posted May 19, 1999 18:26                

Although this split to "The List of Ideas for Firaxis" (thanks for that, too, Mark) HAS created in essence a third forum, SMAC was never really the right place (I admit), and the General Section should still be monitored very closely by the Thread Masters. This forum here is just a convenient place to collect the ideas, and hopefully more and more people will understand that this is indeed the place to come if they have ideas they'd like Firaxis to see.

posted May 19, 1999 23:39                

------------------
"I think you're all f*cked in the head!"
Chevy Chase-Nat'l Lampoon's Vacation.

[This message has been edited by Pythagoras (edited May 19, 1999).]

posted May 19, 1999 23:48                

I've been working under the assumption that we should be working toward providing the best summary we can, with enough material to adequately explain an idea, but getting rid of anything superfluous, unclear, or unnecessary. We're sort of working as filters so that Brian can just absorb the important stuff. If he wanted everything he could just read the forums himself... At least that's what I've been assuming.

posted May 20, 1999 12:10                

I write for a living, mainly speeches. And if I've learned anything it's that you have to know your audience. No matter how important YOU think your points are, if you can't convey them properly to the audience, you might as well sit down and be quiet.

Having said that, and having worked a little bit with Brian in the past, I know that he wants this material to be as "clean" as we can make it. This does not mean we should only bullet our ideas, but we should also clarify as needed. This might require a bit of prose on our part, but as we come closer to sending the list, it will become apparent what needs elaboration and what can just be listed.

Octopus,

I'll do what I can about your thread. Otherwise I'll ask Mark.

posted May 20, 1999 12:18                

I think I fixed it. Give it a try!

------------------

**"un"Officially Making Lists for Firaxis Since SMAC Enhancement 3!**

posted May 20, 1999 01:54                

I took out threads that we no longer needed, and I standardized thread titles. If you guys object to the titles, please give me a better system. I took out the (v1.0) stuff, but you should feel free to update the version number in your summary post as you open a new thread after it reaches 50 posts. Basically, I went for simple and consistent.

posted May 20, 1999 11:49                

I think that you are right, people that post ideas should give as much of a description as needed, even if it may seem too long to some people. The reason is simple, the thread masters main job is to take all the suggestions and incorporate them into one clear concise list. This could be hard to do if the original description is not detailed enough to explain to us what the poster had in mind. I do think that some things make even long posts easier to read such as inerting blank lines between ideas and such.

posted May 20, 1999 17:29                

- standard naming and numbering of the topics
- standard beginning post for each new topic
- standard final post for each full topic

Proposed items for the standard beginning post:

1) Have a link to the prior locked topic in the first post to a newly opened topic (Yin if you need help with the HTML to do this, just ask)

That way people could easily go back and read to their heart's content rather than solely relying on the summary posted by the T.M.

2) Have a link to the MASTER LIST LAUNCH PAD in the the first post of each new topic.

Hey! I worked hard (and continue to work hard) to make this a convenient way for getting around. I don't want it to get lost in the shuffle.

Proposed item for the standard final post:

1) A link to the newly created topic for those who are reading the posts in order.

Civ3 n ... Ted S.

posted May 20, 1999 17:38                

I can foresee the summaries themselves becoming fairly lengthy, thus increasing the download time and thereby defeating the purpose for closing long topics at 50 posts.

If summaries are seperated, a link to the summary could be included in a standard beginning post for a new topic as well.

posted May 20, 1999 17:48                

This way it's pretty clear to get a good idea about the suggestions and ideas in that main-topic.

posted May 20, 1999 18:09                

I strongly disagree. If I am to be managing a thread, I like to be able to set the pace, etc. None of the "advantages" you mention require that a single person start a thread, they merely require that we agree on certain standards. I tried to encourage everybody to do that before, but nobody seemed interested.

I suggest that people consider what elements should be included in a standard template for the beginnings of new threads, post them here, and we can discuss them.

Currently, I believe that keeping the summaries in the discussion threads is the best approach. The summaries allow for good breakpoints in the discussion, which sometimes begin to meander, and refocus people on the task at hand, which is to gather and discuss a wide variety of suggestions.

For the naming convention, I intend to use a decimal numbering scheme to indicate major/minor revisions. I'll be posting a new summary later this evening.

Yin, can you switch the title on my thread back to v1.1? I think keeping the numbers straight will make it easier on posters. Version 1.0 of the threads were in the other forum.

posted May 20, 1999 18:14                

Sure.

Might I add, Ted (everybody), that I can now change titles and so forth after they are created anyway, so all I need is feedback from you guys on how you want things. So, Thread Masters should still do all the hard work here! That's why I hired you.

