Other Minimum post lengths

[Idea]

Idea I think your fighting an uphill battle dear, I'm not sure Hunter is much interested in other viewpoints.

Although I think he is trying to bring up an interesting point with his idea of judging on quality versus word length. It works fine in 1x1s, although that is mostly because it's easy to offer feedback for posts when it's just two people.

I think for groups you make an interesting point about giving people like an objective goal to strive for.

Maybe something like

GM Post Rules
1. All posts should be readable and contain your best efforts at grammar/spelling
2. I would like X number of posts every Y days.
3. No double posting
4. Each post must include characters name, location, and action and a reaction
5. It is preferred if posts are at least four sentences in length but as long as the other three rules are met there might be exceptions.

Something like this maybe? With five and two maybe being added on after the fact. Those would be the things I can see forgetting or not thinking about until you realize that one person is posting like six times in the span of an hour and throwing off everyone else's response. And some people being cute with like a sentence long response that contains an action and a reaction.

Well, what you're proposing there geeking out, is very similar to what I actually do (though I make rules not suggestions).


Still, and I think I hammered this point enough but regardless yes size does not equal quality but actual quality cannot be quantified. It's not that kind of concept. So length minimums are simply an admittedly vastly imperfect, solution to the problem.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Well, what you're proposing there geeking out, is very similar to what I actually do (though I make rules not suggestions).


Still, and I think I hammered this point enough but regardless yes size does not equal quality but actual quality cannot be quantified. It's not that kind of concept. So length minimums are simply an admittedly vastly imperfect, solution to the problem.

Know I understand what you're saying about the post requirements I was just curious on what it would look like to make a rule for some kind of objective post goal versus post length.

Since I don't do groups I was just guessing on what it would look like based on sort of roughly what happens in 1x1s ( well a lot less formally obviously )

 

[Killigrew]

"adventure not love" could be a standard for quality, we've already established that it's the GM's sensibilities that matter more in this case.

Well, yeah. In this case, I'm trying to make sure that the crew is able to interact with everyone at the start, and doesn't end up separating into pairs. Quality of storyline, if you will.
But, see, if I were to outright say that, people would totally miss the point! They'd start to avoid anything but a group conversation, and veer away from any 1on1 interaction with people. I don't mind if it naturally develops, that's what I'm saying -- I just want the character to be open to whatever may happen, and hopefully get a sense of camaraderie amongst the crew.
See how long that'd be to explain, and the risk of misunderstanding? So much easier and clearer to stick to a simple "here for adventure and not the loooove" as what I'm looking for.

I will also ignore the "paragraph sized" there.

bwahahah I'M EXPOSED

"easy to read", "creativity", "interesting" and "pretty posts" are all concepts which are some vague and others actually subjective. Having to define a standard for quality wouldn't stop at having to define some major traits like those because the issue remains that you don't have a concrete measure beyond what your impression of it is, meaning that you fall into the same traps as you would if you left quality undefined.

Well, I'm not sure I would. Because these requests all follow the same logic; namely, that I'm wanting to give the players freedom so that they will in turn use it to contribute to the story and the world's lore. So far, those kinds of people have signed up, and I'm really enjoying the contributions they're adding to the world and the story. The posts are pretty! They're easy to read (and I've been happy to read the RP over again and feel my inspiration replenish). So far, it's honestly what I was hoping for. So I think it's working, at least that it communicated enough to attract the right crowd? I've made sure to critique Character Sheets and encourage lore that goes in the right direction. They're adding lore to the world and asking me to clarify points, and I let 'em know if I'd like help in certain areas (I so need it too).
Man, I hope I don't ruin it :^0

EDIT: Also, in response to your comments about these things needing to be defined and explained, I must disagree. Sometimes explaining something makes it less understandable.

