Site Philosophy - Lockmor

1. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #1

   OK, Moon. You were right again. Always a leap a head in your thinking.
   
   I did some searching on Wiki's since that is basically all the everything engine is but with some extras.
   
   http://tikiwiki.org/tiki-index.php is the best one I found in my limited searching this morning.
   
   So I have been wondering and debating about how best to go about the new restructuring. Do I build on what I have or start over?
   
   The more and more I look at it the more and more I realize that we have to go above and beyond "just another resource" site. I want to have fun and I want to make something even more unique then what I already have. All the discussions that we have been having are going in that direction but it still needs a solid core to implement the features and make the all work together. That aspect has still not really had much time spent on it but it is really the core of what the new site will be.
   
   No, I don't want to go full wiki and turn the site into a endless sea of unnavigable resources, I want to have an endless sea of navigable resources that can be crosslinked to our hearts content while still maintaining a solid structure to grasp onto when the seas start getting rough. A cross between our current structure and wiki is sort of what I am looking at right now.
   
   We already started that way without me even knowing what wiki is when I enabled the linking to other submissions, I am thinking of a system that makes these links a vital portion of the website.
   
   Back to whay Moon was right. He brought up in chat to just have a single submission section where you can submit to any part of the site. At first I didn't see that working, after all right now I have a different table for each type of submission, but the more I think of it the more sense it makes to put them all together in the same table. Doing that simplifies many things and greatly adds to the modularity of the entire site.
   
   Now that I have a single database holding every submission it narrows it down to requiring only a couple of fields to keep stuff straight (among other things). The current subdivisions in each submission type will go away but all that did was enhance the formatting and try and force some structure and thinking on the submissions. We can still do this in the way we offer FAQs and "Submissions: The Stolen Way" or whatever we come up with for that.
   
   So, what can we do with this new structure? Well, the plan is easier linking, more exposure to other items, a collaborative attempt to define certain things and an easy way to point others to things they may need or want to see.
   
   I think I will name the new system the Lockmor Engine to make it easier to mention in conversation. (it is a play on Morlock if you were wondering) I think it is easier the saying the new system or the old system and knowing what we are talking about. The current system can just be the Strolen System for lack of creativity.
   
   We will be able to grow categories with a simple addition in the admin panel. Instead of me having to develop an entire new section for lifeforms we will be able to simply enter a new category "lifeforms" and it is ready and stuff can be inputted immediately. We can have definable subcategories for each main category as well so we won't loose the type weapon or race or whatever and we can define as many of those as we want as well. Each of those will be able to be edited directly from the admin panel as well. The item disaster we have now, admins will be able to go in and edit current categories and if there is a deletion to one, choose where all those items will end up. Will be the same thing for all the categories.
   
   Wiki is built on keywords, strolen is built on type submission and id. I think this will change. The id will still be available but what better way to link to stuff then using their actual name? So that approach will be used for linking so instead of all the The End of the World crap you can just do [The End of the World] and it will link it to the appropriate plot. This forces each title to be unique though which shouldn't be much of a problem.
   
   With the links I also will not have to develop a World or Theme setting, instead we can just develop another category for Worlds (or anything really) and use that as a set of links that are described in as much detail as the author wanted. The links will allow you to just link to it or bring in a summary of the other submission if you wish. In this way you can tie in pretty much anything and make an adventure out of it or develop a world or city using settings, characters, and plots from anywhere and tying them together however you like.
   
   This linking system will also add to the definition of terms or can lead to constant rants people have. Some people may not like the horrible grammar so create a personal submission detailing all their dislikes about it (or add their comments to somebody elses) and so instead of replying to them and having to go on about the grammar they can instead simply do or something similar which will link to another submission detailing their take on grammar. This type of linking system can work for conversations too. Each of the more popular fantasy terms will end up with links etc and instead of these great talks being buried on the forums we will have submissions going on and on about them that are linked all over the place. This will also allow somebody to add more things to their post if they want, for instance if somebody wants to add stats but we don't want them to then they can just link to [Submission Name Stats] which is another submission with the stats for that character (which he can in turn link back to the full description). The Stats can be another category to not clutter the main submissions.
   
   This type of linking and broadening of the types of submissions allowed will also take some of the more interesting articles out of the forum and place them in the main site where they can be crosslinked for an even broader options for links going to those submissions and discussions. So instead of the great threads on a new type of elves slowly dying, the link can be used in anybodies submission to link to the definition of elves, which can be embellished by whomever.
   
