Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Interviews => Topic started by: Trivial Psychic on March 26, 2011, 05:58:04 pm
-
Howdy all:
Since the legendary Volition interview thread has been locked, may I suggest that it be split into two. The first would have just the interview itself, then the second would include all the subsequent discussion from the thread. Both threads would be locked. The first thread would then be sticked for posterity (given its importance), then in a follow-on post, the link to the discussion thread. That way, even if the discussion thread falls off the main page, it can easily be accessed for any new member that wants to read the comments.
-
Why do we want people to read the discussion? I'm against deleting threads but why make it so accessible? It's a cluster****.
Just a post explaining the interview in current HLP context would be great.
-
A better question is why should a "cluster****" be swept under the rug?
As for Trivial Psychi's idea, it's not a bad one. Just post the interview, sans introduction, for people to read and to come to their own conclusions.
-
No, I don't think so. Make a wiki article instead if you want it for posterity. The forums are for discussion, the wiki is for reference. And while I don't want anything "swept under the rug", I will be happy to see the thread naturally sink off the page.
-
There is already a wiki article.
-
The split is a must-do IMO, and I don't think the first thread should be locked for the reason Black Wolf posted above.
-
A wiki article is fine, but I hate the idea of connecting the interview with that discussion in any way.
-
What Qent said.
Split it, lock both, leave the wiki article linking to the interview on it's own and let people interpret it how they like, while I am very close to battuta in opinions voiced on the meanings and scope behind the interview, I heartily believe other people should have the opportunity to take what they like from it and use it creatively in different directions.
Diversity is better than a unified vision.
-
Splitting it off and then linking to it from the wiki gains nothing as the text of the interview is the same, except that it has Battuta's intro. Now, the merits or lack thereof of that intro notwithstanding (it was a point of contention for at least one or two people in the thread, after all), losing it could make some of the rest of the thread make less sense (maybe - I'm not sure if every reference to it was split out or not). So the net result of a split would be to add nothing to the wiki article, while potentially diminishing the readability of the original thread. I see no advantage.
If someone wants to add a link from the wiki article to the original thread, that's fine, as it puts the interview in context, and makes the discussion (some of which was quite interesting) available to the hypothetical wiki visitors who aren't also forumites. Beyond that, the status quo, IMO, is fine.
-
Why would you lock both threads, QD? The flame war's over and if those involved are mature enough, they won't restart it; that doesn't mean other community members shouldn't be allowed to voice their opinion on the matter.
I do understand the sort of "delusion" around that interview, and personally interpret it as the direct result of all the expectations many of us had from an interview about FS3 (more expectations ---> eventually more delusion in case of disappointment). I could also see some elitism there: what we have "learned" about Bosch pretty much killed many of the "Bosch may return" ideas we can find in certain campaigns like Deep Blood, and simultaneously gave more credit, if you pardon the term, to campaigns like BP and INF which don't represent all custom-made campaigns as a whole. Finally, as I posted there, I didn't notice anything in favor of character-driven campaigns (there was nothing against such campaigns either, of course).
I believe the whole deal needs more discussion here on the forums, without flaming of course.
-
Just to be clear, I'm proposing leaving the interview (including GB's intro) on the boards, linking to it from the wiki, and splitting the discussion into Gen FS.
-
Which makes a lot of sense, but that'd completely remove all comments related to the main subject. Can't we simply split the flaming, and leave coherent posts where they are? Just proposing an idea here.
We may even create a "Comments on the interview with Jason Scott" article, addressing all the praises and critiques related to the recent interview.
-
"Inflammatory" is very subjective as demonstrated many times over in that thread. Glancing back over it now, I for instance believe that such splitting needs to begin at the top of page 2.
-
...which is way better than splitting all comments, IMO. :)
-
No, please don't create a "Comments on the interview with Jason Scott" article. Just link to the topic and let everyone decide for himself what he thinks of the interview.
-
Uhm, you're right. Thanks for posting that.
-
I did, in fact, split the thread once at the request of JG, I believe.
Though it seems the the split thread was put back together.
-edit-
Okay. Re-split, original remains locked, and follow on post added.
Comments are here (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=75305.0).
-
Battuta kept splitting the threads back together.
-
I didn't want this in Interviews, didn't want it split like that, and don't understand why you'd go against all the mods who locked the discussion thread.
Very much disagree with your decisions here, thinking about unilaterally reversing them but might be talked out of it. I haven't followed any of the various discussion threads after the split so I have no idea what was said in them.
-
I'm not arguing with the decision to lock the discussion thread. It got really pointless near the end. I'm just separating the interview, which is the main point of the board and the original source of interest, from the rest. And there might be some discussion in the thread that some one sometime down the road might actually consider interesting, so I put a linking post as suggested.
I would re-lock the split thread, but I don't have the ability to lock threads anywhere else.