Agreed. Comparing it with the old guide will definitively improve this new guide after all.
I don't have any problem with people discussing the new guide in relation to the old guide (or vice versa) in this thread. What I am saying is off-topic is when the thread goes off on a tangent of complaining about the old guide being removed without providing any meaningful input to the new guide.
The biggest issue I've seen with this guide is that it's loose. Some say that it's loose to exploitation and misinterpretation.
As a rubrick; I try to follow the 5 W's.
Who, what, when, where, and why. Apply all of them to the suggestion.
Who will benefit most from the suggestion. What net gains are expected from the suggestion. What net losses are expected (don't say "NONE, LOL!" you can lie to yourself, but you can't lie to the community). When do you expect this to take effect. Some suggestions need prerequisite conditions. Some are waiting for a future patch. Where would this new suggestion take place? Biome specific? What are the conditions. Etc. Why should this be added? This is probably the big one and meatiest part of the suggestion.
OHHHH
Can you add guide against suggestion piggybacking?
Suggestion A requires suggestion B (poster: alphaprimero) and suggestion C (poster: bravosegundo) to see the light of day; regardless of whether B or C will ever see the light of day themselves?
"We should add hedgehogs when the mo creature mod is added"
"We should add M4 carbines when the gun suggestion is added!"
OR, my favorite:
"We need astarite swords. Astarite is a new material I suggested here. And requires this new pickaxe." Don't try to click them, they're not links. Just me being a jerk!
I can work with the "5 Ws" thing. I don't know how often "When" should come into play because the typical suggestion's timeframe is almost always the next update, but it could be lumped in with "Where" as in "When/Where will this come into play in the game, as applicable. I'm thinking...
Who is the idea for?
What is the core idea that you have?
When/Where would your idea take place within the game?
Why should it be implemented? (The "what are the benefits/drawbacks?" would get lumped into here)
But piggybacking an idea onto another isn't really a problem from what I have seen. It occurs at times but does it really happen enough to warrant adding to the guide? This is supposed to be more of a general guideline list and that seems more like something that a small minority actually does.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
So overall this is a double edge sword: Personality will make people interested, but won't make them take it seriously. Formal will make people take it seriously, but won't make them interested.
Wh...? So it's not possible for something to be witty and be taken seriously? It's not a double-edged sword at all. It's extremely simple. Spicing up the writing a bit just gives a small boost to hooking the reader better. Yoshi did this with pure perfection in his 'For the Critics' guide.
"Here's how to make a proper suggestion. Beep boop I am a robot." just screams the thought process of "yeah yeah, I assume that this guide is tell me *skips guide out of disinterest*" for some people. Then they miss out on some extremely useful tips.
In conclusion Theriasis' writing was not good for making a guideline. Rewriting was the solution.
Yet some people loved my guide anyway and became good posters because of it. It's not like I was voted twice to make the first two guides or anything.
Anyway, the overachiever's guide should have stayed. That had some super helpful advice there. This guide should also mention to remain neutral toward your own suggestion and not call your own ideas "awesome awesome awesome!!!" as it doesn't change the opinion of the viewer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Unofficial Suggestion Guide - Everything you need to know to not make goofy mistakes in a suggestion! Honestly though, you should really go there.
Couple of pieces of information quick before I go off to work:
As sunperp has said recently in this thread, posts complaining that the old guides are unpinned or talking about how the old guide is better or worse are not considered on topic. This thread should be about improving this list of guidelines. Examples from the old threads are welcome, but just saying "The previous thread was better/worse" without anything to add that is on topic is not.
If people would like to talk about the old guides being unpinned, anyone is free to make a thread in Forum Discussion and Info about it, provided it all stays in a single thread there.
I will be unavailable to do much work or discussion on this from Thursday to Sunday the 26th. My grandmother passed away last weekend so I am flying out for the funeral and will not have access to a computer. I can post from my phone so I will try to keep up in this thread, but don't expect any changes or updates during the next week. sunperp and other MD staff are going to be around for any moderator needs, but I'm more or less the only one that updates the guidelines.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Would it make sense for "1 - Make sure you are in the right place" to reiterate that this is the PC suggestion board, and that other versions have their own boards?
As for merits of this guide vs previous ones, I'm in favor of the basic guidelines being a short, simple, easy-to-read list. If we want to have more detailed guides for overachievers or for going over every single possible pitfall, we could do that someplace, and possibly even link to it from the guide in a "Further Reading" section; but I do think we should separate basic guidelines from more advanced discussions, and keep the basics to-the-point.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Most plans are critically flawed by their own logic. A failure at any step will ruin everything after it. That's just basic cause and effect. It's easy for a good plan to fall apart. Therefore, a plan that has no attachment to logic cannot be stopped. The success or failure of any given step will have no impact on the macro level."
-Red Mage, 8-Bit Theater
"90% of the Internet's statistics are made-up, and 7/8 of its quotes are misattributed."
-Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President
I like the content in the negativity guide. It hits a lot of good points and some of my personal pet peeves ("The very concept of this idea is always hated by everyone forever regardless of implementation" seems to be a common thing I see in response to certain subjects, although my quote is an exaggerated version of it). I also like the idea of user maintained sub-guides for additional reading. Overachiever Guide is a good example, as is the negativity guide possibly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Wishlists are covered by the section-specific forum rules, so they would be covered by Guideline 0.
But it's easy to miss that if you come straight to this forum.