   Might even rethink the entire forum idea really?..maybe just for roleplaying and intros and stuff like that. Any real content should be making its way onto the main site. Even stuff that is still be worked on, that could be a different category where voting is turned off until they are finished. At that time they can move it to the appropriate category and have voting officially start. For those that are designing worlds it might be possible to find a way where they can have their own categories under their world so going to their world is basically like entering another website content wise while still allowing all the crosslinking. They can set it up and divide however they like in their personal little realm yet all their content is still available under the main categories as separate submissions.
   
   I am looking to expand the capabilities of the site and while wiki might be waaaay too open and confusing and non-conformist, I think there is a balance between what we have and what wiki can do that might just work out.

2. Now that you caught up....

   #2

   Actually, now that you believe me...
   
   Since we are a more focused site than something like E2! or most wikis, we can cross reference easily.
   
   We should anchor everything to a solid main page. The structures you were discussing in the other thread would still work, we would just need more boxes. By having a solid anchor to start with, it will be harder to get lost.
   
   What do we need to make this wiki-like hybrid work? What we will need to do is create the meta structure, the skeleton of the site, which we can then hang all our little divisions. It needs to be finite and vague, so we can hang the most information on them. The primary threads are the major categories, secondaries being smaller subcategories. Tertiaries, flavors of the small categories, will be player created. They will serve as linking elemets, but not as secondary fields in terms of sorting.
   
   Examples: In the Full Setting area (primary) we would have the secondaries of all the approved world (i.e.) all the ones that have a forum now AND a secondary for WorldForge (where such things would be set). The individual world ideas and related threads would be tertiaries, which can be linked across. Once a secondary is selected, a list should spill out (preferably one that shows initial author, most recent change date, how many hits, and if possible last post author). So Corvus's world could be a placeholder tertiary, linking all the Corvus items, the NPC, Temple of the forgotten, The SilverStars, and Corvis.
   
   Creating a cross linkable tertiary should be an earned power.
   
   So one the main page, I will click Settings. It will bring up a page that looks kind of like a forum list, of all the main settings and the setting forge. These secondaries might list some tertiaries under them... perhaps those of honor, golden status, or recent submissions. click click and you are there easily, painlessly. And once you are in a specific setting, then it will list its tertiaries AND things in other sections that are linked to the in other sections.
   
   Other areas are going to need to be defined.
   
   Off the top of my head, the divisions might be
   
   Items of Interest
   
   Lifeforms (includes sentients): All our New takes on... and some of our others.
   
   NPCs (Don't list them as Characters... we really only want NPCs. Call them supporting characters if you must. By listing them as supporting characters we will avoid many of the MaryJane and ego gratification characters).
   
   Plots
   
   Settings: see above
   
   World Elements. Primary) would have an encyclopedic listing of parts of a people made world. This is where neighborhoods, weights and measures, city styles, slang, language, magic systems, dungeons/ dungeon styles, etc... This one will be HUGE in terms of subtypes. It will be the center pilar of things to get cross linked to and from.
   
   Articles (game technique mostly) Large catch alls. Secondaries would be by purpose. I am working on those divisions now. Individual articles would be tertiaries. You would then comment on said articles like we do now, but with a list. Many of these would be cross linked to world elements.
   
   Introductions
   General Topics (Selected from the Tavern's best or long lasting ones.. like Best Movie..... Quotes... etc)
   Rants/ opinion pieces (articles but without having to be informative). If we don't have a section for them, they will just clog the system elsewhere.
   Roleplays? Still an option... They just become threads for their mains, and then links across to characters, items, places, etc. Games will eventually generate content, just like JVM's game is right now.
   
   This set up also salvages the ideas area. Heck there could be a random ideas primary. We just need to put them in as small short posts into the system. There are some really good ideas down there.
   
   Now each of these will need a list of secondaries that we should hammer out. Though our recent work of StrolenV2 should be a head start. Check with Manfred.
   
   In case you were wondering, Places will be sucked into Settings. Though we might want a place of special places in the setting area for odd magical things.
   
   Each author should be a cross link as well.
   
   From there, we can create the numerous cross links. I would like to actually limit the automatic cross links to Primaries and Secondaries. You should manually have to create a tertiary link up. This keeps us from eventually getting that "too-much-information-hyperlinked-everything" sort of look that make WIKI articles hard to get through.
   
