-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
New page, new vote reminder:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jasdoif
CALLING FOR CONFIRMATION VOTE ON MULTIPLE QUOTES
The inclusion of the posts below have been challenged. This vote will determine whether they remain in the Index or not.
The quotes are as follows:
Since we've had confusion on this before, the vote will be for which ones to keep, rather than yes or no. Simply vote "keep" for the quotes you support keeping; you don't have to mention ones you want removed (though you can vote "remove" on them if you prefer). If you
want to make my job difficult really don't care about particular quotes, you can vote "no opinion" on those.
You can vote individually ("
Keep A, Keep C") or in a group ("
Keep B, D, E"). "
Keep all" is also a valid vote, as is "
Remove all". ("No opinion on all" would be the same as not voting.)
- Please bold your vote, it'll make it easier for me to notice when I go through and count everything.
- The usual suggestion to avoid discussing quotes during the vote does not apply in this case.
- Per Rule F4, inclusion by vote requires a quote to have two more votes to keep than votes to remove.
Voting will be open until March 16th, 9PM EDT.
There's a little over six hours left, if you haven't voted yet.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Keep A, E, remove B, C, D. I propose moving E to the "storytelling mistakes?" category.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
OK.
The three entries have been removed from the Index.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Joerg
I propose moving E to the "storytelling mistakes?" category.
I'm not sure an unmentioned detail rises to the level of being, or appearing to be, a "storytelling mistake".
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jasdoif
I'm not sure an unmentioned detail rises to the level of being, or appearing to be, a "storytelling mistake".
I think Joerg's suggestion makes sense. The question the quote replies to hints at suspicion of a plot hole. And the Giant's response clearly indicates he felt that way, too.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Indeed. And my reasoning is also: out of context it is an unimportant detail that Elan owns two rapiers (and a chaos saber). That's why it was proposed for removal. But the linked quote actually answered the question why Elan could use a rapier even though he lost a rapier earlier. If I'm looking for a quote that answers that question, the "storytelling mistakes" category is where I look first.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Joerg
Indeed. And my reasoning is also: out of context it is an unimportant detail that Elan owns two rapiers (and a chaos saber). That's why it was proposed for removal. But the linked quote actually answered the question why Elan could use a rapier even though he lost a rapier earlier. If I'm looking for a quote that answers that question, the "storytelling mistakes" category is where I look first.
Ah, the line of reasoning is that if I use the index, and looking for this question, then it's because I think I found a storytelling mistake - it just turns out it isn't a mistake. Makes sense. I would agree with this suggestion.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Actually, none of the things mentioned in the "storytelling mistakes" category are actually mistakes.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
littlebum2002
Actually, none of the things mentioned in the "storytelling mistakes" category are actually mistakes.
Well, technically, the category is "storytelling mistakes?", implying that without the quotes, these things could be construed as mistakes, and the quotes help explain why they are not.
That said, I posit that all the things mentioned everywhere else are storytelling mistakes. I've heard that repeating jokes only makes them better.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
Well, technically, the category is "storytelling mistakes?", implying that without the quotes, these things could be construed as mistakes, and the quotes help explain why they are not.
That said, I posit that all the things mentioned everywhere else are storytelling mistakes. I've heard that repeating jokes only makes them better.
And the thread about Elan's rapier is started with someone implying that Rich made a mistake, and the quote in question is Rich pointing out he didn't.
Just like everything else in that category
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
littlebum2002
And the thread about Elan's rapier is started with someone implying that Rich made a mistake, and the quote in question is Rich pointing out he didn't.
Just like everything else in that category
So it makes perfect sense to put it in Storytelling Mistakes? then.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
So it makes perfect sense to put it in Storytelling Mistakes? then.
I mean, I think it was a quote created in the same spirit as anything else in that category (someone pointing out a mistake, then being corrected by Rich) so yes.
But I also think it makes perfect sense to keep it in the "items" category as well.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
littlebum2002
I mean, I think it was a quote created in the same spirit as anything else in that category (someone pointing out a mistake, then being corrected by Rich) so yes.
But I also think it makes perfect sense to keep it in the "items" category as well.
It makes more sense in the "Storytelling Mistakes?" though. Let the C&LG thread track the items.
Edit: In fact, it is not a (apparent) clash with D&D rules nor a explanation based on them. It's a (apparent) plot hole with no relation with rules. If Rich had explained it as a Sleight of Hand check, than it would belong where it is.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gwynfrid
The question the quote replies to hints at suspicion of a plot hole. And the Giant's response clearly indicates he felt that way, too.
This would be a much more convincing scenario if the question was actually in the quote. Since it's not, the best case scenario for moving the entry would involve redoing the title and description to make it apparent what sort of supposed discrepancy is resolved...assuming such a move is in fact warranted, which I'm still not convinced of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
littlebum2002
Actually, none of the things mentioned in the "storytelling mistakes" category are actually mistakes.
"Storytelling Mistakes?" and "Plot Holes" are similar in that they're both responses to critiques of the writing. The difference is that "Storytelling Mistakes" entries are responses about the quality of depictions within the comic, whereas "Plot Holes" are responses to suggestions that the arc of the comic is contradicting earlier arcs of the comic. (That's why the recent afterlife tweets are in Storytelling Mistakes despite the heart of the matter being the apparent contradiction with Roy's memory assessment from earlier; Roy's memory was expressed in an aside that had no bearing on events, so had nothing to do with the arc of the comic).