I think my explanation, using words like "interesting" and "pretty posts" is perfectly understandable. It means that it keeps my interest (not dull and/or useless) and it's pleasing to read (not jarring and messy). If I were to go so far as to explain everything I understand about what makes something interesting (eventful, but not too eventful, realistic, but not overly detailed, good descriptions, but not only descriptive), I would effectively be handing the RPer a list of what I want them to do. Have you ever had to write to so stringent a prompt? I so hope not.
Before I wrote an essay, I've always needed to be able to look at a prompt and come up with a response of my own that I can support on my own terms. As long as I consider my writing good, most people agreed with me... or that is to say, all who read it thought the essay was good enough to deserve a passing grade.
So I spoke in vague terms in order to encourage the RPer to try and write when they've got a good idea of what they want to write; hopefully this means that instead of trying to suit a laid out list of my varied and stringent standards for reading a good book (I don't even care as much about RP posts as I do about a book... wow, that list would go on forever), they'll just put forth what they've got in mind and I'll have all the fun of a back-and-forth with them. It's best to keep it vague enough to give them an idea of what you'd like and clear enough to give them an idea of what you don't want. And at the same time, you don't want to seem like someone with very strong preferences, since then they'll be intimidated by you even though they liked your ideas enough to submit a CS... and that's just not very fun.

 

[Uncultured]

Killigrew Idea

You can easily assert a writers level by just asking for a sample post. It doesn't need to be objective/measurable to be critiqued by a GM, this isn't a lab setting man, you're not arguing against idiots, convoluted arguments won't work here. Something doesn't need to be measurable on a number scale for it be be analyzed for quality. If the ability to measure with numbers is required for something to be critiqued then every movie critic is irrelevant, studios going over scripts that are submitted to them must be completely lost, book reviews, art reviews, music reviews etc. all meaningless because it can't be quantified by numbers. All that matters is numbers because they're objective lololololol wut ok.

Furthermore, as we all know, length requirements fail to weed out bad writers anyway, if anything a sample post is a better way to ensure quality of post.

 

[Killigrew]

Something doesn't need to be measurable on a number scale for it be be analyzed for quality

tbh if I had that ability, I'd be so happy. "LOOK, EVERYONE, A NEGATIVE 2,000 ON THE SCALE!!! QUICK. STOP READING THIS BUNK BEFORE IT ROTS YOUR BRAIN." ... *sighs* if only...

also ayyyy I did that too! I had them write out a narrative "entrance post" for their character as part of the CS. (=u = I'll just go ahead and pat my own shoulder now.

 

[Idea]

Well, I'm not sure I would. Because these requests all follow the same logic; namely, that I'm wanting to give the players freedom so that they will in turn use it to contribute to the story and the world's lore. So far, those kinds of people have signed up, and I'm really enjoying the contributions they're adding to the world and the story. The posts are pretty! They're easy to read (and I've been happy to read the RP over again and feel my inspiration replenish). So far, it's honestly what I was hoping for. So I think it's working, at least that it communicated enough to attract the right crowd? I've made sure to critique Character Sheets and encourage lore that goes in the right direction. They're adding lore to the world and asking me to clarify points, and I let 'em know if I'd like help in certain areas (I so need it too).
Man, I hope I don't ruin it :^0

EDIT: Also, in response to your comments about these things needing to be defined and explained, I must disagree. Sometimes explaining something makes it less understandable.

I think my explanation, using words like "interesting" and "pretty posts" is perfectly understandable. It means that it keeps my interest (not dull and/or useless) and it's pleasing to read (not jarring and messy). If I were to go so far as to explain everything I understand about what makes something interesting (eventful, but not too eventful, realistic, but not overly detailed, good descriptions, but not only descriptive), I would effectively be handing the RPer a list of what I want them to do. Have you ever had to write to so stringent a prompt? I so hope not.
Before I wrote an essay, I've always needed to be able to look at a prompt and come up with a response of my own that I can support on my own terms. As long as I consider my writing good, most people agreed with me... or that is to say, all who read it thought the essay was good enough to deserve a passing grade.
So I spoke in vague terms in order to encourage the RPer to try and write when they've got a good idea of what they want to write; hopefully this means that instead of trying to suit a laid out list of my varied and stringent standards for reading a good book (I don't even care as much about RP posts as I do about a book... wow, that list would go on forever), they'll just put forth what they've got in mind and I'll have all the fun of a back-and-forth with them. It's best to keep it vague enough to give them an idea of what you'd like and clear enough to give them an idea of what you don't want. And at the same time, you don't want to seem like someone with very strong preferences, since then they'll be intimidated by you even though they liked your ideas enough to submit a CS... and that's just not very fun.