   So I can get to Arth's main page, via settings, or by clicking world elements, selecting the lone deck of cards post (mine for Arth), which can link us back to Arth's main, two magic ideas (see my recent idea posts), and so on.
   
   Are we on the same page?

3. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #3

   So it also looks like the forums are dissappearing in your incarnation....
   
   I think we are the same page with enough difference to be able to hash out some more ideas.
   
   Everything anchored to a solid main page.
   
   -Items
   -Lifeforms
   -NPCs
   -Plots
   -Settings
   --WorldForge
   --Antasia
   --Amorican Kingdoms
   --Arth
   -World Elements
   -Articles
   -Introductions
   -General Topics
   -Rants/Opinions
   -Freeform Roleplaying
   -Random Ideas
   
   So basically the frontpage will be just that, a frontpage with links available to all the major sections. Perhaps some news, perhaps some "Most Recent" "Hall of Heroes" or other stuff, but mostly quick links that do not hold the summaries and such.
   
   Might need a somewhat extensive Help system to that might end up being a primary.
   
   Going to go into Brainstorm mode here so forgive me if I digress occassionally. I was trying to form cohesive thoughts but by the time I get them and get ready to write them I lost them and am thinking of something else. So this will be more of a stream of consciousness...
   
   Primaries are set up above, the bigger question is how to set up the secondaries. I see the way the setting portion works with user created secondaries forming the bulk of that section, but that should probably be more like Personal Settings or Personal Worlds instead of just Settings. Settings should still be like we have now where you don't have to create a full world, you can just have the ideas. I think that is where the WorldForge comes into play for you, but that puts the WorldForge as the main secondary for all the tertiaries below it which doesn't give a good secondary catalog system as the rest will have available. So Personal Settings or Worlds probably needs their own catagory.
   
   All the different main catagories then must be similiar in nature as far as how their subcatagories should work. How much structure should we enforce on the tertiaries through the use of secondaries? Or what is the minimum information that we *must* collect for each main submission (not counting any comments on anything) in order for us to organize it effectively.
   
   
   -Type Submission (depends on the Primary catagory)
   -subcatagory (in each catagory it has to fit in a subcatagory)
   
   Those two will be made just like the forum, through a control panel and we can add any number of Primary catagories and any number of subcatagories. It will be just like the major forum divisions and then the forum catagories under them.
   
   For this much the submission form should be similiar to the forum where you can only add a submission in the same subcatagory that you are browsing. So in order to submit something to Plots I have to first choose the subdirectory I want to put mine in and once there I can click on Enter a Submission.
   
   But with this there is a very strict treelike structure with no overlapping between catagories.
   
   Is there a way to add individualized subcatagories to the submission to allow multiple search criteria. Like Plots, I have the setting type, which I would think would be a subcatagory in our current structure, and I have Type Character. The way it is now the subcatagory structure only allows one or the other for the submission to be placed under unless we go even deeper for subcatagories
   
   -Plot
   --Forest
   ---Mage
   ---Fighter
   ---Cleric
   ---Rogue
   --Road
   ---Mage
   ---Fighter
   ---Cleric
   ---Rogue
   --Cave
   ---Mage
   ---Fighter
   ---Cleric
   ---Rogue
   
   I don't have the database in mind yet on this one on how things will correlate. Can go with a forum type database where you have three defined levels. Main catagories, subcatagories, tetriaries, exactly like the current forum except strolenized.
   
   The other way to do it is have some recursiveness built in so we can have unlimited catagories, subcatagories, tetriaries, quaternaries, etc etc until our heads explode. THe logic involved with this can get heavy but the new forum system uses it so I can probably follow that and figure it out without too much trouble.
   
   I see the World Elements having some solid secondaries with submission under them but then needed some tetriaries as catagories as well to drill deeper.
   
   I guess I am thinking of it more like a yahoo or dmoz style directory.
   
   Those are the two choices really. The forum style with two levels and everything is on the third or a yahoo style where as many catagories as necessary can be developed to make anything fit.
   
   Trying to think of a way to crossreference things with a catagory format instead of depending on searches as well. With a yahoo structure, it gives the most room for growth but it also forces things into a single place which could be buried in the dungeon. I don't really want something 5 levels down, I would rather have things be able to define a couple top level areas and just show up in both, but I don't really want that either.
   
   Will continue to think. I think we are falling in generally the same direction.

