Description Force!

[love_HP]

T    s.    ss  .        s.  x  s  ss . ! s!  s s    s  ! s s    .

I lol'd at this.. is it creeper?

[Dirtytabs]

I checked the status of my most recent descriptions in the queue only to find they've all been approved and now sit prettily on the dragons' pages. Thank you for your hard work, mod(s).

[pinkgothic]

Thanks for the rapid-fire reviews on my recent descriptions, everyone, much appreciated; a lot of them warmed my heart. I'd put them into the description comments thread, but by policy I tend to withhold them unless there's something to argue about, until the description is approved, so I don't end up posting a description more than once if there's another awesome comment later. ...I digress!

 

Point of contention! (No worries, not much of one. )

 

Sovamak is deeply suspicious of so-called 'rational' arguments. Convinced that instinct and emotion should play a strong role in dragon behaviour, he largely lives at instruction of his intangible subconscious thoughts. Bizarrely, this has yet to result in wildly errant behaviour; his friends are divided on whether this means he simply has an inherently odd set of instincts that are compatible with civilised behaviour, whether he's cheating, or if they're simply not around when he's demonstrably crazy. Either way, his outlook seems to work for him, if not necessarily for anyone who tries to follow his example.

• Abstain: Civilised -> civilized, otherwise it looks good to me.

I know most of you are aware of the differences in British and American spelling, so I'm not really putting this up to argue with it - it's pretty obvious the reviewer just overlooked that it's valid British English, and I'm not fussed about an abstain, from their point of view it was completely valid.

 

Instead, I just wanted to say that I feel it helps to double-check these things before committing to a review verdict, because I've had valid British English spellings replaced with their (unwanted) American counterparts by the mods before in the approval process, and am obviously reluctant to re-submit the description(s) affected because of the backlog.

 

I know I've said it before. And I don't think there's a strong risk of a mod replacing my intended spelling in this particular case. But the comment reminded me about it and so I figured I'd bring the topic back up briefly, so new reviewers also know.

 

(For the record, I'm sure I make the opposite mistake sometimes, despite attempts at diligence! So I'm really not trying to complain, here.)

 

Thanks for reading!

Edited April 10, 2015 by pinkgothic

[Toyo]

I haven't read descriptions in FOREVER. Forgive me if this has already been addressed.

 

The few I've done recently, I feel like all I've tried to correct grammar and spelling. Are reviewers supposed to even comment on the content? Unless it is totally nonsensical, I'm not sure it is any of my business.

 

Agree? Disagree? Too indulgent?

[Herk]

I haven't read descriptions in FOREVER. Forgive me if this has already been addressed.

 

The few I've done recently, I feel like all I've tried to correct grammar and spelling. Are reviewers supposed to even comment on the content? Unless it is totally nonsensical, I'm not sure it is any of my business.

 

Agree? Disagree? Too indulgent?

You can always comment if something about the description seems especially good to you, that's usually a huge "YESH!!!" moment for the writer.

 

You SHOULD comment on the content if there are obvious flaws (like two sentences contradicting each other) or if it goes against the rules by being over-powered, refering to RL things, goes against the established breed description, stuff like that.

 

That's not grammar or spelling and still VERY important.

[Toyo]

You can always comment if something about the description seems especially good to you, that's usually a huge "YESH!!!" moment for the writer.

 

You SHOULD comment on the content if there are obvious flaws (like two sentences contradicting each other) or if it goes against the rules by being over-powered, refering to RL things, goes against the established breed description, stuff like that.

 

That's not grammar or spelling and still VERY important.

Ah, yes, I see. I reread the Description "Thing" as well, and it said a lot of that stuff. What I kind of meant was what mageling received a few posts back:

 

Abstain: Try adding more details to make it more interesting.

 

What interests me might not interest other people, and vice versa. If it sincerely bores the crud out of me, but makes the user happy (and follows all the rules) ... then it's cool? I guess? I hope?

[Gsea]

Ah, yes, I see. I reread the Description "Thing" as well, and it said a lot of that stuff. What I kind of meant was what mageling received a few posts back:

 

Abstain: Try adding more details to make it more interesting.