What you have here certainly is a very interesting case. The impression I get is that you mostly got lucky with your player base, since the mechanisms to deal with those who aren't as cooperative are ineficient. You also have a point about sometimes guiding more than defining can be a more effective tactic. That said, it's not one I would take, as I find the idea of imposing a rule one can't even explain to be tyranical and a recipe to abuse. Which may just be a difference in perspective derived from my own experience with GMs that do that.

All that said though, there is one kind of person for whom this system wouldn't work, and that is detailed roleplayers. Roleplayers who enjoy producing and receiving a particular kind of quality content, which not only contributes to the endgoal but to the journey as well. If the function of the criteria was midly questionable before in the case of GMs such as myself it plain useless, because they permit the creation of virtually any form of content. In other words the expectations of the GM have to be pretty loose to begin with for them to work.

you're not arguing against idiots, convoluted arguments won't work here.

Nothing suggested I might be until comments like that start popping up

You can easily assert a writers level by just asking for a sample post. It doesn't need to be objective/measurable to be critiqued by a GM, this isn't a lab setting man, you're not arguing against idiots, convoluted arguments won't work here. Something doesn't need to be measurable on a number scale for it be be analyzed for quality. If the ability to measure with numbers is required for something to be critiqued then every movie critic is irrelevant, studios going over scripts that are submitted to them must be completely lost, book reviews, art reviews, music reviews etc. all meaningless because it can't be quantified by numbers. All that matters is numbers because they're objective lololololol wut ok.

Furthermore, as we all know, length requirements fail to weed out bad writers anyway, if anything a sample post is a better way to ensure quality of post.

I'll just here a few reasons why writing samples are an even worse way of asserting quality:

1.People handpick their writing samples. They won't just give you their average

2.Writing samples are a single post, and doesn't account for the fact that people's lives are mutable

3.Writing samples are 1 post, one instance, as opposed to the multitude a player will have to go through

4.Evaluation of writing samples is measured on the whims of those reading them (when they read and don't just skim) moreso than reasonable criteria

5.Writing samples are devoid of the proper context found in an RP

 

[Killigrew]

That said, it's not one I would take, as I find the idea of imposing a rule one can't even explain to be tyranical and a recipe to abuse.

Not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but I did say that I can explain it, just that going through all the trouble of doing that would only put more pressure on players rather than help them adapt better to the RP. All I want is good content, so my goal is to be clear and brief.

All that said though, there is one kind of person for whom this system wouldn't work, and that is detailed roleplayers. Roleplayers who enjoy producing and receiving a particular kind of quality content, which not only contributes to the endgoal but to the journey as well. If the function of the criteria was midly questionable before in the case of GMs such as myself it plain useless, because they permit the creation of virtually any form of content. In other words the expectations of the GM have to be pretty loose to begin with for them to work.

I've got to disagree. Detailed roleplayers can add to the world and plot just as well as any other RPer. The reason I chose an expedition plot was precisely because of how natural the structure is with new ideas. The CSes helped flesh out the cities that I made a basic outline for -- and I did end up rejecting one person, sorry.
Also, since the players are holding to the tone and logic of the world that I established, the information and lore they add to the world fleshes stuff out and doesn't just spontaneously introduce new elements. That's an important distinction I didn't bring up.

 

[Idea]

I've got to disagree. Detailed roleplayers can add to the world and plot just as well as any other RPer. The reason I chose a expedition genre was precisely because of how natural the genre is to naturally coming up with ideas. The CSes helped flesh out the cities that I made a basic outline for -- and I did end up rejecting one person, sorry.
Also, since the players are holding to the tone and logic of the world that I established, the information and lore they add to the world fleshes stuff out rather than introducing new elements. That's an important distinction I didn't bring up.

Detailed roleplayers can't contribute but they can't expect detailed posts in return because your rules don't enforce that. Your rules only require some contribution be made, which is not enough to satisfy the needs of detailed roleplayers.

Not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but I did say that I can explain it, just that going through all the trouble of doing that would only put more pressure on players that can create quality content rather than help them adapt better to the RP.