The two rapiers bit doesn't really fit in either; there really isn't anything unusual in items appearing when needed (unless you're Roy), and Elan having a rapier all of a sudden didn't affect events. Admittedly this could be splitting hairs (instead of bananas, which is both painful and cold), but categorization in general is defining divisions of hairs; it's not always easy to tell if individual hairs are being split or if it's just grouping of multiple hairs. It's not folly, but it could be follicle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pyrous
Let the C&LG thread track the items.
....We track quotes. Whether a particular quote discusses items or not has no bearing on that.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jasdoif
This would be a much more convincing scenario if the question was actually in the quote.
I don't quite see why that would be more convincing, but it you need that, then, well, the question is indeed in the quote: It's the thread title. Besides, the Giant's "HA!" response can't be explained any other way I can think of. If you read the whole thread (it's not long), it's also very clear a mistake was what the posters had in mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jasdoif
Since it's not, the best case scenario for moving the entry would involve redoing the title and description to make it apparent what sort of supposed discrepancy is resolved...assuming such a move is in fact warranted, which I'm still not convinced of.
I don't think rewriting the description would be indispensable.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gwynfrid
I don't think rewriting the description would be indispensable.
Well, "How Did Elan Get the Rapier In 722 That He Dropped in 714" seems clunky for a title :smalltongue:
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
For de-cluttering the index, I propose the following two items for deletion
Section: Supporting The Strip
Quote:
An OOTS "Munchkin" Board Game?
No current plans for one.
An OOTS Computer Game?
No current plans for one. See here for more.
In both cases it was only one person asking. There's no good reason to suppose that he would produce either game. I don't see any point to keeping these.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Miel
For de-cluttering the index, I propose the following two items for deletion
Section: Supporting The Strip
In both cases it was only one person asking. There's no good reason to suppose that he would produce either game. I don't see any point to keeping these.
Seconded..
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
Seconded..
Thirded. Akane x Ranma
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
martianmister
Thirded. Akane x Ranma
Fourthed..
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Miel
For de-cluttering the index, I propose the following two items for deletion
Section: Supporting The Strip
In both cases it was only one person asking. There's no good reason to suppose that he would produce either game. I don't see any point to keeping these.
I oppose. It still meets the rules, there's no indication it's become redundant, and there's no rule about "only one person asking." Seems like some semblance of a changed circumstance should be necessary before removing, especially when we're still using the lopsided +2 rule to keep things in the index.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Particularly the computer game idea is recurring.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kalmegil
I oppose. It still meets the rules, there's no indication it's become redundant, and there's no rule about "only one person asking." Seems like some semblance of a changed circumstance should be necessary before removing, especially when we're still using the lopsided +2 rule to keep things in the index.
Agreed on all counts.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kalmegil
I oppose. It still meets the rules, there's no indication it's become redundant, and there's no rule about "only one person asking." Seems like some semblance of a changed circumstance should be necessary before removing, especially when we're still using the lopsided +2 rule to keep things in the index.
The instigation behind the removal of "Haley is not Orrin Draketooth's Daughter" was very similar to the instigation here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quild
Has this ever be useful?
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Even if that were the only reason proposed to remove the Haley/Orrin quote, that wouldn't be a reason to continue in that vein.
In any event, someone pointed to a change in circumstances that could, arguably, be said to render the quote redundant: that familicide did not kill Haley. There's nothing like that for the quotes currently in question.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kalmegil
Even if that were the only reason proposed to remove the Haley/Orrin quote, that wouldn't be a reason to continue in that vein.
In any event, someone pointed to a change in circumstances that could, arguably, be said to render the quote redundant: that familicide did not kill Haley. There's nothing like that for the quotes currently in question.
At some point we need to ask ourselves: Is the mission of the index being served by retaining this quote? I have personally never seen anyone ask that question in the 2+ years ive been here. If the questions are there and Ive just not seen them, then I guess the answer is yes, the mission is being served. Otherwise, I think were better off taking it out, because its just clutter.
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Keltest
At some point we need to ask ourselves: Is the mission of the index being served by retaining this quote? I have personally never seen anyone ask that question in the 2+ years ive been here. If the questions are there and Ive just not seen them, then I guess the answer is yes, the mission is being served. Otherwise, I think were better off taking it out, because its just clutter.
Total Devil's Advocate here:
It could also be that no one is asking the question because they find the relevant quote in the Index and therefore don't feel the need to ask it
-
Re: The Index of the Giant's Comments V―On a Saner Forum, We Wouldn't Need this Index
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Keltest
At some point we need to ask ourselves: Is the mission of the index being served by retaining this quote? I have personally never seen anyone ask that question in the 2+ years ive been here. If the questions are there and Ive just not seen them, then I guess the answer is yes, the mission is being served. Otherwise, I think were better off taking it out, because its just clutter.
Wow! Two whole years? And you've read every thread not only in the Order forum but also those related to gaming where this may have come up? Impressive!
[/sarcasm]
Seriously though, we're nine pages into this new thread and most of the discussion has been about removing 'clutter'. As far as this nebulous "mission of the index" is concerned, for some of us that went out the window when voting was introduced. It used to be when the index popped to the top of the list it meant a new quote to read which was useful since I, for one, do not have time to read each and every post myself. But those days are long gone.