Misused: Webcomics Long Runners

TR is Tuesday-Thursday. R is used as an abbreviation for Thursday since T is already taken.

I added a note about that at the end of the description. Either that, or we write it out in the examples. It's nothing we can expect everyone to know.

Huh. I thought it was pretty common. It's something I saw on my class schedules as early as middle school. Might just be an American thing.

Abbreviations, acronyms, and the like are very rarely world-wide. Those that are are generally far better known by the short version (like most three-letter organisations).

You do realize those folders will all have to be updated every year? Doesn't seem like the best plan. Maybe if they said "Launched in XXXX" rather than "XX Years Old", it would simplify things.

Otherwise, looks pretty good.

Technically, you're going to have to update any time one webcomic passes a limit.

Use five-year intervals, and still sort them by age? Or two years? Or three point seventeen years?

Once a year isn't that bad, and all that has to be done is copy and paste those that haven't ended "up" a folder.

My concern is the number of strips, which is always changing. That, I think, was a bad idea in retrospect.

I was originally going to do "launched in XXXX", but then I ran into a lot that ran for over 10 years, but then ended. Putting them under their original year gives a false impression about how long they ran. This way seemed to make more sense.

edited 16th Aug '12 2:27:38 PM by ccoa

You're always going to need to add new examples, but that's not the same as needing to re-organize the whole page every year. (Which you'll have to do even if we make the groups larger as you suggest, since some comics will change group every year.)

Long-Running Book Series is sorted by genre, which doesn't require yearly reorganization. How do other Long-Runner pages do it?

eta: one possibility is to sort them by update frequency: daily, weekly, bi-weekly, tri-weekly, monthly, irregular.

edited 16th Aug '12 2:32:53 PM by Xtifr

Long Runner does it in 10 year increments. But that's not practical for something this new. Video Game Long-Runners does it by franchise, but the page is a mess. Print Long-Runners divides by genre and then sorts alphabetically.

EDIT: I should note that the way I have it organized, it would be the work of 10-15 minutes to re-folderize everything up a year. All ended webcomics are at the top of the list, so it's not an effort to sort them out.

EDIT EDIT: What about those that changed frequency during their run?

edited 16th Aug '12 2:34:34 PM by ccoa

Ok that sandbox works

It'll be the work of a few minutes if it's maintained immediately on new years day. If it lags, and new examples get added that have the correct number of years while the old examples still have the previous year's number of years, then someone has to go through and check them all.

I admit, I'm not talking about a catastrophe here, but I just tend to like low-maintenance solutions. If we sort by, say, genre, the yearly fixup requirement goes away completely, and the only thing we need to do is add new examples every so often.

But since I'm probably not going to be the one doing the maintenance (my focus is more on literature and speculative fiction), no skin off my nose either way. :)

If we're having trouble with "time interval between first comic and last comic/today" versus "total number of comics", perhaps we could come up with a variable that relates the two.

edited 17th Aug '12 4:05:10 AM by NateTheGreat

I sort of did calculate how many strips a 10 year old webcomic should have based on update schedule.

But honestly, the more I think about it the less I like it. I think we should just put up a "common sense" warning telling people not to add comics that are technically over 10 years old, but have taken so many hiatuses that they haven't truly been active that long. I can watchlist the page and make sure something like A Modest Destiny or VG Cats isn't added.

I updated the sandbox page with a second set of folders sorted by launch date. Honestly, I like the first way better since it lets you tell at a glance which are oldest, but I'll go with the majority.

edited 17th Aug '12 8:46:09 AM by ccoa

I think the first one looks better, too, but I'm not going to spaz out if the votes go towards the yearly breakdown.

(Unrelated to this thread, has the note thing always been broken like it is in the entries for Irregular Webcomic!?)

edited 17th Aug '12 4:36:50 PM by Nohbody

"Broken" how? It looks fine to me.

^ If you click on the note in the alternate organization, it opens the first note, not the second.

@Nohbody: Every note has an ID so that the right one will open when you click it. These are dependent on the text in them. If two notes contain the same thing on the same page, clicking either will open the first. I don't know if Eddie is working on it, but it's a known issue and in Tech Wishlist.

Maintain it yearly in January, keep locked at other times, make people list new examples on a subpage where they can wait for the next update.

Locking it is a very bad idea.

Care to elaborate?

Locked pages tend to suffer from updating issues and tend to decay in quality, which is the fault of the locking interface.

Anyway, I don't think we can defend a system that requires page locking for implementation.

We still have the same problem if we rank by number of strips, like currently. Just saying.

...what is wrong with simply listing them alphabetically?

Because then we can't keep score.

Joke.

edited 19th Aug '12 5:40:31 AM by AnotherDuck

Huh?