Yes you did, but if you don't lay it out somewhere then it might as well not exist because people can't actually access the full criteria

 

[Killigrew]

people can't actually access the full criteria

I mean... they can ask me questions. I kind of assume they aren't so... dumb, I guess, as to have no clue of what I mean by interesting, pretty posts, or contribute to the world. Unless I somehow have a psychic connection with the strangers that showed up to my rp, the requirements communicated just fine.
Hypothesis -> Experiment -> Success
Scientific method? Butwheresmycontrolgroup

Detailed roleplayers can't contribute but they can't expect detailed posts in return because your rules don't enforce that. Your rules only require some contribution be made, which is not enough to satisfy the needs of detailed roleplayers.

Tbh maybe you're right. I think I disagreed on your terminology, since I know of some (of whom I would call detailed rpers) that are cool with writing paragraphs or lines of dialogue now and then. I tend to think of it as rare for someone to be so stringent with rping as to not only need from themselves to post an excess of 3 paragraphs, but to need it of anyone who replies to them as well.

 

[Uncultured]

Idea Killigrew

Anyone who can't accept a common sense based, contextual system, is a person who is enslaved to a ruleset. Rulesets are dogma and anyone enslaved to a dogma needs to re-evaluate.

I'm advocating for a system where people can post according to what they feel is appropriate, not a one size fits all rule where context is ignored because "hurr durr longer is better". A short story by a world class writer will be better than anything I write even if what I write is 2000 pages and what they write is 20 pages.

Longer posts typically take more effort and time, but effort and time doesn't equal quality, longer posts aren't always good for a RP, and it's not always appropriate to post something long.

You literally won't admit that sometimes something under four paragraphs can be a good addition to a story, lol, elitism at it's best. Just because it doesn't adhere to your magic number doesn't mean it can't be a valuable contribution.

Also a four paragraph limit inherently favors flowery writers. Someone who writes in a barebones, minimalist style (which, by the way, many great writers do) will have to create a lot more real content. You might find it very easy to fill space with random observations and unnecessary big ass words, but other writers may struggle because they are more minimalist and cut the fat from the edges, preferring not to just stuff the sheet. For them they need to actually work their asses off to write larger posts because they'll need to scrape the bottom of the barrel for some fresh observation or thought, and people like this will feel pressed and uncomfortable writing because their style is stacked against.

Also I again, am a detailed writer, but I am also contextual. Sometimes a short post is far more impactful.

 

[QuirkyAngel]

Hmm, people here seem to all agree that a minimum post length/post quota isn't a perfect measure of quality, but don't really highlight its other uses. Why do you think teachers require certain lengths in their essays? Post quota is a quantifiable measure of the amount of work performed per post. Some people like seeing a response that has a certain amount of effort or thought put into it. Maybe they like reading lengthy stuff. Because while lengthy post doesn't necessarily mean a better rper, it also generally means more details (flowery or not) is included in the post.

What is detail? It paints a beautiful image in your mind with wordiness. Paints a pretty picture. Detail doesn't always tell a story nor does it have to push plot. Detailed writers love that =P

Other than that, post quotas can serve to block jet-fast posts (in case the gm in question isn't looking for a fast paced one). It can serve to challenge people who have never tried writing more than 3 sentences in their life. It's not as intimidating as saying 'You have to write creatively' or 'I want each of your posts to be a well written work of art'

 

[Killigrew]

Why do you think teachers require certain lengths in their essays?

Honestly, I've asked teachers this and for the most part they agreed that it didn't do anyone much good. Hahahha really, they still have some kind of expectation for length, but all they really judge is the content of the essay.
And not to forget, short stories have quotas, novels have quotas, novellas have quotas... they're differentiated by their length. Why? Not because of style or ease of access... because the publishers decide how much it should cost to publish.
Quotas are uselessssss
But I agree that it can be fun to meet a pointless requirement now and then. Like if I had to use the word "hickory" three times a day. It does me no practical good, but I could have some fun with it. Additionally, a professor had her class rewrite a line of Robert Frost's poem 10 times, and I felt my brain growing I swear.
Anyway, the whole argument that "I like thought and detail" == "Time for a post quota" was where we started, so I won't get into it again even if it is tempting... bottom line is, everyone likes that stuff, but some of us only want it if it's contextually useful so that the words aren't mere pointless padding... in the worst cases framing a dull line of dialogue as a meager attempt at interaction.