4. Your roots are showing.

   #4

   Blarg on current plot sudvidisions.
   
   Since we are a non system site, can we lose the Fighter/ Wizard/ Thief/ Cleric bit. There are other ways to divide the world, without echoing DnD.
   
   There are lots of game settings where the magic users and clerics are the exact same types. Paladins cross two lines, as do Bishops (MU+cleric). There are worlds without clerics or wizards as well.
   
   There are 8 types of character roles: Smashers (I fight), Thinkers (I solve), Sneakers (I sneak), Talkers (I talk), Sklllsters (I do), Leaders (I lead), Feelers (I hold the game group together), and Reactors (I only react to the GM's actions). If you figure out what is important for the player running that type of character and make sure that there is something every game for that role you game will work.
   
   That aside, we could divide plots into a similar arrangement. The first four of these are more suited for a plot cateogy.
   
   Combat Plots, Puzzle Plots, Social Plots, Stealth Plots, World Plots (you
   must be a character in a specific world for this scenario to work... many of these are campaign seeds more than plots...)
   Moral plots are just that, ones with moral twists. If a scenario requires a specific character type, isn't that listed (in the better plots) in the begining?
   
   Yet there are plots that have combinations of each, so how do we select? Can the plot be cross listed in more than one place? Who makes the decision on how it is listed.
   
   I would rather define the plots by location
   Urban, Town/village(suburban?), Wilderness, Ruins, than by type of character required, as any number of the scenarios can be run by any number of types of characters.
   
   More thoughts later.

5. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #5

   Deep breathe. Shake the head. Tilt head, smack topside. Trying to get rid of preconceptions and the 'old way' and start thinking outside the box again. I am glad I have access to your perspective! Everytime I go huh? then think then Ahhhhh!
   
   I will chew on this a bit.

6. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #6

   That combination of each is what gets me and how to represent it.
   
   For plots we have two ideal ways on organizing it.
   
   Type
   Location
   
   I think they are both necessary and work well with each other. Location would probably be the key catagory that I like as well but the type plot can be an important and useful catagory as well.
   
   That is the question, how do we navigate them?
   
   Plots
   -Location
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   -Type
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   
   The same thing may happen to NPCs as well. The divisions you mentioned, perhaps race or is that one division enough?

7. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #7

   Control, Control. You must have control.
   But why Master Yoda?
   So you can make everything easier to find and categorize.
   
   
   First, yes the forum as a PHP sort of thing will go away. But as long as there are pages where if we click a primary, we will see a list of all the secondary (and possibly a few golden entries, so there might be one to three lines under them, and an "and more", and a page where we can see each secondary (thus see a list of all the teritiary lists), it will not confuse people who do not understand the wiki surfing world.
   
   It is only when you start using the cross links AND search functions that wiki functionality will be applicable.
   
   This is why I can only see our defined primaries and secondaries, without anything going deeper than tertiary. At the tertiary level, you only go laterally- in potentially an infinite distance either way.
   
   So our three categories should stand.
   
   Primaries are our large meta categories
   
   Secondaries are our own artificial divisions in the larger category. These divisions MUST BE CONCRETE AND EASILY DEFINABLE, or they will eventually cause problems with lost/ miss filed information. They really should be a pull down or specific list.
   The secondaries we are using for the items, plots, should serve as a guide.
   
   Tertiaries. These are independent categories... freetext that can be used to cross reference. For example, Item, Bauble, with the tertiary either ORB or Corvis, Corvis's World, would reference it. These tertiaries may or may not link to other places/ things/ people, laterally.
   
   In addition to the tertiary links, we will have all the various important cross links we can set up... keywords and such. (Elf, Dwarf, Orc, Castle, Orb)
   
   I don't really want something 5 levels down, I would rather have things be able to define a couple top level areas and just show up in both, but I don't really want that either.
   This is why we must limit ourselves to primary, a managable number of secondaries, and allow the flexibility to be in the tertiary. Nothing can get too lost, when any of it can be found by two clicks and cross links by an entra.
   
   Example: So Settings, WorldForge, Individual world.
   Eventually these world threads if enough work is invested will be promoted to a secondary. If we make WorldForge a primary, the secondaries will not be a pulldown menu, unless you want to classify worlds by types/ genres/ system... Do you now see why I don't see the usefulness of making it a primary.
   
   We might want a WorkZone, kind of like fleshing it out, but for any sort of article, entry. These posts would delete after six months or so, unless someone wants to save them.
   
   [[[We might want to award points for posts people post out of place, that way we can reward diligent weblings]]]
   
   I guess I am thinking of it more like a yahoo or dmoz style directory.
   Feel the Force Luke. The category structure will make finding things easier. Our Primaries should be of a limited number, but we have that structure all ready. The whole point of this is for things not to be buried. If we get too deep in the categories (near infinite tertiary, quardrary) or too wide (200 secondaries, with a near infinite tertiaries), information will get lost in the sea of definitions. Broad, easy to define categories for primary and seconaries, with diversity in the tertiary (and all the cross links) seems the only way to achieve all the goals you have stated.
   
   
   Okay, you know I have no way to achieve this. So I hope you have the technical knowledge to pull this off.
   
   Aside II I want to shift over some of the existing forum material, as well as the entries (item, npc, etc) and comments. This is do able, or are we doing stuff manually when the day occurs?

8. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #8

   But to have control you must sacrifice some freedom.
   
   In two levels I am having difficulty trying to figure out how the subcatagories will not grow without the tetriaries becoming like the submissions are now. You have a finite amount of catagories for things to go in and then then all you have is 300 submissions under Plots->City but no other way to navigate through them except by crosslinks. I think that will lead to the same kind of stagnation that we have now.
   
   If we had one extra level in some of the catagories then we could add one more option of navigation as I demonstrated in the Plots unless you just want to have it
   
   Plots
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   ========
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   
   and allow the tertiary submission to be in two (or however many separations) subcatagories.
   
   I think the more options for navigation (within reason, i am not suggesting more then just one extra subdivision right now) the more options people have to troll through all the submissions.
   
   ====
   I was thinking after the main page with all the generic listings, you click on a Primary, that will basically be a homepage for all submissions in that section. Can show Hall of Heroes, Golden, New Submissions etc. and all that will be in the Primary Homepage. From there then they will be able to really start the navigation of that Primary.
   =====
   
   I think the submitting will happen inside the secondaries, so you actually have to be in a secondary before you can click on "Add a Submission" and where ever you are, that is what secondary your submission is added to. Once inputted there will be an easy option to move it if it is innappropriate.
   =====
   
   I think I would like the WorldForge have catagories a little like we have now. Without some kind of catagories except for those that are under a specific secondary (which are somebodies actual world) all those that only want to input a bar they have have to add it to the soup of the WorldForge where there is no navigation to sort the stuff.
   
   I am trying to see the ease of simple clickable navigation without one more catagory layer on some of the submission types.
   =====
   
   I am not sure if having 30 secondaries and infinite tetriaries is worse then 10 secondaries with the same amout of tetriaries now filling up the 10 secondaries. With 30, there is a thinner layer of tetriaries and they are at least navigable but turn that into 10 and you have 3 times as many tets in a seconadary and now I have to go through even more to find what I am looking for. I see the tets being buried even worse with a limit to secondaries as catagory headers.
   
   I really don't even look at Plots, Items, Articles as being the first level...all they really are is the main subdivisions. The real hierarchy starts once you choose to view Plots or Items and the catagories invovled there. So really the three levels is really only two when you think about it and that can really open up some navigation options. You can still keep your main catagories that you want. You click on the secondaries, you get all your stuff, but then there is also the option of the tertiary as another catagory which is sort of a refined search if you will.
   
   So you could view it like
   
   Plots
   -Location
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   -Type
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   
   Or
   
   Plots
   -City
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   -Town
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   -Road
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   -Ruin
   --Disaster
   --Power or Messenger
   --Revolt
   --Daring Enterprise
   
   Or
   
   Plots
   -Disaster
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   -Power or Messenger
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   -Revolt
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   -Daring Enterprise
   --City
   --Town
   --Road
   --Ruin
   
   You aren't going to be able to view all the options like that, but you will be able to sort through and look at them in all those different ways just by adding a tertiary catagory scheme. I think 3 levels will be enough with the understanding that the second level is the main sorting and the third level just gives options. If you wanted you could ignore the third level all together and do exactly as you talked about, but adding the third level you add extra options for those that are just browsing allowing them to view submissions in different orders and from different perspecitves hopefully ensuring a more fleshed out view of all the submissions just by browsing the first page of each of the tertiary catagories.
   ======
   
   I think we will have to hand shuffle the stuff over from the forum although if there is enough stuff I can write up a script that will transfer it over. Depends on the amount of data we are going to transfer and if it is worth the effort to automate it or if it is easier to just plug the few things over.

9. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

   #9

   Thinking link organization.
   
   We can use the strength of the wiki by
   
   1. Keywords or free text areas.
   Ok, no drop downs, but how about when you go to put in a submission I supply a list of keywords that others have already used in a unobtrusive column to the left of the submission area. So in that area a large column of just text will form
   
   Thief
   Corvus
   Desert
   etc
   etc
   
   And just say that these are keywords others have used and they can use them to bring together similiar things or they can just create their own.
   
   Every keyword that the put in becomes a linkable word as well that can be used inside any post anywhere in the site. This list is also useful when building your post so you know what you can automatically link to.
   
   Then if anybody clicks on that link then it takes you to that main item that spawned the keyword and/or a list of all submissions that use that keyword.
   
   2. Autolinks for connections
   This way no longer allows a place to "Add Suggested Submissions" type thing because it will depend on links to that submission.
   
   Wiki enables a link structure that shows what other topics are linked to the current topic. So you go to the main Corvus submission. It has the regular keyword link to the rest of submissions using that as a keyword.
   
   The autolinks automatically show all the other submissions that are linking to Corvus or using the keyword. Will figure out a way to display that, but every submission that has in their submission should be shown in the actual Corvus submission space.
   
   ----
   
   How do those things sit?
   
   For number 1, It could be that only the top 100 keywords are shown, those that are used the most often and then a link available to see the rest of the keywords.
   
   In this case I think I would want to limit it to only one or two keywords per submission. One might not be enough depending on our secondary, but not sure about that. There will be true power in the anyway so maybe one freetext keyword would be enough.
   
   I think I would want the "World" association held in a different one so that you can get the "Official World" submissions instead of all the ones that use it as a keyword or link. You could get all the keyword ones as well, but you could also limit it to only ones that were made just for that world.
   
   I also figured that for World Submissions, that the submission that is not created by the original authoer would require an approval by the author in order for it to be "officially" known as part of the world. That gives the author some control over what gets into his world. Those that are rejected are still valid submissions, they just didn't make the cut to be officially entered into the world.

10. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #10

    Voting
    
    Been thinking...
    
    We may not need it anymore...
    
    It could all come down to links. How many other things link to yours. Still will have the Hall of Honour and Golden Sub.
    
    Just thinking out loud. The wiki thing really takes the wind out of ya...such a departure from the normal, static way of thinking...it is...so...free...

11. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #11

    Voting of some sort should be kept. Otherwise I can make important posts by simply including the words Magic, Sword, Elf, and GM in all of my posts. Then dozens of things will be linked to my post, even though it is about horses.
    
    Rating stars are still an option. Gold Stars awardable by people of high levels are good things.
    
    Remember: Freedom is truly the thing that men fear the most. It requires them to be responsible and work together.

12. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #12

    Argh! I've been on holiday too long! It'll take me a while to read this thread.
    
    ephe!

13. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #13

    Might I suggest something for Roleplaying, if you are looking to remove the main forums?
    
    If Im getting this system right, you are saying there is one main 'submission' place, wherein there is, perhaps, a pulldown menu with selections of which categories you want it in?
    
    First, I'd like to say that to start a Roleplay, you should have a moderator or Administrators permission. (such as the current 'moderated freeform') This is so those 'Kalabaresque' people dont make Munchie, non-plotted irritating roleplays which simply take up space.
    
    Why not have a roleplaying category. This is ONLY for starting new Roleplays. The GM creates a roleplay by the following:
    
    Select 'Roleplay' [Pulldown menu]
    
    Name of roleplay: [Text box]
    
    max No. of players: (leave blank for indefinite)
    
    Current No. of players: (Automatic)
    
    Author: (Automatic)
    
    Roleplay summary: [Text box w. limit 200 words]
    
    Rules of roleplay: [Text box]
    
    Roleplay intro/scene setting: [Text box]
    
    
    Now, all the roleplays could be set in a similar system to the current items/characters/etc... listings, wherein There is a brief bit showing, for example:
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
    
    Darklands - Prison of Death | 03/05 players | Author: Warlock | VIEW
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
    
    The 'Darklands - Prison of Death' game, is a roleplay wherein the adventurers are thrown into an unknown cavern by
    magical means, and they must find their way out.
    
