[TECHNICAL THREAD] for rules and settings and blaming the organizers

[Lord Parkin]

I note Margarita_sub appears to have the same relatively rare problem with blocking other players out of the game that Margarita did.

[Bisons]

this is a problem i had before. only with a few people. may be a firewall setting ^^

[Halvgud]

Raptorous, after seeing the content in the thread you made, I find myself at an impasse. You write good, it feels like you could have posted in the first story thread without missing a beat. Now there are two threads and this is confusing. Where to write? At the moment my gut feeling would suggest that the two threads be joined.

It appears that there are different interpretations of what makes a story. Another element is the non-story comments in the story threads. Does the story thread need a revamp? A set of rules?

I ask here instead of in the chronicle thread that Raptorous made, since Raptor posed the question here in the first place.

[suttree]

Halvgud - I think Raptorous wants his chronicle thread to be like the story thread but without the non-civ content. I think that's fine; since your stories are about your civ, I guess you could post in both my concern was that Raptorous wanted to start a banter thread, which is a place for public diplomacy. Nobody is forced to read a story/chronicle/whatever thread so it can't hurt to have many, I guess. Does that answer your question?

[Halvgud]

Perhaps I should move my posts to the chronicle thread then.

[Lord Parkin]

I too was confused about the exact purpose of the Chronicle thread when I first saw it. Personally I think the Story thread currently has enough overlap in focus that both threads could be merged into one. However, maybe it could be good to narrow the focus of the Story thread slightly, so as to make the distinction between content much more clear.

For example:

Role-play thread - "where you and your sock puppets can role-play to your heart's content on any topic you desire"
Chronicle thread - "where players in the game can post stories or misinformation related to their in-game adventures"

As in, splitting the current content between (1) a free-for-all thread in which anyone can participate with no subject off-limits and (2) a thread strictly for players limited to game-related stories.

Just a thought anyway.

[Halvgud]

For example:

Role-play thread - "where you and your sock puppets can role-play to your heart's content on any topic you desire"
Chronicle thread - "where players in the game can post stories or misinformation related to their in-game adventures"

As in, splitting the current content between (1) a free-for-all thread with no subject off-limits and (2) a thread strictly for players limited to game-related stories.

Just a thought anyway.

This is what I had in mind when stating my first question about possible rules. I believe this is a good idea. What do the other players/teams think?

[suttree]

I give my approval, but again, I don't believe anyone needs my permission to make/post in threads that are just for fun people can create a separate "sock-puppet" thread or an additional "interpretive dance" thread for all I care. I'll read the content I like and ignore the rest. No rules needed.

If people start negotiating treaties or doing "serious" diplomacy in-thread, then it matters. I would feel compelled to participate because its part of the game.

Raptorous and Halvgud want to tell the story of their civ - have fun.

[suttree]

or an additional "interpretive dance" thread for all I care

I'm serious about this btw. Oxyphenbutazone keeps on complaining in-thread that there aren't enough places on the Internet where one can express the essence of Civ IV through movement.

[Halvgud]

You realize that this request may become a phenomenon greater than Gangnam Style? Oh, Oxy counts on it? Well then.. :angel: