Right, that's assuming the threads will have to restart from page 1 rather than continue where they left off.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallWell, two of the things definitely happening, according to the pinned op are:
- New threads to discuss the cleanup
- New OP that makes joining the discussion for the first time (or after a hiatus) easier
Which means that there will definitely be new threads (redundantly speaking)
My troper wallIt would honestly be better to start fresh IMO. It's not fair to ask newbies to read through hundreds of thousands of posts just to feel like they're up to speed. Let them start fresh, and all of us along with 'em.
Wanna make one last stab at this, because I think it will be a terrible idea, but I really don't like the no EPs for candidates unless controversial, the main reason being what's controversial/obvious for someone else won't be for another. We have definitely had EPs where the proposer states something in it that they don't think is a big deal, but because of that tidbit the thread goers either check it out or ask for clarifying questions and it becomes clear that it's disqualifying for whatever reason. Yes some characters slip through the cracks under the current system, but that would increase tenfold if you didn't need EPs since a lot of people would just briefly summarize someone who they think is obvious but there were problems when people looked closely.
You can only write so much in your forum signature. It's not fair that I want to write a piece of writing yet it will cut me off in the midIt's not technically 'No E Ps unless controversial', again people can still do it if they want too. Technically this is just codifiying what was already supposed to be policy (That an effortpost typically will not be required) it may still cause problems in some areas but not too much.
Bow to the PrototypeRight, again, it's important to keep in mind that not only are we also going to have more discussion going on at each point, but that people are entirely free to get all the information they can during said discussion period. Every other thread works on this sort of "here's what I think" "but there's an issue" "let's discuss it" system, so it can work if people put the effort in.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wallpeople in this thread have talked about that very thing, Star. i don't blame you for missing it considering how fast it's moved, but it's a real thing people have brought up. remember, you can't know how many posts haven't been made that should have, because they weren't made. it's easy to say there's not a problem because examples do get cut, but that's not the question.
We already do that. If a candidate is controversial we probe and ask questions. But it's much easier to do so if an EP indicates there are problems. A short summary is far less likely to engender suspicion. If you just have a short summary someone might not know what to ask.
You can only write so much in your forum signature. It's not fair that I want to write a piece of writing yet it will cut me off in the mid![]()
Basically it's sort of confirmation bias — because you see the times when things are called out, it's harder to recognize that there might be times when the current system is failing to call things out.
I can see that, but hey, no harm in giving it a shot.
Edited by WarJay77 on Oct 8th 2022 at 6:10:51 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall![]()
![]()
If you are talking about the decision to remove the resolved items section, this won't help. There are very few characters who are there at the moment (below 10 I think) and if a character gets put there, it usually means that there is really no more need for discussion (Syndrome is a special case) because they were discussed multiple times in the past.
Also, our goal is to not allow bad examples to slip through at all. That's why I am in favour of keeping the current format even if the users aren't obliged to strictly use the EP template, but they still provide thorough explanation. I am also in favour of removing resolved items by the way because I don't see the point in them.
Edited by WatTambor on Oct 8th 2022 at 1:13:48 PM
I think that people should have the choice to EP candidates if they want to rather than just abolish the EP system altogether
My sandbox of EPs and other stuffTo be clear, when I'd originally suggested the "only EP the controversial cases" idea, it was as a solution to the problem people had with the waiting period idea... which was that easy cases didn't "need" discussion and thus forcing the thread to wait a day just to talk about them seemed silly.
If ditching the EP format in any capacity will ultimately make things worse... Well, that remains to be proven. But if it's true then just get rid of that plan.
Edited by WarJay77 on Oct 8th 2022 at 6:16:08 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallOkay wait, I need to ask. Who is advocating getting rid of the current EP system completely, the most that has been suggested is making it so that EP's are reserved for controversial characters which isn't getting rid of it. I see a lot of posts where people think we are trying to advocate getting rid of it when I don't see anyone who has. Am I missing something?
I am seeing people talk about how it would be wrong to abolish the EP system and uh...I am sure it might have come up but I am not seeing many people talk about that? Like the general consensus seems to be that it should still be an option if people want to do an EP.
Edited by Snoketrope on Oct 8th 2022 at 3:18:17 AM
Bow to the PrototypeI simply think trying to make eps only for controvesial candidates is trying to fix what isn’t broken. Now if somebody wants to do a post they can, simply dissagre with making ep” controvesial candidates only”.
Feel it’s best to give it give it a shot in trial period and if fails simply get don’t do it
Edited by EmperorGeode on Oct 8th 2022 at 3:20:50 AM

it may be better to allow a mod to do it, but as i said that's a discussion for later.