------------------
CIV3 DEVELOPMENT LIST COORDINATOR

**(un)Officially Making Lists for Firaxis Since SMAC Enhancement 3!**

posted May 20, 1999 18:22             

DONE! *Yin*

posted May 20, 1999 18:30                

Re: who creates the new topic

Of course none of things I mention, require that one person create it.

However, one person is in a much better position to enforce standards without requiring that everyone know and get the UBB or HTML code "just right." And as you pointed out, no use in having standards if they are not kept, well, standard.

And since the moderator is the one responsible for locking the old thread, and the one who edits the topic subjects to be standard, it made sense for him to be the one to create a standard new topic "header".

If everyone is left to their own devices to implement the standard, Yin is still left in the position of doing all the cleanup work to bring topics up to par.

Re: having seperate summary areas

I was only thinking long term. If this project is going to go on for months, there are going to be quite a few summaries as time goes by. Seperate summary topics could easily accumulate fifty summaries each. (UNITS is on it's 4th topic already!)

posted May 20, 1999 18:43                

Post a template for people to cut and paste.

"And since the moderator is the one responsible for locking the old thread, and the one who edits the topic subjects to be standard, it made sense for him to be the one to create a standard new topic "header"."

No, it makes sense for us all to know what the right standards are, and just do it. There is unlikely to be a lot of "cleanup work". How many times do you think Yin will need to correct somebody before they get the drift?

"If everyone is left to their own devices to implement the standard, Yin is still left in the position of doing all the cleanup work to bring topics up to par."

If we can't trust the thread masters to implement even the most basic things like posting appropriate headers, then we have a bigger problem.

Yin has a big enough job. I, for one, do not want to have a thread started and "get off on the wrong foot" before I am ready for it. I see many drawbacks and almost no advantages to your proposal.

posted May 20, 1999 18:45                

My main reason for not wanted to start the titles myself is that I want your names, not mine to be the designated originator. Imagine a board filled with 'yin26'--creepy. You guys are doing the work. Your names should appear.

But the idea of a better place for summaries is appealing. Can everybody give me some feedback on how this can or should be done? Thanks Ted for the ideas.

------------------
CIV3 DEVELOPMENT LIST COORDINATOR

posted May 20, 1999 19:15                

If you don't mind, I'd like to first invite Octopus do run that thread, since he is already doing the Tech thread. If he's too busy, though, you're the man! Thanks.

------------------
CIV3 DEVELOPMENT LIST COORDINATOR

**(un)Officially Making Lists for Firaxis Since SMAC Enhancement 3!**

posted May 20, 1999 19:19                

I hear you. Folks here at Apolyton got their fill of seeing your name on topics weeks ago.

>>>>> Octopus

Easy there big fella. You've got eight arms. I've only got two.

Re: Standard Topic Headers

Cutting and pasting an HTML and/or UBB template is a great idea. I considered that myself, but could not figure a way to post the code here without trashing the HTML tags and UBB codes. Perhaps a template could be e-mailed. Or maybe there's a simple way to post that kinda stuff here.

I'm still not confident that all of us are gonna get it right. But trying it is an easy way to convince me I'm wrong!

Re: Topic Summaries

Basically there are four ways to go:

1) Post summaries when warranted in the "body" of a MASTER LIST topic

2) Post summaries (partial or comprehensive) whenever a "fresh" MASTER LIST topic is created

3) Post all summaries in a separate, but all encompassing, MASTER LIST SUMMARIES topic

4) Post summaries in summary topics each specifically devoted to different MASTER LIST topics

My opinion is #4 is the way to go. People could get to the specific summary topics through the standard header or the launch pad.

posted May 20, 1999 20:30                

tfs99: Liberal use of < (less than) and > (greater than) can make what you are trying to do easier. For example:

<a href=../../Forum28/HTML/000014.html>Wow, a link!</a>

ought to look like this

Wow, a link

If that wasn't clear:

When you type &lt; it looks like this: <
When you type &gt; it looks like this: >

Speaking of standard headers, People should look at what I have at the beginning of Technology 1.1 (which I will repost when I summarize for Technology 1.2). I think we can use that as a starting point for our discussion of the standard opening (e.g. "you shouldn't have said that! That's horrible! You totally forgot about _____!" ). Either that, or make a proposal of your own.

posted May 20, 1999 20:51                

I don't think this is necessary. Remember, CivIII is the first stroke of the broom of time - the game probably won't go past 2100 before it breaks into either SMAC(II) or Sid Meier's Expansion Game (SMEG for short). So future tech is pretty much going to be the stuff that's in SMAC.

posted May 21, 1999 01:03                

All Thread Masters:

Please click here to jump to THE SUMMARY THREAD. The paperwork continues!

posted May 21, 1999 22:09                

If anybody is still doing that "first time posted in this thread" stuff, cut it out. Completely unnecessary.

