Group Question: Please Read

[Pompey Bum]

Would anyone mind if I started a single thread that contained (starting at current status) the song title game, the say the next word game, the two word game, the word association game, the aye or nay game and the this or that game?

All others would remain independent threads, including hangman and PAM, which are different kinds of games, and the food chain game, which Peter seems to like without having much use for the others.

It seems to me that would allow our gamers to keep rocking without driving other people's work (some of which may take days, weeks, or even longer to write) off the front pages. Does that sound good? Please answer. This means you! :)

[Danik 2016]

This is just an opinion as I myself rarely play these days. Organizing some of the games into one thread might be practical but it can also be confusing if the player wants to answer just one or two of the questions. For example, there are members that play only the song title game. And these games help to keep the forum going.

On the other hand, it´s not so difficult to bump up an interesting thread back to the front. It is even advisable if one thinks it might get more notice.

Anyway, as I said, it is just an opinion, it´s mainly for the players themselves to decide.

[Pompey Bum]

Thank you for your opinion, Danik. It's really not a question of bumping one's posts to the top (a practice we probably don't want to start here in any case). I have known people who have actually stopped posting here because of this issue. And just imagine it from their point of view. Someone works days, weeks, maybe more on a story. They know (or should know) that a professional publisher won't consider a work if it's been posted online. But they risk posting it here because they would like someone to see it now--and maybe to get some constructive criticism. But within a day or so, it's been buried under piles of short word games. Consider, first of all, how that must feel; and second, how likely that writer is to stay on here.

I think a compromise solution is necessary. I know the LitNetters who DO play these games to be compassionate and generous people (well, not Ennison, but he's cool just the same :):):)). I call on them to consider my suggestion or offer a better one. We are friends. We can do this.

[Danik 2016]

I see your point, PB. We all would like to have more literature posted on this site. But I think the main reason people aren´t posting so much any more is not because of the games, but because people are not responding so much any more, these days. As I see it, the games gain more evidence, when other activity is lacking. In my other site it is the same thing.

I welcome very much your efforts to revive the literary discussions, but have as yet no idea for a compromise. Maybe someone comes up with a good idea.

[cacian]

Hi there Pompey I do not mind at all.
I use the Game section on a regular basis so it really is not an issue if that is what you want to do. :)

[Pompey Bum]

Hi there Pompey I do not mind at all.
I use the Game section on a regular basis so it really is not an issue if that is what you want to do. :)

Merci, my friend. I knew we could count on you. :) I'd like to hear from tailor and Ennison, too. PeteL will get his separate food chain game in any case. Hangman and PAM, too, for anyone who wants to play them.

[tailor STATELY]

??? (lol) I don't see how this is a problem.

If one presses the Forum tab (between the What's New and Blogs tabs) it takes one to the "Literature Network Forums... Welcome to the Literature Network Forums" page http://www.online-literature.com/forums/forum.php which has all the forums listed:


General Literature

Religious Texts

Poems, Poets, and Poetry


Write a Book Review


Philosophical Literature

Who Said That?


Forum Book Club

Author List:

WritingThreads / Posts Last Post

General Writing


Personal Poetry


Short Story Sharing


Short Story Competition

TeachingThreads / Posts Last Post

Lesson Plans

.
.
.

and so on...

Also................. one can always subscribe to a thread to get their feedback nice and tidy in their email if one desires.

But, hey, who am I but a stitch in time... I will condescend to consensus even if it will save only one contributor.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

[Pompey Bum]

Sorry, the site's acting really weird tonight.

[Pompey Bum]

??? (lol) I don't see how this is a problem.

If one presses the Forum tab (between the What's New and Blogs tabs) it takes one to the "Literature Network Forums... Welcome to the Literature Network Forums" page http://www.online-literature.com/forums/forum.php which has all the forums listed:



Also................. one can always subscribe to a thread to get their feedback nice and tidy in their email if one desires.

But, hey, who am I but a stitch in time... I will condescend to consensus even if it will save only one contributor.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

Thanks for considering it, tailor. The problem is that the Internet traffic sees the front page and the What's New page. Nobody sees what's been pushed off those pages unless they go looking for it among the forums. They can't do that if they don't know it's there. And they will offer no feedback (whether there's a subscription function or not) if they've never seen it. I've known people who have left the site in extreme frustration over this, and sometimes I can relate. I was recently about to post something I had worked on, a bit at a time, for about a week. I didn't though because something came up at my home. When I got back to LitNet, the front page had been wiped clean by short word games. If I had already posted it, I would have felt pretty disappointed. I can imagine how others must feel. It's actually been a problem for a while. This is at least a workable compromise, isn't it?

[MANICHAEAN]

Good initiative Pompey old chap.

You already know my views on the irritating habit some contributors have of constantly trying to obtain pole position by bumping the hard work of others with cut & past jobs from obscure tomes. I've managed to break the stranglehold on odd occasions in different sections e.g. Religious texts, and I'm widely tolerant of the niches occupied by "Who Said That?" and also Peter L's Blog section, which actually is quite good.


It amazes me how Steve has kept going all these years, undaunted in providing new material for the Short Story Sharing, despite the above mentioned practice. But as you say, its frustrating to put some honest work into a piece to have it disappear within 24 hours to accommodate something that is not literature.


Right. Got that off my chest.


Perhaps I need to start throwing in the Horseman in all sections!!!!