 

What interests me might not interest other people, and vice versa. If it sincerely bores the crud out of me, but makes the user happy (and follows all the rules) ... then it's cool? I guess? I hope?

Yeah, I agree; I don't think it's up for us to decide what is "interesting" in a description. Some people prefer their descriptions to be brief, only mentioning a few qualities/traits, because that's the most they need to flesh-out that particular dragon's personality/appearance/etc. As long as it follows all the rules, "it's boring" would not be constructive criticism & isn't worth commenting.

[Herk]

Yeah, I agree; I don't think it's up for us to decide what is "interesting" in a description. Some people prefer their descriptions to be brief, only mentioning a few qualities/traits, because that's the most they need to flesh-out that particular dragon's personality/appearance/etc. As long as it follows all the rules, "it's boring" would not be constructive criticism & isn't worth commenting.

Well that is a tricky line "This is boring" is certainly not constructive, and I try to keep my opinin out of it, but sometimes people write "This dragon is cool" and think that's a description, which to be honest it's not. So I tend to write "How is he cool? What does he do that's cool? You need to add some detail." and abstain. It's not breaking any rules but I have no idea what that dragon is like, which is what a description is all about.

Well like I said it's a tricky line and it's dependent on the reviewer and sometimes even the mood if you just let something that wishy-washy fly or try to give constructive criticism.

[Fuzzbucket]

Point of contention! (No worries, not much of one. )

 

Abstain: Civilised -> civilized, otherwise it looks good to me.

 

I know most of you are aware of the differences in British and American spelling, so I'm not really putting this up to argue with it - it's pretty obvious the reviewer just overlooked that it's valid British English, and I'm not fussed about an abstain, from their point of view it was completely valid.

 

Instead, I just wanted to say that I feel it helps to double-check these things before committing to a review verdict, because I've had valid British English spellings replaced with their (unwanted) American counterparts by the mods before in the approval process, and am obviously reluctant to re-submit the description(s) affected because of the backlog.

 

I know I've said it before. And I don't think there's a strong risk of a mod replacing my intended spelling in this particular case. But the comment reminded me about it and so I figured I'd bring the topic back up briefly, so new reviewers also know.

 

(For the record, I'm sure I make the opposite mistake sometimes, despite attempts at diligence! So I'm really not trying to complain, here.)

 

Thanks for reading!

I got warned for saying this once, but may I please support this post without another warn, as it REALLY is annoying to UK - and Canadian and Australian - players; it has happened to me too. Also with colour and practise. I have NEVER corrected descriptions the other way to make them what would be right for ME - please don't do that to mine.

 

It is one of the reasons I have stopped writing descriptions. (Yes I'm childish. But I don't want them spelt American.)

Edited April 11, 2015 by fuzzbucket

[dragongrrl]

I got warned for saying this once, but may I please support this post without another warn, as it REALLY is annoying to UK - and Canadian and Australian - players; it has happened to me too. Also with colour and practise. I have NEVER corrected descriptions the other way to make them what would be right for ME - please don't do that to mine.

 

It is one of the reasons I have stopped writing descriptions. (Yes I'm childish. But I don't want them spelt American.)

I am an American, born and bred, an avid reader from age 4, with a wonderful grandmother who had been a schoolteacher before my mom came along. I always read English and American stories without discrimation, and being an excellent speller, questioned the variations in the spellings of some words. According to my wise grandmother, both were correct, but some were English words and some were American words. They aren't wrong spellings, simply alternates, and both spellings were acceptable.

 

Granted, it's 100 years ago that my grandmother taught school, but I still think it's a valid way to regard the variations.

 

Edited for pre-coffeee spelling.

Edited April 11, 2015 by dragongrrl

[Obscure_Trash]

Not everyone knows all the spellings of AE/BE. I don't think people are correcting to be rude. They just haven't been exposed to BE. I know I hadn't been until I started interacting with people on this forum and never really noticed it until I was promoted and started modding descriptions. It's just not something you actively think a lot about usually. =o

 

Aside from that, though...

 

English Only

 

Dragon Cave is entirely in English; to keep with this, descriptions not in American English will be rejected.

 

Sorry, all! I've been avoiding pointing this out because I'm not sure how much it really matters which you use, although it would be more consistent if the whole site stayed in AE...