 

[QuirkyAngel]

Honestly, I've asked teachers this and for the most part they agreed that it didn't do anyone much good. Hahahha but really, they thought to teach us how to write -- but again, short stories have quotas, novels have quotas, novellas have quotas... they're differentiated by their length. Why? Not because of style or ease of access... because the publishers decide how much it should cost to publish.
Quotas are uselessssss
But I agree that it can be fun to meet a pointless requirement now and then. Like if I had to use the word "hickory" three times a day. It does me no practical good, but I could have some fun with it. Additionally, a professor had her class rewrite a line of Robert Frost's poem 10 times, and I felt my brain growing I swear.
Anyway, the whole argument that "I like thought and detail" == "Time for a post quota" was where we started, so I won't get into it again even if it is tempting... bottom line is, everyone likes that stuff, but some of us only want it if it's contextually useful so that the words aren't mere pointless padding... in the worst cases framing a dull line of dialogue as a meager attempt at interaction.

Hehe, and my argument is that nothing anyone puts serious effort in is pointless so I must be a Hufflepuff

I simply said longer post == more details (whether the details are necessary or not is not a matter )...and that's what detailed rpers like. I won't say anything about what I prefer. But I will defend a gm's right to place a quota. Because, in my mind, it's all really just preference. What is dull to one person might be fascinating to another.

 

[Idea]

mean... they can ask me questions. I kind of assume they aren't so... dumb, I guess, as to have no clue of what I mean by interesting, pretty posts, or contribute to the world. Unless I somehow have a psychic connection with the strangers that showed up to my rp, the requirements communicated just fine.
Hypothesis -> Experiment -> Success
Scientific method? Butwheresmycontrolgroup

It's not that their dumb, but as I brought up before, that they might have a different perspective on what the words implies, on the nuances if nothing else. If a person thinks something as interesting but it doesn't fall into what YOU would consider interesting, then you go into the dilema which I mentioned before. Either you effectively state that each person can define their own standard and thus the rule is meaningless OR you have to impose on them a rule you effectively never actually told them about.

Tbh maybe you're right. I think I disagreed on your terminology, since I know of some (of whom I would call detailed rpers) that are cool with writing paragraphs or lines of dialogue now and then. I tend to think of it as rare for someone to be so stringent with rping as to not only need from themselves to post an excess of 3 paragraphs, but to need it of anyone who replies to them as well.
There was this one guy a few years back who totally would do that, though... Man, I'm so glad I never actually joined his rp.

I don't mean by the size specifically. I mean having flavor to the post. Things beyond the functional action, reaction, and dialogue, things like characterization, worldbuilding, the details of the experience, the thought process of the characters, foreshadowing and other concepts which I must have alredy mentioned a million times in this thread alone. That kind of content isn't actually requested by your rules and one could go the entire roleplay with their character in a vaccum under those rules. Which to a detailed roleplayer is just bland and boring and it's especially bad when one feels like they just jammed a buck load of work and the other person barely glanced at the screen, by what appearances suggest anyway.

Again, your way of doing things is pretty amazing and I don't doubt that it is effective in various contexts yet I also believe that it works well with a certain kind of GM and players whose expectations match your rules, rather than ones that need anything beyond them.

where context is ignored because "hurr durr longer is better".

You literally won't admit that sometimes something under four paragraphs can be a good addition to a story, lol, elitism at it's best. Just because it doesn't adhere to your magic number doesn't mean it can't be a valuable contribution.

Wow, you really can't go one post being respectful can you? And you have the balls to call me an elitist after saying stuff like:

Anyone who can't accept a common sense based, contextual system, is a person who is enslaved to a ruleset. Rulesets are dogma and anyone enslaved to a dogma needs to re-evaluate.

Ad Hominem.

'm advocating for a system where people can post according to what they feel is appropriate, not a one size fits all rule where context is ignored because "hurr durr longer is better". A short story by a world class writer will be better than anything I write even if what I write is 2000 pages and what they write is 20 pages.

Longer posts typically take more effort and time, but effort and time doesn't equal quality, longer posts aren't always good for a RP, and it's not always appropriate to post something long.

