Submission Guidelines

[Flagg]

As the submission system is forum-based for the time being, I'd like to come up with a "Submission Guidelines" announcement to put at the top of each forum.


Some basic points I'd like to cover are:


* Use of proper grammar / spelling -- while it's understood that many people are not native English speakers, there should be a minimum reasonable level of effort to make sure it's readable, properly punctuated, and free of major spelling errors.


* A standard format for submitting stats, for Charms, Characters, etc.


* A basic WW-compatible legal disclaimer of what constitutes infringement.


* A prohibition on submitting characters, artifacts, etc, without any descriptions or flavor text.


Input?


-S

 

[Persell]

* Use of proper grammar / spelling -- while it's understood that many people are not native English speakers, there should be a minimum reasonable level of effort to make sure it's readable, properly punctuated, and free of major spelling errors.


I consider this to be one of the most improtant aspects f our new site. If we make mention of this, little teenagers who post illegible garbage before declaring "idun care, its the internet lamo lol", can be happily pointed at the FAQ, then sodomised by Octavian.


On that note, can I request a total absence of lol, anywhere?

 

[Persell]

I really, really, really think we should endeavour to have some editors for submissions. Provided we don't have ten thousand submissions per day, if every submission has to be approved by an editor before it goes up we could make a serious dint in the truly epic volume of crap the compendium was plagued with.


I suspect there are more than a few of us who would volunteer for this. I would!

 

[Flagg]

I really' date=' really, really think we should endeavour to have some editors for submissions. Provided we don't have ten thousand submissions per day, if every submission has to be approved by an editor before it goes up we could make a serious dint in the truly epic volume of crap the compendium was plagued with.[/quote']
I think this is a good idea. Unfortunately, phpBB doesn't support this out of the box. However, there are quite a few free mods available. I'll see if I can find one that fits the bill.


-S

 

[Persell]

I really' date=' really, really think we should endeavour to have some editors for submissions. Provided we don't have ten thousand submissions per day, if every submission has to be approved by an editor before it goes up we could make a serious dint in the truly epic volume of crap the compendium was plagued with.[/quote']
I think this is a good idea. Unfortunately, phpBB doesn't support this out of the box. However, there are quite a few free mods available. I'll see if I can find one that fits the bill.


-S

I fear it would require custom work. Something like an automatic post screening system. Forum moderators (such as the editors) can choose to either unscreen or delete posts. New posts would need to be right at the top on a moderators screen, and there would need to be a sticky at the top explaining what happened. Or, alternatively, we could receive twenty five identical submissions, then find outselevs bombarded with "My Submission didn't work lol help please" threads.

[QUOTE="Blue Moon. I]I think this is a good way to preserve quality - anything altogether rubbish can be immediately rejected. Anything that doesn't meet the standards of english usage can be politely turned down. Anything that is nonsense, or inappropriate can also be shot down.
Of course, the Editors would need to be charged to use their power wisely. Anything legible and legitimate should be approved, even if we disagree with it's form, style or manner.


Did I say we? I meant they. Yeah.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Flagg]

Here's my proposal for a submission system using the current forum capabilities:


I will lock the existing categorized forums so that only moderators can create new posts there.


I will then create a "New Submissions" forum that people can post their stuff to, and edit them, but other users will not be able to view them.


It will be the job of the Moderator to approve the new submissions, then move them to the appropriate forum, where they will be made "official" and users can leave comments on them.


Thoughts?


-S

 

[StarHawk]

Another thought along the same lines would be to set up some free account elsewhere (or here, I wouldn't know) just for "Moderators" (probably renamed something interesting) where people who want to submit stuff send their email with their submission.

 

[Persell]

As an interim, I think it should work just fine. I suspect it will be more than a little awkward over a long time, but I could be surprised. It also gives an option for moderators to give feedback on things they feel don't quite make the grade, which is probably a good thing.


Thoughts, in no particular order:


All accepted material should have the creator's name, and the creation's name (hehe... Creation) as the thread title. Depending on length limits, a two or three word description might be helpful, especially when we have a great many submissions. For example: "Amaranth (Naive Zenith Missionary) [L. Jaquelin Michael]". We should work out a naming convention we can all agree on; but this will stop posts entitled "My New Character" or "Look"


Editor Caste Exalts... er... Moderators could have an honorary title. Maybe "Celestial Censor" or "Imperial Auditor"? If there is a senior moderator, they could be the Celestial Censor, and the others Auditors.


Are we going to have a standard polling method for people to vote, if they'd like to? On one hand, standards are good. On the other hand I think I create amusing polls.


On that subject, do we want to put the current "rank" in the title, so an alphabetical search shows the highest ranked characters first? Or should we leave such things untill after we start playing silly games with code?