[Dimar]

Just dropping in to add that people who occasionally review descriptions might not be regulars on the forum, much less checking out this thread and others like it. While those of us who are visible do certainly make mistakes with BE and eventually learn otherwise, there are also reviewers who won't ever see these posts.

 

So there will always be this problem of AE/BE confusion in comments, regardless of how often we try to remind everyone of the difference. :/

[pinkgothic]

I don't think people are correcting to be rude.

I don't think anyone made this claim. At least in my case, quite on the contrary.

 

All I've done is pointing out that I've had my spellings 'corrected' by mods while approving the description, which I do not like (but endure, given the alternative is resubmit and wait until death do us apart ), and it's genuinely never happened to me if there wasn't also a comment from a user pointing it out as an error. Obviously not everyone will read my post, and that's fine, but it's been a while since it came up and I felt it prudent to point that out - precisely because some people don't know about it. Consider it an education effort. It doesn't have to reach everyone to be useful.

 

The fact I haven't had my BE descriptions rejected (or even tampered with in absence of comments) I feel also undermines trying to use the description guidelines to make a point, since it's clearly not that way in practise. Maybe start rejecting BE descriptions if you think that's honestly how it should be handled? I'm not suggesting that to be flippant, I genuinely think that if you're going to make that argument, then it probably ought to also be enforced, so that us BE-users (e.g. herk, fuzzbucket and me) stop violating the guidelines.

 

(Granted, in that case I'd probably stop using the feature, but that's very much my problem, not yours. )

Edited April 12, 2015 by pinkgothic

[Obscure_Trash]

I don't think anyone made this claim. At least in my case, quite on the contrary.

 

All I've done is pointing out that I've had my spellings 'corrected' by mods while approving the description, which I do not like (but endure, given the alternative is resubmit and wait until death do us apart ), and it's genuinely never happened to me if there wasn't also a comment from a user pointing it out as an error. Obviously not everyone will read my post, and that's fine, but it's been a while since it came up and I felt it prudent to point that out - precisely because some people don't know about it. Consider it an education effort. It doesn't have to reach everyone to be useful.

 

The fact I haven't had my BE descriptions rejected (or even tampered with in absence of comments) I feel also undermines trying to use the description guidelines to make a point, since it's clearly not that way in practise. Maybe start rejecting BE descriptions if you think that's honestly how it should be handled? I'm not suggesting that to be flippant, I genuinely think that if you're going to make that argument, then it probably ought to also be enforced, so that us BE-users (e.g. herk, fuzzbucket and me) stop violating the guidelines.

 

(Granted, in that case I'd probably stop using the feature, but that's very much my problem, not yours. )

The AE in the description guidelines is recent because before then, there wasn't anything in the guidelines mentioning language at all. There had been an English-only mention in the blurb when writing descriptions but then that was gotten rid of and there was no mention of language anywhere for a while.

[pinkgothic]

The AE in the description guidelines is recent because before then, there wasn't anything in the guidelines mentioning language at all. There had been an English-only mention in the blurb when writing descriptions but then that was gotten rid of and there was no mention of language anywhere for a while.

 

Urgh. Gotcha. Thanks for the heads-up!

 

Does that mean you and the other mods will indeed be actively rejecting BE in future? Just so I (and others) can understand the consequence of this. (Asking because then, as mentioned, I really ought to stop using the feature, chiefly to prevent myself additional frustration.)

Edited April 12, 2015 by pinkgothic

[Obscure_Trash]

Urgh. Gotcha. Thanks for the heads-up!

 

Does that mean you and the other mods will indeed be actively rejecting BE in future? Just so I (and others) can understand the consequence of this. (Asking because then, as mentioned, I really ought to stop using the feature, chiefly to prevent myself additional frustration.)

We have not talked about it. I can get other opinions, though, and let you know.

[Duskspoken]

@Sock How much weight does the user reject/accept have in a description getting approved/rejected? I have a perfectly fine and acceptable description for a dragon yet it has more reject votes with no comments.

[Obscure_Trash]

@Sock How much weight does the user reject/accept have in a description getting approved/rejected? I have a perfectly fine and acceptable description for a dragon yet it has more reject votes with no comments.

