The communal story thread appears to be stalled. Somebody needs to get out and push.

Get thee behind me Chicken of Satan, and Push!

OK, So I tried posting a pithy comment, and nut'n shows up!

What the!

Rant, rant, rant, rant.

Pout, pout, pout, pout.

Boy, I'll be embarrassed if this posts...

I'd love to add in some more, but I have lost where the story went. I've read it over 5 times and I can't figure out what the hell is going on now.

In Response to TheWizardofFez (#602):

Agreed. I think people were more interested in putting in clever (and not-so-clever) references and general mayhem than they were in creating a good storyline.

I think there should be some rules for the next one. Here's a couple that might help:

1) No use of Goats characters. If you can't create original characters, try using the ones in the storyline.

2) No more than three sentences per post.

Anyone else have some ideas about how we can streamline and improve the communal storytime process?

In Response to kedamono (#601):

If you're having troubles with the posting system, send phillip [goats.com] a note letting him know what the difficulty is. We're stil ironing out some of the kinks, and detailed feedback is extremely helpful.

In Response to jon (#603):

Well, damn. Guess my 'Hamsters & Dragons' reference was not so good after all.

I think at some point (every 10-20 posts?) we need a plot summary, just so people like me can figure out what has happened.

In Response to jon (#603):

I think there definitely needs to be some kind of limit on character creation. At one point I tried to drag everything together and tie it in a big knot [goats.com], and I jotted down the characters. There were at least ten, and my post was the sixteenth.

I'm just glad there were more posts after mine. I was afraid for awhile there that I'd killed it, but that was during the no-post bug fix period.

I really like the idea, and I'd like to see it continue.

In Response to TheWizardofFez (#608):

On plot summaries: Might be a good idea, if it's practical. I have noticed that the way the post index is rendered is tricky to follow in two cases: 1) multiple sub-threads starting at a deeply nested post; and 2) really long threads. These situations are innevitably going to occur, so it might be that condensing the posts from time to time would help. Ideally such a system would provide a quick read of the story for newcomers and help anyone find the current thread endpoints.

However, it also seems like a lot of work to be sure and get it right, and it might make the post clutter in the topic even worse if done badly. From a workload standpoint, I think one of two things would have to happen: Either someone would have to volunteer to do it once a week, or a rotation of some sort would have to be established.

I'm willing to play a part in such an effort. If it'd be helpful (and if we're interested in trying to salvage the existing thread) I could try to write up a summary of the existing material.


On length limits: Length limits are IMO a necessary part of a communal storyline. It's bad to have one person run off with the story. At the same time, it shouldn't be so short that an individual can't express an idea. "Three sentences" is probably a pretty good rule, but may tend to result in people with "a lot to say" writing crazy run-on sentences.

An alternative approach to post length control (I think I've seen this used somewhere, but I can't recall where) would assert that a post should follow two rules: 1) don't address more than a single scene; and 2) don't present more than <insert short time interval> of action time. ("Action time" would not include lead-in time caused by starting a post with "The next day" or something like that.) Opinions? Am I just on crack here?


On use of Goats references (or other outside canon): I'm not sure if it's harmful to the storyline thread or not, but if we want to assert that the story be entirely original, I'm game. Sorry; my bad.


Other rule suggestions: I think a lot of confusion would be mitigated if it were only legal to reply to, say, the last three posts in any given thread. This would allow thread-splitting to a point, but would discourage excessive back-tracking in the canonical timeline. Along the same lines, we might want to declare a sub-thread "dead" if it's inactive for a certain length of time.

Along the lines of "keeping it communal", there should be a limit to post frequency. Obviously no individual should own two consecutive posts in a single thread; I'm bouncing around the thought that no individual should post to the story more than once per day (counting all threads together). Maybe if the thread count gets high the rule would have to be loosened a bit to keep the story moving.

Fourth-wall maintenance is another question. I would argue that the fourth wall should be a rule. As it happens, I violated that one in the existing storyline to try to cover an error in the continuity of Baio's location; I wasn't sure it was a good idea at the time, and I've come to doubt that it was.

Which leads into my last point; more a "suggestion suggestion" than a "rule suggestion", I guess. I don't want to have snotty-sounding demands that limit participation in any way, but it would be nice if everyone be careful to keep their posts consistant with all that's come before. Nothing makes it harder to follow a story than if the story legitimately doesn't add up.

In Response to jon (#604):

It vas mine own ignorance. Mine browser is der keeping the cache of pages to vhich I have visited, much to long.

A zeemple refresh und all is monkeys and bananas!

Tank you for your advice Jon!

In Response to jon (#603):

Well, besides some of the more draconian ones mentioned elsewhere:

- No posting a reply for your own post. This prevents folks from running away with the story. Give the other folks a chance to reply to your wit with their own post.

- Try to fit your bit in with the plotline of the thread you're posting to.

- Unless it's for vital reasons, don't try to tie the different threads together. Even if it means that the same character is in two places at once. Live with the paradox.

- Scatological humor is funny, once. Be creative, not and be Beavis and Butthead.

Anymore ideas?

In Response to kedamono (#619):

I would approach the "tying threads together" issue a bit differently. Rather than saying "avoid it unless it's vital", I'd simply say "do it when it's appropriate, and don't do it when it's not appropriate". It's pretty clear when two story threads should or should not relate.

Remember that the threads, taken together, are one story. To make it readable, I think we do want to tie the threads together -- or even merge them -- when called for. Just letting a paradox develop makes the story inconsistent and harder to follow. And that's the initial problem we're getting at -- if people can't read it, they can't contribute to it, and it freezes.

In Response to mea37 (#620):

True, but why tie threads together? This in its essence is a "hyperstory", where the strands go off in different directions, sometimes contradictory directions and is definitely non-linear in its structure.

To force the writers of a hyperstory to stick to the rules of linear storytelling is incredibly limiting.

Let's look at the active thread in the Communal Storyline. What if someone were to post a thread that dealt with Herbert investigating the stain on the wall, at the same time the Hole thread was posted? Do we force the two together? Or let the alternative universes diverge and develop different storylines and histories?

I'd rather do the latter, than the former. Threads should not and must not tie together unless they come to this naturally, and not because someone wants to stick to linear thought!

What the hell is this soapbox doing here? Get thee hence Satan's washing powder and never clean my shirts again!

In Response to kedamono (#655):

On the one hand, maintaining consistency between the threads isn't the same as imposing linearity. In fact, if each thread is independent, than really all you have is a collection of linear storylines.

On the other hand, you have a point, and it's one that the voices in my head have been debating off and on for a couple days now. I like the idea that threads could represent entirely independent branches of canon for the story.

I also like the use of threads to trace multiple paths through the same canonical timeline. Making good use of this approach can be challenging for the contributing authors, but it also can produce some very cool results. IMO, it puts a lot of the "non-linear" into a non-linear story.

The problem is that within the structural constraints of the communal story discussion, if you use one mechanism for both, then they look the same to someone who tries to read the existing material, and it becomes impossible to determine what's going on. The worst case would be if two threads sometimes interact but other times ignore their mutual consequences.

IMO it needs to be clear what it means when two subthreads appear; either they're always divergent canonical timelines or they're always related to one consistent canon and are just focused on different parts of it. In the former case I think you'll find you get nothing but a collection of alternative linear stories.

In Response to mea37 (#661):

The real block to a true hyperstory is the structure of this forum. A true hyperstory segment can link to several lines or have several lines link to it.

All we can really do is, as you say, have nothing but a collection of linear stories. So perhaps I will bend my will and agree with your alternate method of different paths through the canonical story line. That can be a method we should go with.

As to how we can enforce it... well, the best method would be peer pressure, making the gerbil gnashers feel the wrath of us hamster hackers.

After that would be moderation, assigning a low score to a story segment that doesn't fit. But of course one man's mead, is another's poisson.

Any ideas of how we can steer the storylines?

In Response to kedamono (#680):

Here's some fun. A friend of mine was telling me this weekend about a site she spends time at where they write these kinds of communal stories. It's at www.tagyoureit.org [tagyoureit.org]

In Response to snookles (#924):

If someone wants to, they should feel free to start a new story in a new discussion. The folks on this forum seem to be reluctant to start new discussions, for some reason.

In Response to jon (#929):

I realize this sounds ridiculous, but I think part of the reason that people are so recluctant is because they are lazy. That darn new discussion button is way, way, way too far down on the page for most of us to get to.