Summary Comments: I think I have some comments about some of the styles used for the various summaries, but I don't want to "pollute" the summary thread with them. Where should we do that?

STANDARDS

Please, people, can we start working on some standards?

I think every thread should have a header that explains the basic purpose of the list, what a thread master is, etc. Please look at the beginning of my Technology thread to see what I am talking about. A header post like that sets the groundwork for a thread, and properly orients somebody who has just arrived on these forums. I think every thread should have one. Once we establish what sort of content is appropriate, we can post a template which you can just cut-and-paste into the beginning of your thread.

Thread names: I think each thread should have a major name in all caps (like TECHNOLOGY or UNITS), a revision number (like 1.2 or 3.7), and a "hosted by ______" (this is probably superfluous, but it makes the threads stand out a bit).

For the numbering scheme, use numbers to the left of the decimal point for major revision and numbers to the right of the decimal point for minor revisions. (I leave undecided at this point the question of whether 1.11 is greater than 1.9).

I welcome anybody else's suggestions for standardization, but please, let's at least start thinking about it. This forum is going to be confusing enough for people coming in for the first time without every thread master doing everything in a different way.

posted May 21, 1999 22:19                

quote:

---

I've already said I will develop a perl script to do that for us. It will be easy. Yin, stop telling people to do it. It's pointless work.

---

O.K., O.K., Don't yell at me! If you can do this for us, that's really going to save us a lot of time. MUCH appreciated.

As you all know, I'll be out of town soon, so I might not be able to help set these standards over the next few days. But if you guys agree to Octopus' system, I'll update all the thread titles ASAP.

Do you like his system, everybody?

------------------
CIV3 DEVELOPMENT LIST COORDINATOR

posted May 21, 1999 22:40                

I said at the time it was unnecessary. If you didn't listen it's your own fault .

tfs99: The "running out of numbers" problem can be solved by either starting more conservatively at 1.00 and moving to 1.01, or by declaring that it isn't really a decimal number, and that 1.10 is greater than 1.9, not equal to 1.1 (with that system, you can continue down the path to 1.10.2.17 if you were some sort of masochist and branched off...). I think we lose a sense of continuity with either arabic or roman numeral naming systems. It is a lot clearer that "Technology 1.3" is related to "Technology 1.2" than it is that "Technology 3" is related to "Technology 2". At least, the way I look at things it is clearer that way...

posted May 21, 1999 23:41                

FYI: I'll be closing your thread at around 50 posts. At that point, you'll carry a clean summary to your new thread. The numbering system for the thread titles will be fixed soon.

By the way, everybody:

posted May 22, 1999 01:10                

Absolutely not! Take a look at my UBB code thread. Find a post with some formatting trick in it you like. Then click the "edit message" button. You'll see all the codes in the message. Now all you have to do is use those codes in your own stuff if you want. Easy. In fact, if you click "edit message" on this post, you'll see how I did italics. Here's bold. Piece of cake! If you need more tricks, just ask. *Yin*

posted May 22, 1999 02:08                

Any "decimal" numbering system will have an intuitive discontinuity at either the transition from 1.9 to 2.0 or at 1.9 to 1.10. It introduces needless complexity. A simple numbering system suffers from no such discontinuity. Remember the KISS principle.

There is another possibility: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.

posted May 22, 1999 04:29                

TOPIC (ver1): Hosted by Thread Master

posted May 22, 1999 13:50                

Yin, you seem to be a tad quick about declared consensus reached. There seemed to be only one objection to the decimal system, and no other posts on it. I remember that evil_conquerer voiced support for the decimal system on the SMAC forums. If we decide that a particular decision is going to be reached by consensus we ought to reach it. If you're going to make a decision unilaterally, you shouldn't imply that you won't.

posted May 22, 1999 14:34                

Those who were inclined to look in the War Room and comment did so. I suspect that the specifics of a numbering scheme is probably a non-issue for most TMs.

And if it works out that Yin's (verNN) system is burdensome or unworkable, it can always be changed later.

posted May 22, 1999 15:03                

You have a valid point. I suspect that Yin made the decision quickly due to his imminent road trip.

Also, it seems like Yin, you and I (as well as the occasional passerby, that rhymes!) are the only ones who pay attention and post in the War Room. Maybe Yin concluded that there wouldn't be any more comments.

I agree numbering is not a biggy. Recognizing that it's not, perhaps Yin figured a lot more discussion was not needed. I don't know. As far as future decisions, we'll just have to wait and see.