into complications when you try to classify each theory into those broad categories when they apply to multiple ones.  It's the age old Dewy Decimal conundrum

For the most part, yeah.  Especially when some people interlink everything.  The challenge would be to have people focus on a particular aspect of their theory.  It wouldn't work for every theory, but the big ones (pgtt, origins of the Fae, the Black Council, origin of magic, etc) could be focused.

It seems like every time someone brings up one theory, everything else (especially me) drags their own theory in to get attention/derail.  Folks end up retyping their theories constantly. 

If there was an archived post that they could simply link to, it'd give others a chance to see what other theories there are if they want to, or ignore it and remain focused on the new one.  Then, once the new poster has had a chance to temper their theory against those that (hopefully) give constructive criticism, they can add it to the Archive.  No new thread needed with post after post of us old folks rehashing our own stuff.

[wizard nelson]

No new thread needed with post after post of us old folks rehashing our own stuff.

While I agree in theory, and indeed have before just posted a link to an older topic on PG craziness... for obvious reasons. but sometimes its the rehashing that gets a new convert to understand your meaning better too.

[Serack]

I got essentially the following PM today, and I thought I'd share my response with everyone and possibly paste it into the OP of this sticky:

So far I haven't been able to come up with a Thread worthy of being included in the Reference section. If you don't mind me asking, what am I doing wrong? How is a Thread judged good enough to be saved in the Reference Section?

Since I'm the curator that seems to be the quickest to pull the transfer topic trigger, I guess if one of your topics were to be transferred it'd probably be by me, and I'm human and that makes the decision a bit subjective.

As such I'd say that the criteria for topics I transfer are:

• A worthy topic has to somehow come to my attention after it gets auto-locked but before it gets auto-deleted or
• Is a "Reference" that can be expected to require maintenance by the OP (Original Post) as new books come out.  I.E. a "list" of things in the series.  Then it usually gets transferred before the auto-lock.
• The topic must somehow be significant in my best (not perfect) judgment.
  Things relevant to "significance:"
  • Novelty:  Something I'm pretty sure is an entirely new idea.  Of course it also has to be relevant.  The most pure example of this is the Lacuna = Tooth fairy theory. 
  • If it is a good representation of, or advances a popular topic.  I.E. I think someone deliberately crafted a Simon=Cowl topic for the DFRC They did a good job with the presentation and development (discussed below) and it was a popular theory that we didn't have an archived representation of to point new members at so it got transferred (I think).  I think I've transferred several Little Chicago threads that theorized from a relevantly different angle because of how they "advanced" the topic.
  • Presentation:  Formatting matters, so if I have a choice between 2 topics that say the same thing but one is a single paragraph with no line brakes, while another one with the same conclusions has all the thoughts in bullet form with nice bolded headers for each sub section, the latter will get the transfer.
  • Development:  Between two topics, if one includes things like "I remember a WoJ that implies x" or "I remember book Y saying this particular detail" while the other quotes the actual relevant WoJ's or book excerpt, I'll chose the one with quotes. 
  • References:  External mythology and stuff that could have influenced Jim's creation of the DF also adds relevance to a topic becoming a reference topic since it brings material to our table that many of us may otherwise be unaware of.  Links to sources and pictures and stuff really get my attention too.  Take a look in the DFRC, and you will find references to Yeats, quotes from Wikipedia on the Battle of Hastings, and may discussions on various myths that Mac could be from with relevant references.  Heck, I've got a topic that utilizes a Feynman Diagram to illustrate the relationships between the Fae mantles.
  • Substance/meatiness:  If a topic OP consists of just a 1 line question, unless some serious development progresses in the later comments, I probably won't transfer it because it's the conclusions that tend to carry the most weight for me, not the questions.  Plus, see my first criteria.  It's harder for a topic to get my attention after it's locked if the significance is in the replies rather than the original post.

Let me revisit the "it has to come to my attention" part.  This is probably the most arbitrary part of my evaluating potential topics, because I'm not always active, and how something gets my attention can vary, but some rather subjective/arbitrary things influence it (Such as if I take a brake from participating on the forums).  But in addition to that, there have been plenty of times when I went on an active prowl looking for new topics to transfer, and part of my method was to go to the profiles of forum posters who have a history of generating topics that I'd transferred in the past (There is a "topics" tab in the show posts page of everyone's profile).  This ends up biasing things towards those that have already made contributions though.  But I do post in the suggest topics sticky asking for suggestions as well. 

Another way topics come to my attention is when I'm researching the forums using the search function to find a post I remember someone making that I want to use in my response to someone's current topic.  This happened today, in that Griff listed his WAGs and I searched for one I remember him generating topics on.  I saw that the topic he generated was well presented and developed, referenced interesting external mythos, and came to significant conclusions.  Although the version I transferred wasn't in itself novel, it was novel relatively recently, and wasn't represented in the DFRC.  The search also pointed me at a slightly older topic Eldest Gruff generated that had even more polish and meat to it and I transferred that one as well.

[wizard nelson]

whatever happened to our other triggermen from back in the day? Elegast, tcf being promenant in my head.. as a frequent poster and someone who has nominated a few threads myself, i think what the average poster wants is feedbback if we do nominate something. a no with a reason is ok, and just a no is acceptable really. its the not hearing anything in reply that gets you the pm, for some feedback... remember, perceived dislike is preferred to perceived apathy.(sorry for the phone typing)

[Serack]

whatever happened to our other triggermen from back in the day? Elegast, tcf being promenant in my head.. as a frequent poster and someone who has nominated a few threads myself, i think what the average poster wants is feedback if we do nominate something. a no with a reason is ok, and just a no is acceptable really. its the not hearing anything in reply that gets you the pm, for some feedback... remember, perceived dislike is preferred to perceived apathy.(sorry for the phone typing)

There have been instances where something just fell off the table (curators weren't actively working to get the job done in the window necessary), otherwise, it's a matter of application of the above principals (that I spent a considerable amount of time and effort laying out in detail). 

Honestly, I'm a bit uncomfortable being explicit about decisions about individual topics not making the cut, especially publically.  I mean, each topic is someone's baby, and I'm just a volunteer.  I'd prefer not to have the stress of having to defend the group decisions or my forgetting to check back on time to get something saved.