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
    
    If someone clicks on this selection, it opens a new page where it has more detailed information such as the rules, and the indepth description, similar to the 'items' page currently. In either this section, or back in the summary section, they can click on 'VIEW' to enter the roleplay, where it will be taking place in the forum-like area that it is in now (Unless you want to make a whole new area for it :P)
    
    It might be easier to give GM's access to their own roleplays for moderation too:
    
    When they enter their roleplay,
    If Author = True, then give access to Edit other peoples posts and delete other peoples posts
    Else normal user.
    
    *This post was made after reading Moonhunters first post :) Sorry if its already been addressed*

14. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #14

    Well, as much as I have been hoping for an 'out of the box' solution that I could tweek, seems more and more that I need to code it all myself if we are to get everything we are discussing :)
    
    We shall see though!
    
    I do see what you are saying, but there really won't be a drop down, it will be more like a 'section' of the website. From the front you can go to plots, npcs, articles, roleplaying etc and start your submissions from those areas. Each area will be able to crosslink between them and such without a problem, but there will be defined, major areas.
    
    That is the major philosophical branch in the road, how to navigate. Have some extra subcatagories or rely entirely on crosslinking.
    
    I like your idea though, nice and clean. Just not sure how well it would fit into the proposed system as it stands. It goes back to having specialized field catagories which we have been discussing departing from. The overall idea right now is to have pretty much all the submission basically follow the same format as far as input fields and it is pretty much up to the author to format them correctly and add all the required content.
    
    This isn't hard and fast, nothing is yet, but that is the current 'philosophy' of the site. Very open and dependent on the posters.
    
    (again, browse around www.everything2.com or www.perlmonks.com for the general idea of what we are currently looking at)
    
    But I do so like your idea.

15. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #15

    Still trying to wrap my head around how to do the catagories.
    
    Wikis - Only thing we are taking from them is the ease of linking and the singularity of the database. Wikis are too open since they do not attribute any submissions to any person. We need accountability for submissions, comments, and votes. We also need some sort of authentication for that. Wikis do not provide that. (there are some that do but not to the extent we need)
    
    So that is where everything came into play except they have barely any structure as well. I don't like that and since I have been taking the time to explore it a little I sort of don't like the way it works either. Granted, I like all the features it has, it is the execution that bothers me. The format really does not do that much for bringing older submissions to the forefront and since there is no real organization/catagorization you end up just wandering around clicking on interesting looking links. This isn't a bad thing if that is the aim you are going for. Then you have the search when you are looking for something in particular so I suppose there is a balance, but I still think there is room for something in between.
    
    www.perlmonks.com gets a little closer by actually having catagories that you can browse through but one level is all they have.
    
    Still trying to think my way through it. I see the power of having it so generalized, but I also see weakness in it and I am having trouble finding a balance. I like the wikis, but I get frustrated trying to navigate them.
    
    I need a zen guide to webpage organization. I think I will meditate some more.

16. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #16

    http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
    
    
    Sort of a zen guide I was meaning. Last half with the numbered points is where it really gets interesting.

17. Site Philosophy - Lockmor

    #17

    OK, I am back in this rut.
    
    Plots
    -Location
    --City
    --Town
    --Road
    --Ruin
    -Type
    --Disaster
    --Power or Messenger
    --Revolt
    --Daring Enterprise
    
    With that we have two categories of plots.
    
    How many categories do we want?
    
    Can we only have one category and shoehorn everything into that one set of descriptions. Like only using the Type plot and not using location as a key. It can be in the post as taking place in ruins but it will not be a defineable criteria.
    
    Perhaps "ruins" would be a hotlink to a generic description (Worlds Elements Thread) called "Ruins."
    
    That is the easiest way to code it BUT do we want extra categories that each submission can be placed in?
    
    If so, how many different categories do we want to limit it to?
    
    I am thinking 2 but actually leaning to just one generalized set and then expecting searches and links to find everything else.
    
    The World Elements list could also act like a sorter by itself. Implementing a link page associated with elements in the Elements category might work.
    
    I go to "Ruins" in the World Elements section. Has descriptions and such of what a ruin can be (or whatever) and then has a link to "Show all submissions Linked" which will show all the posts that link to the "Ruins" post.
    
    (Probably an interesting idea for all the submissions)
    
    Or there can be a page that is user built that links to other ruins posts.
    
    Don't know....just typing. Wish we could have a production meeting.

Administrators · All categories · Guildhall