Some of you might have already noticed I have a great fondness for a "customised" feel, especially in terms of naming things.

 

[Flagg]

All accepted material should have the creator's name' date=' and the creation's name (hehe... Creation) as the thread title. Depending on length limits, a two or three word description might be helpful, especially when we have a great many submissions. For example: "Amaranth (Naive Zenith Missionary) [L. Jaquelin Michael']". We should work out a naming convention we can all agree on; but this will stop posts entitled "My New Character" or "Look"

How about the following:


For Writings:

• [Title]:[short Desc] by [Author]

For Charms:

• [Exalt Type]:[Charm Name]:[Relevant Ability] by [Author]

For Artifacts:

• [Artifact Level]:[Artifact Name]:[short Desc] by [Author]

For Spells:

• [spell Circle]:[spell Name]:[short Desc] by Author

For Hearthstones/Manses

• [Manse Level]:[Manse Aspect]:[Name] by [Author]

Editor Caste Exalts... er... Moderators could have an honorary title. Maybe "Celestial Censor?" or "Imperial Auditor?" If there is a senior moderator' date=' they could be the Celestial Censor, and the others Auditors.[/quote']
I like "Celestial Censor" and "Celestial Auditor" respectively.

Are we going to have a standard polling method for people to vote' date=' if they'd like to? On one hand, standards are good. On the other hand I think I create amusing polls.

I think it should be a standard. Something like wordman suggested. Funny polls are, well, funny, but they can find a home on the other forums.

On that subject' date=' do we want to put the current "rank" in the title, so an alphabetical search shows the highest ranked characters first? Or should we leave such things untill after we start playing silly games with code?[/quote']
Sounds a bit tedious under the currently proposed system. Best left until we have a more robust engine for it.


-S

 

[Persell]

Are we going to have a standard polling method for people to vote' date=' if they'd like to? On one hand, standards are good. On the other hand I think I create amusing polls.

I think it should be a standard. Something like wordman suggested. Funny polls are, well, funny, but they can find a home on the other forums.

Agreed. Uniformity is the only way to create a meaningful ranking system. When all is said and done, if we don't we shouldn't bother with rankings at all.


*whispers*


On the other hand, if I did make editor I'll probably refrain from having rankings on my submissions, instead opting for stupid shit for as long as I could get away with it.


And, uh, that was most definately a lie. Yep. I'm no deviant.

 

[Flagg]

Here's my draft for a set of submission guidelines.


In addition to giving input, could you guys also check it over for grammatical and spelling errors? I gave it a quick proof-read, but I'd like the backup. It would be embarassingly hypocritical to ask people to use proper language if I can't even accomplish it myself in the asking.


Thanks!


***


Exalted Compendium Redux – Submission Guidelines


All new submissions should be posted to the “New Submissionsâ€

 

[Joseph]

For Writings:

• [Title]:[short Desc] by [Author]
  

This one seems fine on its own, given internal content will vary.

For Charms:

• [Exalt Type]:[Charm Name]:[Relevant Ability] by [Author]

I think a slight reversal would be in order.

• [user Type][Relevent Abililty/Attribute/Virtue/Grace]:[Charm Name] by [Author]

. That way all the technical stuff is on one side. (Example title would be "Solar Brawl: Thunderclap Rush Attack by Exalted Staff").


I'd also like to propose a strict Charm format for within the text. The first chunk would be exactly like the statistical breakdown from the books that heads each Charm. Then a space, with the next paragraph being flavor text. Then a space, with the next paragraph being the raw mechanics. I think one of the most annoying things about Exalted is flavor text and mechanics not being entirely distinct from one another. This system ensures every Charm we have submitted is clear and concise, while still being flavorful and cool.


So it would look like:


[Name]


[Cost]


[installation Cost if Applicable]


[Duration]


[Type]


[Minimum (Trait)]


[Minimum Essence]


[Prerequisite Charms]


[Flavor Text/Description of Effect]


[Raw mechanical effect]

For Artifacts:

• [Artifact Level]:[Artifact Name]:[short Desc] by [Author]

• [Artifact Name (Artifact 1 - 5)]:[short Desc] by [Author] seems cleaner, but that may just be personal preference.
  

For Spells:

• [spell Circle]:[spell Name]:[short Desc] by Author

I think we could probably forego a short description for Spells -- the name will usually be sufficient to give a rough idea, and titles should remain pretty clear.

• [spell Circle]:[spell Name] by [Author]

seems fine.