You literally won't admit that sometimes something under four paragraphs can be a good addition to a story, lol, elitism at it's best. Just because it doesn't adhere to your magic number doesn't mean it can't be a valuable contribution.

Which I never once said. Again, and I really must question how many times I must state this, minimum post lengths are not the perfect way to go about it, but they are the best available way to actually getting the content we are looking for as detailed writers. Which, as I stated from the very fucking beggining, is not saying detailed writers are better than non-detailed writers, simply that they have different styles which are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE. You know what "minimalist posts" , as you call them, are to me? Bland and boring. They have no flavor. Which is not to say they are bad posts, but they are not the kind of posts I want to see when I join a detailed roleplay or as a detailed roleplayer. If you want to make those posts by all means go ahead and make them, but you don't have the right to demand we remove limitations just so you can shove content the other people don't want in their roleplays into their roleplays.

Also a four paragraph limit inherently favors flowery writers. Someone who writes in a barebones, minimalist style (which, by the way, many great writers do) will have to create a lot more real content. You might find it very easy to fill space with random observations and unnecessary big ass words, but other writers may struggle because they are more minimalist and cut the fat from the edges, preferring not to just stuff the sheet. For them they need to actually work their asses off to write larger posts because they'll need to scrape the bottom of the barrel for some fresh observation or thought, and people like this will feel pressed and uncomfortable writing because their style is stacked against.

Yes, it favors flowery writers,THAT'S THE POINT. The idea is to keep out the writers who don't match the expected style of the roleplay. People who are not into the same things as to what the roleplay is supposed to be like.

 

[Uncultured]

Idea

You think flowery writing is inherently better, lol. Because you'll deny it I'll play the quote game.

"Bland and boring" which are negative traits.

J.D Salinger comes to mind as an excellent minimalist writer. Mark Twain was also a simple but elegant writer. Actually most good writers avoid being flowery because it's a shitty way to tell a story in most cases. "Flowery" is just a pleasant word for overwriting and overwriting might be the worst thing a writer can do because of how it kills reader interest.

Barebones and minimalist is often more emotionally striking than flowery bullshit. One day you might realize how ignorant you sound. Regardless of how detailed or simple a writer typically is, something that doesn't add anything to the story is useless. A good detailed writer will take a long road to the same destination that a minimalist writer will. The thing is that most detailed writers on this website, and most amateur "detailed" writers, confuse writing important stuff in a detailed fashion and writing a bunch of useless shit that adds nothing to the story. Most of the writers on this site are average as fuck and think that the best way to write detailed is to just meander around, beating around the bush and kicking the observation horse until it's ghost dies.

 

[QuirkyAngel]

Oh dear. I feel like I'm playing Doki Doki Literature again.

 

[Idea]

You think flowery writing is inherently better, lol. Because you'll deny it I'll play the quote game.

Which, as I stated from the very fucking beggining, is not saying detailed writers are better than non-detailed writers, simply that they have different styles which are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE

"Bland and boring" which are negative traits.

Yes, they are. Also to note:

are to me

In case you missed the "to me" part which specifically implies that I'm referring to my experience of them and not necessarily to the whole universal reality. I did make myself a stand-in for detailed roleplayers in that phrase, yes, but that again doesn't imply all shorter posts are inherently bland and boring. Just that I and as I understand other detailed roleplayers read those posts and find them to lack basic traits which are at the heart of what makes the writing interesting to us.

J.D Salinger comes to mind as an excellent minimalist writer. Mark Twain was also a simple but elegant writer. Actually most good writers avoid being flowery because it's a shitty way to tell a story in most cases. "Flowery"

Yes and no. Yes, most good writers avoid being flowery for the sake of being flowery, but no writer worth their salt would just ignore basics like characterization, foreshadowing and descriptive immersiveness. Let me rephrase that actually, some do, but they appeal to a specific group of people with that kind of writing. Which is a restructed group of people.

Barebones and minimalist is often more emotionally striking than flowery bullshit. One day you might realize how ignorant you sound.

Wow, you really can't go one post being respectful can you? And you have the balls to call me an elitist after saying stuff like:

Ad Hominem.