Mods can't even see if users rejected/accepted. I can't even see how many people have actually looked at your description. Mods only see comments and overall score. I find user comments far more helpful anyway. I have accepted descriptions with large negative scores and rejected descriptions with large positive scores. Score and such is helpful at a quick glance but I always make sure to at least skim the descrip because I do not always agree with user decisions.

 

None of that has to do with the large wait right now, though.

 

I was trying to get caught up but I have quals coming up and then I'll be TA'ing field camp (and we'll be camping during the week, so no internet except during weekends that we come back home), so I don't know when I'll actually be able to catch up. Of course, 12k descriptions is going to take a while no matter what is going on. =_=

 

EDIT: I went and looked up your descrip out of curiosity and, I'm sorry, but I agree with the rejects. That doesn't describe the dragon and it's a modern reference. It's workable into an approvable description but doesn't fit the guidelines right now. <3

 

Ex. to make workable: "Death Dusk cannot write their own stories but they consider any writers their role models. For this reason, Death Dusk's owner named them after the death of an influential writer, Perry Tratchett. Death Dusk wears their name with pride - and grief."

Edited April 13, 2015 by SockPuppet Strangler

[Dirtytabs]

Toesocks after reviewing descriptions for several hours

 

[Dimar]

Tabs, that's so perfect! I'm crying with laughter. Thank you very much for your contribution.

[Guillotine]

How can I make it clearer that this dragon is supposed to be trans without spelling it out? I got an user comment noting that the dragon is a male Bright-Breasted, but the pronouns used were very deliberately chosen. I tried to subtly imply it but clearly failed.

 

Brightly Colored Canopies is a bit of a loner, preferring to spend her days flying as high and far from civilization as she can. This is not due to treatment--her family is very fond of her and her few friends have a deep respect for her--but simply her own preferences. She is easily overwhelmed by crowds and socialization, and she needs the time alone to recharge and recover before the next social interaction. She has something of a morbid streak and a fascination with medicine, which makes her unofficial job of saving stranded and injured travelers she finds when flying a bit... interesting. She has incredible stamina for her breed from all her flying, and if a dragon is needed to fly far and fast she's among the first to volunteer--assuming she's around to do so.

[Dimar]

How can I make it clearer that this dragon is supposed to be trans without spelling it out? I got an user comment noting that the dragon is a male Bright-Breasted, but the pronouns used were very deliberately chosen. I tried to subtly imply it but clearly failed.

 

Though I see you don't want to state it directly, I think it'd be best to specify that she identifies as female. Otherwise readers will probably still think it's a mistake - and I would wonder the same if I saw it in the queue, because there's really nothing implying that she's trans other than the pronouns.

 

I'm having trouble determining where an additional phrase would fit into your existing text. "Her family is very fond of her and her few friends have a deep respect for her and her female identity" is the best I can come up with. Maybe someone else has better ideas...

[yosofine]

Guillotine, and anyone else,

On some descriptions, we honestly can't tell if it's intentional or not. We mean no harm, but when we look at 500 descriptions, it's difficult to sort each one on a specific basis.

 

If your dragon is trans, or gay, or has any feature that is intentionally unique (but not overly super powered, etc. as per rules), and you want gender difference to stay in the description, PM to me or Sock and tell us the specific dragon code and scroll name and the feature you want to stay as is. I never mean to change the gender of a trans-gendered dragon if I know it's supposed to be a certain way.

 

Once a description leaves my monitor as approved, no one will change it unless there's a complaint against that description or the scroll owner revises it to change something, then that description will go through the approval process again.

[Guillotine]

I just edited the description to make it more clear; thanks for the idea, Dimar. I couldn't figure out another way myself.

 

And I appreciate that it's hard to tell with that many descriptions to go through; it's why I wanted to make the alteration in the first place.

[Poisony]

I need to thank three description reviewers, thanks to you, I could see the mistakes and change them

 

GT, pg and a G

Who are you to be so nice :3

 

I'd love to participate. I'm already reviewing anyway, but I'll add a little word to it so you can recognise me; I sign with Pyc

Edited April 20, 2015 by Poisony