For Hearthstones/Manses

• [Manse Level]:[Manse Aspect]:[Name] by [Author]

• [Manse Aspect (Manse 1 - 5)]:[Name] by [Author]

Of course, all of my above commentary is purely aesthetic in nature. I don't think it would actually improve the functionality at all, so I don't care all that much either way.

 

[Forn Clakes]

In response to the subject titles, I personally feel that it would be a waste of space to include the author in with the topic being submitted, since the author automatically appears in the next colomn anyway.


Also, am I correct in my thinking that moderators of submissions are merely sifting through those submissions that are coherent & worth taking the time to look at? I'm asking since I don't mind moderating submissions, if it will help, its just that my own skill at constructing charms, artifacts, etc, is pretty limited.


If it only requires reading each submission and making sure that the submissons are in line with the mechanics of the game and fairly coherent, then count me in.


~FC.

 

[wordman]

What does posting submissions as forum topics gain us compared to just posting them in the Wiki (which already has well defined standards)? The whole point to me of the compendium was that the data was recorded relationally in a database, allowing (potentially) cool ways to search, sort and display it.


It seems more rational to me, until such a data entry system exists, just to have people post into the wiki. Once this site supports a relation model and entry system, then just suck data from there.

 

[Flagg]

What does posting submissions as forum topics gain us compared to just posting them in the Wiki (which already has well defined standards)?

Nothing, I suppose. People asked for something here, so I'm trying to accomodate them. I think there's something to be said for having our "own" stuff as well, that we can have control over as a community.


Besides, I don't particularly care for the Wiki. It seems like a big tangled mess to me. YMMV.

The whole point to me of the compendium was that the data was recorded relationally in a database, allowing (potentially) cool ways to search, sort and display it.

That would be very nice to add in the future. However, since we don't have that capability yet, this will have to suffice.

It seems more rational to me, until such a data entry system exists, just to have people post into the wiki. Once this site supports a relation model and entry system, then just suck data from there.

There's an obvious demand for something NOW. People can still post to the Wiki if they choose. For those who's rather post stuff here now, they will have that capability. I don't see how having more options harms anyone.


-S

 

[Flagg]

In response to the subject titles' date=' I personally feel that it would be a waste of space to include the author in with the topic being submitted, since the author automatically appears in the next colomn anyway.[/quote']
That's a very good point. I suppose we can dispense with that then


-S

 

[Persell]

For Charms:

• [Exalt Type]:[Charm Name]:[Relevant Ability] by [Author]

I think a slight reversal would be in order.

• [user Type][Relevent Abililty/Attribute/Virtue/Grace]:[Charm Name] by [Author]

. That way all the technical stuff is on one side. (Example title would be "Solar Brawl: Thunderclap Rush Attack by Exalted Staff").


Of course, all of my above commentary is purely aesthetic in nature. I don't think it would actually improve the functionality at all, so I don't care all that much either way.


I disagree. If we have everything organised the way you are suggesting, alphabetical displays will helpfully group charms by Exalt and Attribute - Aestheticly pleasing *and* useful.

 

[Persell]

In response to the subject titles' date=' I personally feel that it would be a waste of space to include the author in with the topic being submitted, since the author automatically appears in the next colomn anyway.[/quote']
That's a very good point. I suppose we can dispense with that then


-S

I was under the impression that editors would need to create new threads, which would be authored by the moderator in question; hence: names in titles. Since this has proven not to be the case, author names become redundant.

 

[Flagg]

On the "lost content of the EC" front: What ever happened to those PDFs of homebrew submissions that Silesia made and hosted on his "Wayfarer's Retreat" site long ago?


Does anyone still have copies?


-S

 

[Persell]

I had a lot of them, but when my ex left she absconded with vast swarths of my data. There were a great many available on Shareaza for a while; they might still be floating around filesharing networks.
I'll see if I can find them in my backups, but I'm not optimistic.

My god did that sound more angst ridden that it was.


Woe, and grand tradgedy abound. I shall perish in torment! My heart is black...


Hey now, hey now, now. Sing this corrosion to me.

 

[Persell]

No luck so far, and nothing at the hands of google. Although "wayfarers retreat" (sans apostrophe) seems to be a googlewhack.

 

[Flagg]

Jeez... the original Compendium was hosted in Australia. Now it's GONE. The Wayfarer's Reatreat was hosted in Ausrtralia. Now it's GONE.


I see a trend forming.


-S

 

[Persell]

You've been to Australia! You know it exists!

 

[Flagg]

You've been to Australia! You know it exists!

Well, it existed the last time I went there... but the EC existed then too!


Australia might have vanished entirely since then.


-S

 

[MikeOQuinn]

Exalted Compendium Redux – Submission Guidelines


All new submissions should be posted to the “New Submissionsâ€