A good detailed writer will take a long road to the same destination that a minimalist writer will. The thing is that most detailed writers on this website, and most amateur "detailed" writers, confuse writing important stuff in a detailed fashion and writing a bunch of useless shit that adds nothing to the story. Most of the writers on this site are average as fuck and think that the best way to write detailed is to just meander around, beating around the bush and kicking the observation horse until it's ghost dies.

That is true, but if you think that in any defends your position you haven't been paying attention. Because what I argued with you thus far was that many people label themselves detailed writers but aren't actually fit for that style. You, sir, might just be one of them.



I would like to also announce that I won't be replying to message from you anymore. It is clear that you have no intention if so much as having a civilized discussion or taking any of my words seriously. Furthermore given I could effectively reply to everything you say at this point by simply going back and quoting my own posts, the conversation is already going in circles. Besides, I need to get back to my studies. So I wish you a good day and call this off.

 

[Idea]

Oh dear. I feel like I'm playing Doki Doki Literature again.

lol

 

[Uncultured]

Yes, they are. Also to note:

In case you missed the "to me" part which specifically implies that I'm referring to my experience of them and not necessarily to the whole universal reality. I did make myself a stand-in for detailed roleplayers in that phrase, yes, but that again doesn't imply all shorter posts are inherently bland and boring. Just that I and as I understand other detailed roleplayers read those posts and find them to lack basic traits which are at the heart of what makes the writing interesting to us.


Yes and no. Yes, most good writers avoid being flowery for the sake of being flowery, but no writer worth their salt would just ignore basics like characterization, foreshadowing and descriptive immersiveness. Let me rephrase that actually, some do, but they appeal to a specific group of people with that kind of writing. Which is a restructed group of people.







That is true, but if you think that in any defends your position you haven't been paying attention. Because what I argued with you thus far was that many people label themselves detailed writers but aren't actually fit for that style. You, sir, might just be one of them.



I would like to also announce that I won't be replying to message from you anymore. It is clear that you have no intention if so much as having a civilized discussion or taking any of my words seriously. Furthermore given I could effectively reply to everything you say at this point by simply going back and quoting my own posts, the conversation is already going in circles. So I wish you a good day and call this off.

I'd bet my life savings that I'm a better writer then you in any style, "detailed" in your lexicon basically means lots of bullshit. Barebones writing has plenty of detail, it is just important detail.

The fact that you think bare bones means no foreshadowing (which is actually a really stupid thing, foreshadowing is stupid) no characterization (how) and immersing the reader (which is actually as doable in barebones as over descriptive because life is a lot simpler than over-writers present)

I'm arguing with someone who has a 12 year old anime girl in with BDSM gear on and has a bunch of <10 year old anime girls on their profile, what da fuq am I doing. My lack of civilized behavior is reflective of your superiority complex, your high horse could step over a mountain.

 

[Idea]

I'm arguing with someone who has a 12 year old anime girl in with BDSM gear on and has a bunch of <10 year old anime girls on their profile, what da fuq am I doing. My lack of civilized behavior is reflective of your superiority complex, your high horse could step over a mountain.

I think the irony of those two sentences next to one another pretty much sums up our entire conversation

 

[Uncultured]

I think the irony of those two sentences next to one another pretty much sums up our entire conversation

I have no shame about being an asshole though, I don't think it detracts from anything that I'm saying. The irony isn't lost on me, that's why I mentioned it.

 

[rae2nerdy]

QuirkyAngel : Re teachers and post lengths.

Well I would say length is more a measure of talent than work/effort. Sort of like math. Some people can do complex math problems in their head with no problem. And some people need a calculator, a piece of paper, their book, and a good three hours to figure out the same problems.

For some people writing detailed well thought out posts is like doing math problems in their head and for some it's like sitting at a table for three hours trying to figure out the value of X or whatever.

I mean I agree with the general idea that setting specific post length = one way to measure thought put into posts.

And in groups I think it also gives some form of accountability to the players. Everyone must hit this goal post no exceptions. It evens the playing field a little between people who might not have the innate talent to push out long posts but still like detailed responses.

Actually something I've never seen proposed that might help some of the problems that keep being brought up - A min/max posting length.

Like you must post at least 3 paragraphs but no more than 5.

You're cracking the hammer a little but you're also evening the playing field. So the folks who can't write like three pages equally don't get overwhelmed and the folks who like long flowery posts don't get bored by shorter responses.

 

[Whisker]

Idea

You think flowery writing is inherently better, lol. Because you'll deny it I'll play the quote game.

"Bland and boring" which are negative traits.

J.D Salinger comes to mind as an excellent minimalist writer. Mark Twain was also a simple but elegant writer. Actually most good writers avoid being flowery because it's a shitty way to tell a story in most cases. "Flowery" is just a pleasant word for overwriting and overwriting might be the worst thing a writer can do because of how it kills reader interest.

Barebones and minimalist is often more emotionally striking than flowery bullshit. One day you might realize how ignorant you sound. Regardless of how detailed or simple a writer typically is, something that doesn't add anything to the story is useless. A good detailed writer will take a long road to the same destination that a minimalist writer will. The thing is that most detailed writers on this website, and most amateur "detailed" writers, confuse writing important stuff in a detailed fashion and writing a bunch of useless shit that adds nothing to the story. Most of the writers on this site are average as fuck and think that the best way to write detailed is to just meander around, beating around the bush and kicking the observation horse until it's ghost dies.

I know they're not arguing anymore, but I have to +1 this post. Conciseness and avoidance of being unnecessarily verbose are one of the hallmarks of good writing. Pacing is incredibly important, even more so on a site like RPN where there is a high RP-mortality rate, and there just aren't that many people who can run a story effectively with the pacing it needs.

I see no drop in quality between the sentence "It was hot enough to fry an egg on a rock" and a whole paragraph devoted to describing how hot it was. That one sentence pretty much tells you that on it's own.

 

[QuirkyAngel]

QuirkyAngel : Re teachers and post lengths.

Well I would say length is more a measure of talent than work/effort. Sort of like math. Some people can do complex math problems in their head with no problem. And some people need a calculator, a piece of paper, their book, and a good three hours to figure out the same problems.

For some people writing detailed well thought out posts is like doing math problems in their head and for some it's like sitting at a table for three hours trying to figure out the value of X or whatever.

I mean I agree with the general idea that setting specific post length = one way to measure thought put into posts.

And in groups I think it also gives some form of accountability to the players. Everyone must hit this goal post no exceptions. It evens the playing field a little between people who might not have the innate talent to push out long posts but still like detailed responses.

Actually something I've never seen proposed that might help some of the problems that keep being brought up - A min/max posting length.

Like you must post at least 3 paragraphs but no more than 5.

You're cracking the hammer a little but you're also evening the playing field. So the folks who can't write like three pages equally don't get overwhelmed and the folks who like long flowery posts don't get bored by shorter responses.

So maybe not effort then =P, but the person who churned out more paragraphs still did more work. Work is a quantifiable output (remembering my Physics class). Say players A and B were both given a single task - to clean their room for example. Both rooms were the same size and the same level of mess. Player A finished quickly. Player B struggled to finish their room (because let's be honest, some people are a natural with getting things done and some people struggle to focus with the boring stuff). Player B clearly spent more time, but in the end, both players did the same amount of work. The kinetic energy utilized is the same.

I do see what you mean though...but I don't think putting an upper limit is the best solution for rps I wanna do either. I don't want to limit people's words. I like reading them. Finding a comfort zone of writing for everyone is a challenge worth taking on if the gm is up to it. But in my mind, if a player gets overwhelmed or bored of another players response in a group setting it's simply just a matter focusing on their style or finding another player in the group to interact with if they want to continue rping.

That said your solution of a compromise holds merit.

 

[myfanwy]

after skimming and going back in my promise to myself not to comment again, i feel that i must say this:

i'm not what you would call a "flowery writer", nor am i fully minimalist if we go with the definition of minimalist writers not writing blocks of text, and yet i still write more than the average amount.

style has a lot to with it, yes, but with also what people deem important enough to post. minimalist writers may not focus on scenery but they do character building well (even though salinger was a whiny bitch, especially in catcher in the rye, his character development was pretty good). "flowery" writers do well with scenery and some character development.

it's not impossible to find a group role play with detailed writers, they're just (no offense) on more... highbrow writing sites.

join whatever role play you like just follow the rules j f c it's not this hard