[Pompey Bum]

I appreciate your weighing in, M. People's frustration at being pushed away after working hard (and sometimes lovingly) on a piece is very real. Steve is still hanging in and good on him. Many others have left. The word games aren't the only reason for that (and those who enjoy them need to keep playing), but at least it's something he can fix if we work together.

Anyway, I am not going to start the new thread until Ennison weighs in. I agree with tailor that this needs to be done through consensus.

[Pompey Bum]

Okay, so Ennison just came and left without comment--aside from piling on another five word games. I sent Ennison a private message while he was here, telling him about the thread, but he either didn't see it or ignored it.

Until I hear otherwise from Ennison, I will assume that this is the feedback on my proposal from the game players:

Cacian: :)

tailor: :/

Ennison: :flare:

That is not a consensus, so I will not start the proposed thread. I notice there have been no alternatives suggested, as I'd hoped. So I'll make one for those who DO care about others (as I know most do). If you see someone has put effort into a literary or critical piece, and you (gamer or non-gamer) have added several consecutive posts, have the consideration to comment briefly on that post (or ask a question or something). That would solve the problem--at least to the extent we want to treat each other like friends. Anyone willing to try?

[ennison]

This is over my head. I don't get what you are on about here at all. I don't think I have ever started a games thread. I take part for a bit of fun. And I have to go looking for the forum games bit. Explain in simple terms to a dumb fellow what the exact problem is? I only just read your message as I drift in and out of this site

[Secret III]

I would be more interested in a linear writing game, say each turn you take you write a single paragraph to expand the story. Rules would be you must wait your turn (three or four paragraphs) and each paragraph can be about 100 words tops. We would need a good number of participants to make this game fun. An extra level of fun could be you are allowed to insert your paragraph between earlier paragraphs if you want to remove the linear rule.

[Pompey Bum]

This is over my head. I don't get what you are on about here at all. I don't think I have ever started a games thread. I take part for a bit of fun. And I have to go looking for the forum games bit. Explain in simple terms to a dumb fellow what the exact problem is? I only just read your message as I drift in and out of this site

Okay, well let's keep it simple then. You've done nothing wrong. Neither has anyone else who likes to play word games. All I'm asking is whether you would object to a single thread that combines the six most popular games (song title, say the next word, two word game, word association game, aye or nay, and this or that); in other words, you would be playing those six games all on one post. That would relieve congestion that pushes longer pieces off of the What's New and home pages--a longstanding source of frustration to some.

Cacian has said yes, a combination thread would be fine; tailor wasn't crazy about the idea, but he said he would go along with the group's consensus. That makes you more or less the deciding vote. So--would object to a single thread that combined those six games? :)

[Pompey Bum]

I would be more interested in a linear writing game, say each turn you take you write a single paragraph to expand the story. Rules would be you must wait your turn (three or four paragraphs) and each paragraph can be about 100 words tops. We would need a good number of participants to make this game fun. An extra level of fun could be you are allowed to insert your paragraph between earlier paragraphs if you want to remove the linear rule.

I'm in. Anyone else?

You may also want to check out a joke thread Manichaean and I were writing, more of a satire on continuing story threads than anything else (and very low farce), called Horseman Riding By. Somehow it ended up in the General Literature forum. On the other hand, if you want nothing to do with Horseman Riding By, who could blame you? :)

[Pompey Bum]

And while I'm in town, I suppose I should repost my message to Ennison, lest the page turn (not to say the four consecutive word games that followed it) should hinder communications. :)


This is over my head. I don't get what you are on about here at all. I don't think I have ever started a games thread. I take part for a bit of fun. And I have to go looking for the forum games bit. Explain in simple terms to a dumb fellow what the exact problem is? I only just read your message as I drift in and out of this site

Okay, well let's keep it simple then. You've done nothing wrong. Neither has anyone else who likes to play word games. All I'm asking is whether you would object to a single thread that combines the six most popular games (song title, say the next word, two word game, word association game, aye or nay, and this or that); in other words, you would be playing those six games all on one post. That would relieve congestion that pushes longer pieces off of the What's New and home pages--a longstanding source of frustration to some.

Cacian has said yes, a combination thread would be fine; tailor wasn't crazy about the idea, but he said he would go along with the group's consensus. That makes you more or less the deciding vote. So--would object to a single thread that combined those six games? :)

[ennison]

Yes fine. I find the present set-up a little cumbersome but I put that down to me rather than it.

[Pompey Bum]

Thank you, Ennison. That's more like a consensus, but I want everyone happy. tailor, can you live with this? We'll give you veto power. Do we have your blessing?

Added: I've sent tailor a private message too. If he gives the word, I'll start the new thread.

[tailor STATELY]

Rec'd PM :) Ça ne fait rien... let's do this.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

[Secret III]

I'm in. Anyone else?

You may also want to check out a joke thread Manichaean and I were writing, more of a satire on continuing story threads than anything else (and very low farce), called Horseman Riding By. Somehow it ended up in the General Literature forum. On the other hand, if you want nothing to do with Horseman Riding By, who could blame you? :)

I will be checking it out.

[Secret III]

double post

[Pompey Bum]

I will be checking it out.

Heaven help you. :)

[Pompey Bum]

Okay, tailor responded with a resounding "No problem", so I will immediately start the new thread--to be called Six Game Reboot. I would like to thank everyone for working together in good faith to address this issue. Thank you indeed. :cheers2:

[cacian]

Heaven help you. :)

LOL that is what I like to hear :D
Let's rock this place again. ;)

[Pompey Bum]

LOL that is what I like to hear :D
Let's rock this place again. ;)


I'm SO there, Cacian!

:party::party::party: