Relax description rules

[Fuzzbucket]

In another thread, which has become confused

 

 

suggestions have been made that the requirements to stick to existing lore and head canon requirements should be relaxed, as they "stifle creativity".

 

Views ?

 

This idea needed its own thread as the lore issue has nothing to do with shortening approval time. This thread is only about what may and may not be in a description, and whether maintaining the lore requirements is important.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[DragonLady86]

I don't see why it's needed, people come up with very creative stories all the time.  and you can even add things like harry potter or even tv as long as you word it correctly.  (tv= magic mirror/crystal ball type item that shows things happening far away or even on other worlds which may or may not exist)  The only instance of people being upset about the lore restrictions I'm aware of was the space chickens.   And that was fixed by saying the chickens believed they came from space, rather than that they did for certain.

[Ruby Eyes]

Sounds to me like these rules *encourage* creativity, then.

[SkyWolf25]

　I believe that lore sets guidelines and boundaries that makes a certain setting a single, connected universe. Creativity in making a character for a set breed/race in a set universe works by fleshing out details based on the information you have of the world and thinking through how what you'd envisioned for the character would work with the rules in place. Creativity is only 'stifled' in the same way the Lion King universe would 'stifle' an idea about a intergalactic, super-advanced cyborg alien - too much freedom only make things look out of place and ends up hurting the unity of the universe.

 

　I am aware some people don't care about adhering to the lore, but I do think it matters; that's just something we'll have to agree to disagree on. Aside from the early-on joke breeds and temporary events, the site is consistent with its lore everywhere, from the dragonopedia to the lore section to the dragon's page. Lore-breaking descriptions would damage the immersion that I like about DC. On the other hand, creative descriptions that also fit well into lore embellishes the experience. This is especially more so because the user descriptions are placed right below the official lore of the breed and dragons in general.

[Cinspawn]

3 hours ago, DragonLady86 said:

I don't see why it's needed, people come up with very creative stories all the time. 

 

Because that's (in my opinion) not the reason, the real reason is in the OP of the post:

 

4 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

This idea needs its own thread as it has nothing to do with shortening approval time.

 

The context was that for faster description approval, we could get rid of the mod queue entirely, and just have descriptions be instantly visible on the dragon page. Obviously abuse and spam could be reported, but it raised the next question: should style changing (using "I" for example) or lore changing (saying my White dragon is a fighter) be reportable? And I am of the opinion that no, if you go the instant approval route, those guidelines go out of the window as it would really suck to have some user nitpick your description to have it removed afterwards. That defeats the point of it being auto-approved, that defeats the point of free descriptions, if it still has to hold up some standard. 

 

RE: creativity, I'm fine with the way it works now but I wouldn't mind if the rules relaxed a little, it would open up a lot of fun ideas plus I just don't take it so seriously, I guess. I agree with SkyWolf that it doesn't really get stifled by the rules, it's more that people simply don't feel like writing at all if they have to adhere to these rules (especially in combination with how slow the queue itself is, but also the whole making adjustments process (and having to go back to that queue after adjusting)) 

 

 

9 minutes ago, SkyWolf25 said:

I am aware some people don't care about adhering to the lore, but I do think it matters; that's just something we'll have to agree to disagree on. Aside from the early-on joke breeds and temporary events, the site is consistent with its lore everywhere, from the dragonopedia to the lore section to the dragon's page. Lore-breaking descriptions would damage the immersion that I like about DC. On the other hand, creative descriptions that also fit well into lore embellishes the experience. This is especially more so because the user descriptions are placed right below the official lore of the breed and dragons in general.

I disagree with the site being consistent and immersive. Sure, the encyclopedia etc. are all official sources, but they often lack a lot (simply no info at all, or for example, how do sprinters alts fit in the lore?) 

Not to mention the other freely editable thing on DC: the names. I don't feel particularly immersive when I see dragons named Kawaii Spaghetti Monster (or whatever). We can even write descriptions about Kawaii Spaghetti Monster and use their name. Does that fit the world of DC? I don't think so... But I also don't care because I like having free naming freedom - just like I would like free descriptions freedom. 

 

And no, I'm not gonna be a fan of descriptions that simply read "This is Kawaii Spaghetti Monster uwu sparkle" and nothing else, but I will be a fan of seeing way more** descriptions in general and opening it up more for first time writers. 

 

**if, this idea would be implemented with an instant queue, that is. I don't really care about it if it's not.

[Fuzzbucket]

4 minutes ago, Cinspawn said:

 

The context was that for faster description approval, we could get rid of the mod queue entirely, and just have descriptions be instantly visible on the dragon page. Obviously abuse and spam could be reported, but it raised the next question: should style changing (using "I" for example) or lore changing (saying my White dragon is a fighter) be reportable? And I am of the opinion that no, if you go the instant approval route, those guidelines go out of the window as it would really suck to have some user nitpick your description to have it removed afterwards. That defeats the point of it being auto-approved, that defeats the point of free descriptions, if it still has to hold up some standard. 

 

Indeed it was - but the abandoning or relaxing of lore is MUCH bigger than that. (And "My white dragon is a fighter" could get approved if there was more in the description than that. I have vampires that hate to bite....

 

Free description is huge and is about FAR more than speeding things up. Hence this thread, and thanks for posting in it.

[BrazenChase]

My thread isn't confused, thanks!

 

Cin's response is very insightful, as it was in the other thread. 

 

Ultimately it comes down to giving users greater freedom to describe their dragons. I don't really care what people do with their dragons and their lore because as long as it isn't hateful they are not my dragons and it is not my business. 

 

Repeating what I have already said in my own thread, since it's the same conversation in the simplest terms:

 

Allow users to Describe freely > But the lore! > Why does it matter that much? > Does it actually matter enough to warrant the resources that are being dedicated to it?

 

I do not understand the obsession with policing how other people are playing in the sandbox when it isn't hurting anybody. 

 

 

[Cinspawn]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

Indeed it was - but the abandoning or relaxing of lore is MUCH bigger than that. (And "My white dragon is a fighter" could get approved if there was more in the description than that. I have vampires that hate to bite....

A fighter not fighting is not the same as a pacifist fighting (heck, the fighter could be permanently injured or something) 

 

From the rules:

 

--

No Conflicting Descriptions

While the goal of being able to describe your dragon is to personalize it and make it unique, the breed descriptions were created as they are for a reason. If a dragon is part of a breed of pacifists, it doesn’t make sense for the dragon to be a bloodthirsty murderer. You don’t have to follow the breed description to the letter, but behaviors that clearly contradict the breed’s concept will likely be rejected.

 

--

 

It doesn't say white dragons, but I've always been shown that example. So no, I think a white dragon loving to fight would not get approved under current rules. 

[Fuzzbucket]

LIKELY be rejected.

 

 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[Cinspawn]

1 minute ago, Fuzzbucket said:

LIKELY be rejected.

What is your point? 

[Ruby Eyes]

1 minute ago, Cinspawn said:

What is your point? 

I suspect that Fuzz is generally agreeing with you, though special circumstances (such as the description explaining WHY) might be considered.

[Fuzzbucket]

3 minutes ago, Cinspawn said:

What is your point? 

 

That on occasion descriptions that are very well done can go against breed characteristics. Just as the space chickens managed to get around the lore issue. That's it's not as rigid as "no dragons competing in motor cycle races."

 

ETA - yes exactly, ruby - thank you.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[Cinspawn]

Then that's massively inconsistent and maybe even elitist - as long as you're a good enough of a writer, your description might be approved even though it's against the rules? 

 

Perhaps the rules should be updated to reflect reality. 

 

Also Fuzz don't forget to update your first post as it doesn't accurately represent why these threads were split (faster queues instead of 'stifling creativity') 

[Fuzzbucket]

I will amend it - but this one IS about the creativity issue, NOT the speeding up.

 

And the ability to write well inevitably affects whether one gets approved. "My wite dragon is prety and loves to eet berries." is not going to make it. Sad but true. And I have reviewed many of that standard in my time.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[Cinspawn]

Just now, Fuzzbucket said:

I will amend it - but this one IS about the creativity issue, NOT the speeding up.

In what way do the current rules stifle creativity? 

[Fuzzbucket]

I didn't say they did. I don't actually think they do. But it was said, by the OP there.

 

 

[Cinspawn]

Then why did you make the thread? If BrazenChase wanted to focus on the creativity issue outside the context of speeding up a queue, I'm sure they would have made another thread. What's the point in making a thread because one user makes one offhand comment somewhere? It wasn't even the focus of their post.

[BrazenChase]

My thread was discussing open description posting. When the rules came into question I asked why they are necessary to begin with? If we looked at it, and had a discussion about it instead of derailing it, we may have come to an understanding that perhaps they aren't and my suggestion of free posting and editing of descriptions is not a bad one. 

[Fuzzbucket]

It started with cutting the wait time.

Quote

 

I love describing my dragons, and I know a lot of other users do as well. But the queue can be very daunting and discouraging. I found out that the "Review User Descriptions" function does not actually do anything towards getting a description approved at all. Does not contribute to a counter, or move it through a queue etc.

 

 

 

And TJ has ALWAYS asked that different issues should have different threads. I'm actually past caring - I don't even mind that much if the lore rules are relaxed - but until they are, they are reportable issues, which is why auto approval can't work. So best ask TJ if he would relax them. Hence this thread, which makes the specific issue of lore requirement for descriptions very obvious.

 

A mod in that thread has already said that 

Quote

Please continue discussion under the presupposition that lore-breaking descriptions(ex: sci-fi, modern setting, inserting other fandoms' lore) are in the same category as spam/inappropriate content/everything else that is against the rules in terms of needing to be reported/rejected/moderated, not regarding the level of severity.

 

 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Fuzzbucket

[olympe]

Okay, for everyone not familiar with the description rules, here's a little link for you to read up on them: https://dragcave.net/help/descriptions

 

Anyway, here's where I don't completely agree with things:

• American English only: Why not allow at least British English, too? Here in Europe, it seems to be the English version most commonly taught as a 2nd language, and I suspect it's the same for many other countries, too.
• The medieval setting being given by DC seems arbitrary to me. Why not allow people to choose a different setting for their personal scroll? Why not allow one person to have their scroll set in Middle Earth or a steampunk setting or the Star Wars Universe? Let people describe their dragons as superheroes if they please - nothing wrong with that. (Now I imagine some of my dragons sitting in a sattelite roughly 22,300 miles above earth, organizing how to fight crime with their super-hot breath weapon, superior strengths and ability to fly to better the world...)
• Actually Describe the Dragon: Well, this can be misunderstood. To some people, "Red Dragon 101 has a red body and yellow-orange eyes. It has two black horns, black belly scutes and the underside of its wings are black, too," is an adequate description of their dragon. Same goes for "Golden Wyvern 24 is a purebred and even-gen dragon of 5th generation." Instead, could you reword the rule to "Describe your dragon's personality and special traits."
• Allow question marks in descriptions. Not allowing them in descriptions doesn't add anything, as it's quite easy to use indirect questions ("Dragon X wonders why/whether... ")

 

 

[Fuzzbucket]

I was told once that the question mark thing is because it can interfere with coding. I have NO idea how true this is any more. But yes, they'd be nice. I would also like SOME use of the first person. For instance - if you wanted to write "Gloria is a self centred and conceited dragon. She wanders around saying "I know you all want me to join in your silly games but I am better than that." It seems that would get rejected - but technically it doesn't fall foul of the rules.

[olympe]

True enough. As long as it's direct speech/thought, first person should be fine. What else should we use the allowed quotation marks for? 

[SkyWolf25]

@Fuzzbucket

I was under the assumption that this thread would discuss all aspects of pros and cons in relaxing description rules when I banned the subject in the other thread. If the topic is focused only on whether or not the rules stifle creativity, it's more fit for Site Discussion. 

There's someone else who wants to create a new thread on relaxing/removing description rules for a faster/more efficient queue, where potentially whether or not the rules should go and whether or not it would help the queue could be discussed. Perhaps the suggestion can be continued there instead?

[Fuzzbucket]

Fair enough; I came here from there, as I don't see how relaxing the rules would speed things up.

[SkyWolf25]

👍

Since a new thread for relaxing description rules will be made, I will be closing this. If you don't think relaxing the rules would speed things up, you can express your disagreement in the new thread and start discussing.  

If you want to continue the discussion specifically about whether or not the rules stifle creativity, contact me and I'll move the reopened thread to Site Discussions.