Questus Interruptus - The Fate of The Dwarf, The Elf And The Wizard

MC

Thanks for U2U.

I read the black and white of the rationale, and I will post something up here later, but in answer to your question - no, outside the official reason for scuttling, and leaving the three heroes with the mark of the beast branded on their forearms with no means of removing it, I have no alternative theory.

I don't really think it was having to recover Mithander's crystal from his rectum, or the well incident, or the way you rode your pony, or even the elf drawings you showed me... it was something far more sinister, yes, and the perpetrators are reasonably obvious to me, although I hear nothing directly.

But I don't know what the real rationale was.

Anyway, I will leave this up for a while, you can let me know what your understanding is if you like, and I will complete the post-analysis and launch into my scathing critique in this thread later!

One of the resident witch doctors has already placed a curse on the complainant, which I hope gets removed later, as it's a painful (though non-lethal) one.

WAS ME! Any questions?

PEACE...
m...

I u2u'd you for a reason. if I wanted to call you out for the entire board to hear, I would have.

edit: I did send JohnBull1 a few recommendations for future fiction sessions, but I doubt they'd be of much interest to the general board population.

[Edited on 9/23/2003 by MorningtonCrescent]

For you, no. It is all in character.

However, as a comment to be expanded on later, if you really believe that this Forum environment is a suitable place for minors (including your own children, for example) than I seriously question your judgment.

Not because of the possibility of silly innuendo in a fictional story. There is far worse than that posted up every day, by 5-6 members, and there is widespread use of expletive and abuse instead of a rational means of problem-solving.

No, far worse than that, there is RAMPANT PSYCHOPATHOLOGY inherent in the behavioral patterns of a number of contributors, which has a far more insidious effect on impressionable minds than any perceived smut or toilet humor.

On that level, you have proven yourself to be completely wrong in your judgement, or at least insofar as I understand what has happened, as I have it only from a Moderator.

MC

There is nothing that intuition has ever failed me on here, ever. This isn't an issue for you to worry about.

I am all for improving this community in a public way, and not by gossip or innuendo.

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
MC
There is nothing that intuition has ever failed me on here, ever. This isn't an issue for you to worry about.

I am all for improving this community in a public way, and not by gossip or innuendo.

no, I have some issues with you. if you plan on writing in future CF outings, they need to be addressed. but, let's see if your intuition can hit it. (hint: not content related)

Dude, it JUST SUCKED, that's all... Take what you want out of it, the comments you refer to ( about minors are NOT mine- try again).

It SUCKED. You made it SUCK ( by adding uneccessary cheap trash to it and that's that. No big deal. No big LOSS. Get OVER IT. Why is this on the board? It was PRIVATE until YOU put it up.

My character is UNIMPEACHABLE.

PEACE...
m...

I found the whole process, including the recommendation that authors not collude at all in plot development or scheduling of posts, to be interesting.

I think frequency of contributions is an obvious issue, and for example if the debate thread runs at 18 hour cycles then there should be one fiction contribution per writer every 18 hours.

However, I am happy to take on board any issues here, as they really will be useful for future efforts.

It's a shame we ended up as only three, but it was fun (at least that's what anyone reading it was telling me) while it lasted.

In fact, aside from what I perceive to be a relatively low interest in the Collaborative Fiction readership, I think most people reading it would have wanted to see the thing come to its climax. Or not.

Springer

Some things will never be to your taste.

On the matter of private vs public, decisions on collaboration between team members are generally better made between team members, no?

I accept that you are not someone who is concerned with minors viewing the board space, as a responsible parent.

But if there was some concern about the appropriateness of content to minors (not your concern), I reiterate my comments above. There is subject matter which becomes interesting to minors because of TV and mass media, that draws them here - and is presented herein in a way that is not suitable for minors at all.

Children are not able to fully distinguish reality from fantasy, good intention from bad, or where to place trust. That may well be so in all the WWW, but here the content is fluid and dynamic, and at times instantly unsuitable for impressionable minds until it is caught up on.

'Nuff said.

first things first, writer issues stay between writers. this topic is of interest to exactly 4 members of this board. taking petty issues public can only result in trouble. but, since they are, might as well run with it.
you're right, MA, there should be restraints put on posting. like, no more than 1 post in 18 or 24 hours. basically what happened is, you post nearly constantly, so it became more like "catch up with MA" than actual collaborative fiction. that's no fun to write.
another big one is never, ever do anything major with someone else's character without their permission. this is the #1 way to piss off a fellow writer. what happened with Springer's character falls under that rule. minor dialogue and possibly scenery changes are the only things that I've seen that are universally acceptable between players. anything else, clear it with the other writer. it takes 2 minutes and avoids misunderstandings and irritations over percieved misuses of character.

edit: and let's not humor ourselves. if we had 3 regular readers, I'd be shocked. I think it's best to leave The Quest as it is, and start fresh at some point in the future.

[Edited on 9/23/2003 by MorningtonCrescent]

AMEN! Kamsa HamniDa!

PEACE...
m...

I think those are intelligent guidelines. We didn't have them.

What we had was a loose game plan, and four people with different things going on for them personally in real world affairs, which reduced to three, and which at times led to no contributions for 48 hours or more.

You may think, for example, that I posted constantly, but I didn't. Sometimes I would fill the vacuum, and bump the thread when it had disappeared off the face of Today's Posts. My posts, no matter the length, take me no longer than a few minutes to compose and edit. I'm quick enough, with ATS chugging away in the background when I'm on my PC.

However, as Jb1 said, it is all about improvement, and there is room for plenty of that round these parts.

Out of interest, what is it that makes you say that "writer issues stay between writers"? If the topic is of little interest to the community at large, then they won't visit or read it, no problem.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, you should always do that.

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Out of interest, what is it that makes you say that "writer issues stay between writers"? If the topic is of little interest to the community at large, then they won't visit or read it, no problem.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, you should always do that.

I figured the "don't do anything outrageous with other characters" thing was common sense, but maybe that's just me. and I say "writer issues stay between writers", but I may not have elaborated enough. there was no reason for Springer or anyone else to get involved. I u2u'd you for a reason. already we have other unintended parties involved, and this thread hasn't even been here for 15 minutes. it's easier to solve problems when you don't have 50 other people chipping in their opinions. that's how flame wars start, and I'd personally prefer to avoid them if possible.

Agreed, there is PLENTY of room for improvement. I think a GREAT place to start would be with your attitude.

WTF was the "for you no, it's all in character" bit about? Further more all of a sudden you are sanguine about the fact it was a WRITER who asked that it be shut down?

I'll tell you what, I do not appreciate your BULL# innuendo here anymore than I did in the "Quest". Not that it matters a hill of beans to you (it wouldn't to me, but I have better manners than this) you need to come way down off your AIRhorse one of these days dude... Just my opinion naturally...

PEACE...
m...

MC

Appreciated.

You don't know what I was going to post anyway, nor what I will post, but I understand your concern that things should not get inflammatory.

I didn't U2U you for the same reason I have been replying publicly to things, with discretion, while not sending U2U's.

If any children come here with an intent to do something other than read and learn about collaborative fiction or what happened, and they start making snide remarks, then let them! I doubt it will happen.

Yes, like good taste is subjective, so is outrage.

The war in Iraq presents more outrage to me than a fantasy story where the puzzle pieces are still out there and evil grows in that alternate reality of our minds. The evil in the Iraq equation and the delicate poise of the international situation are far more gripping (and at the same time distasteful).

Let's avoid flame wars then!

[Edited on 23-9-2003 by MaskedAvatar]

we're not talking about Iraq. don't change the subject. do consider what I said. if you don't, this conversation will be happening again, and it won't be so civil. and no, I don't know what you were going to say. go ahead. I'd be interested in hearing it.

Springer

"In character" means "as expected". Not a sleight on character.

Your character is not unimpeachable, and nor is mine.

I don't intimate that mine is, at all, so it's not especially fair for you, who makes this claim, to say that I am on an air horse or high horse.

I'm OK with my attitude, and I am sorry that you are not.

I tell the truth as I see it. I don't demean anyone who has a different truth, except when I see them demeaning others.

There is a history of conflict involving you and those close to you with other parties on this Board. I have no interest in participating in that, nor flame wars, nor any attitude correction program you have in mind for me.

That is something that you can deal with now. Be firm and decisive, and see that people can be different to you, and have a different bearing and demeanor, and be equally correct in what they are saying, and appreciate that difference. Often it feels good to me, hope it works for you.

MC

I have already taken on board what you have said, and I won't be drawing you into any other issues that could be dealt with in private.

Although it would be interesting to see an angry side.

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
MC

I have already taken on board what you have said, and I won't be drawing you into any other issues that could be dealt with in private.

Although it would be interesting to see an angry side.

you don't want to see my angry side. and, good, because I'm going to bed and don't plan on dealing with any issues, mine or otherwise.

Bringing up useless attacks ON ME and MINE that I defended against and attempting to TWIST into ME attcking someone displays MUCH of what I referred to in my previous post.

I work with, EVERYDAY at the office (most hired directly by me), the most diverse group of people you could imagine. I am on NO "quest" (how appropriate!) to "change" ANYONE...

The folk of whom you try to suggest I and my imagined "Posse" attacked, were RUDE, and THEY attacked me and mine, DO NOT attempt to twist that, (the record with dates and time stamps is there for review by one and all) it diminishes your argument, I simply do NOT suffer rude, arrogant people without letting them know how I feel. I abhore bullies in all media.

The fact that you have so misread me and have "classified" me the same way as those who have felt my sting when being unneccessarily rude and combative tells me MUCH of your fortitude and make up.

You have had BOTH of your "co-writers" tell you that this was the wrong way to deal with this issue and you have retorted with besmurching my escucheon. That tells me ALL I need to know about YOU.
m...

[Edited on 9-23-2003 by Springer]