Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-24841494-20140309224529/@comment-24841494-20140310025840

Lemmy118 wrote: GraydonL wrote:

Mr.Zalgopasta wrote:

GraydonL wrote:

GraydonL wrote:

Mr.Zalgopasta wrote:

GraydonL wrote:

Mr.Zalgopasta wrote:

GraydonL wrote:

GraydonL wrote:

Lemmy118 wrote:

GraydonL wrote:

Mr.Zalgopasta wrote:

1. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

2. I think being told that your story -- via talk page -- is a Quality Standard's nightmare/is too Vague/has not story or content/etc. is enough of a lesson to learn from. Holy shit, how fucking awful is having a place were your be stories can get critique, right? I mean, it's not like critique helps new authours learn, right? I mean, what the fuck was Graydon thinking? That he would try something that would only help the community? Fuck that noise, amiright? Try reading the majority of the comments on this wiki. They certainly do not help people improve. The majority of comments I see are critique, friendly or not. If they say "This was awful" then the author knows not to do something similar. And I know for a fact I leave constructive critisim every time I comment. Also, on a site devoted to "bad" stories, people are less likely to say that it is just bad, that is a given. Instead, they will be more likely to leave constuctive critisim, also, constructivity will be encourged. 'Kay. No. I -- in recent memory -- honestly can say I don't remember seeing constructive criticism in the comments. "This was awful" is in no way constcutive. What about the story is awful? Was it the formatting? Was it the dialogue or characters/character development? Quoth Frank Leslie, "The world may never know". I never said it was constructive, I just said it was critisim. Also, constructivity will be incentivised and encourged. How do you expect to achieve that? Don't know yet, maybe in the form of badges or something similar. You should check out Crappypasta.com. That is basicly what I am trying to acompalish here. I'm not entirely sure badges can work on something so specific. And, besides, our main purpose isn't to provide critiques for writing; we just try to catalogue it all. And if it isn't good enough to be part of a literary community like ours, then fix it or bring something else to the table.

Now, I get that what you're going for. I respect it and it's kind of noble to want to provide an outlet such as this. However, my biggest concern is that I don't want it to be a part of this community (I'm not particulaly fond of the Trollpasta, Spinpasta, etc. wikis). I think it creates a sense of possible obligation among some users and -- the big one -- I think it adds a whole new level of distraction from things taht need to get done around here. Fucking finally some legitiment concerns. The main reason is to move "bad" pastas so Admins and the such can worry more about other things than deletion appeals, as commentors can vote to have a pasta reinstated if it is not actually bad.

I see what you're trying to do, though it's a problem when people when people don't understand the quality guideline. What people think is not bad might not meet the required quality. For example, if you put pastas like Sonic.exe on it people are going vote on it in a heatbeat.

In the end an admin have to make the final decision. Well, thats the thing, if people think it is worthy of being on this site, then it will be uploaded, although any errors would be corrected. I have never read Sonic.exe, but I know it is considered a classic by many, so it should not of been deleted, no matter how bad. That is like deleting Jeff The Killer, it may be awful, but it is a part of creepypasta history and it should be catalouged.