Anyway, I think there should be a mention of the "what fits and doesn't" argument. Something that people misuse and usually don't know what they're talking about when they say that. A suggestion should stick to the experience of the game, and not be so out there and random that it breaks what Minecraft tries to be. Example: "Minecraft isn't realistic so endernukes is coooool" or "Laser-eye ocelots?" is a failure sandwich.
I know that can be very subjective, but I think there should still be a small entry about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.
I always argue toward intermediate technology when determining if something would fit or not.
Jets in Minecraft would be a great example. There's just too much of a stretch between what the player has available to conceive of a jet. There's too much there that has to be explained; and too much there that must be prerequisitely included before we can even consider a jet.
This means that muskets and low-tech guns would fit; too bad they generally fail at scale tipping and their inclusion would either be overpowered or irrelevant.
The main issue with "does it fit?" is as you said, it is basically entirely subjective. What fits is going to vary from person to person and the reason why something does or doesn't fit can be greatly different depending on who you are. Examples for saying something does or does not fit:
"Space Aliens fit because Minecraft doesn't have to be realistic" - Bad reasoning
"Muskets fit because it is relatively within the technology range of other crafted items such as TnT" - Good reasoning
"Space Aliens do not fit because it does not thematically jive with other aspects of the game, which are more low tech and fantasy based" - Good reasoning
"Muskets don't fit because this is an idea that has been disliked by people in the Suggestions section before" - Bad reasoning
There might be room for discussing the "theme" of the game though, without saying thing X or Y can never fit and while explaining that the theme is not officially established by anyone.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
It's not a weasel word; but the most concise and exact word needed in this case.
I'll use an official dictionary definition and a personal definition here.
OFFICIAL Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Feasible - adv.
1: capable of being done or carried out a feasible plan
2: capable of being used or dealt with successfully : suitable
3: reasonable, gave an explanation that seemed feasible enough
MY definition
Feasible - adv.
Plausible within the scope of what's already expected and confirmed.
Realism has no place here. No one cares how (un)realistic. Instead, we care how well things confirm to established rules: Minecraft's "reality". If we keep discussions of "real" to what's real to the game universe; then "does it fit" becomes a much easier discussion. Now we're restricting the argument to "what's allowed in the game universe" not "game universe vs real universe". We are no longer talking "medieval vs steampunk vs industrial" when discussing setting. We're now talking "Minecraft".
The main issue with "does it fit?" is as you said, it is basically entirely subjective. What fits is going to vary from person to person and the reason why something does or doesn't fit can be greatly different depending on who you are. Examples for saying something does or does not fit:
I don't think the Space Aliens was the best example for that. I should have clarified that when people suggest something that's so stupid and out there that no developer with even a 5th of a brain would add it. The idea of adding a Nick Cage or Deadmau5 has the plausibility of... adding a Nick Cage or Deadmau5 mob. A good chunk of those are obvious joke threads anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.
I don't think the Space Aliens was the best example for that. I should have clarified that when people suggest something that's so stupid and out there that no developer with even a 5th of a brain would add it. The idea of adding a Nick Cage or Deadmau5 has the plausibility of... adding a Nick Cage or Deadmau5 mob. A good chunk of those are obvious joke threads anyway.
In those cases they are either joke threads as you said (meaning they already ignored all our rules anyways) so you can report them as likely being trolls, but if they are 100% legitimately serious, I would say that is an extreme edge case as I can't really recall any time that has occurred recently and it certainly isn't common.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Earlier today I posted on an old thread to give my support to a suggestion I liked. But I was then advised not to revive a thread if I have no interesting new information to provide.
First of all (ignoring the fact that all I did was offer support): This advisement got me wondering, if I consider the very many styles and ways each person plays MC, then the standards of what is considered new and interesting information is going to be different for each person. So who is it that determines for everyone else what is classified as interesting/important information, and what is not?
Secondly: Why is reviving an old thread to give support to a suggestion that is appreciated by the reader considered unimportant enough to be eligible? If I'm not mistaken, this is a forum where we are free to express our ideas and opinions ("opinions" being appropriate to offering support to an idea). I can't for the life of me see why the age of a thread determines a threads "worth of attention". It's kinda like telling my history teacher that things that happened before I was born aren't worth my consideration.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorI don't have any problem with people discussing the new guide in relation to the old guide (or vice versa) in this thread. What I am saying is off-topic is when the thread goes off on a tangent of complaining about the old guide being removed without providing any meaningful input to the new guide.
- sunperp
The biggest issue I've seen with this guide is that it's loose. Some say that it's loose to exploitation and misinterpretation.
As a rubrick; I try to follow the 5 W's.
Who, what, when, where, and why. Apply all of them to the suggestion.
Who will benefit most from the suggestion. What net gains are expected from the suggestion. What net losses are expected (don't say "NONE, LOL!" you can lie to yourself, but you can't lie to the community). When do you expect this to take effect. Some suggestions need prerequisite conditions. Some are waiting for a future patch. Where would this new suggestion take place? Biome specific? What are the conditions. Etc. Why should this be added? This is probably the big one and meatiest part of the suggestion.
OHHHH
Can you add guide against suggestion piggybacking?
Suggestion A requires suggestion B (poster: alphaprimero) and suggestion C (poster: bravosegundo) to see the light of day; regardless of whether B or C will ever see the light of day themselves?
"We should add hedgehogs when the mo creature mod is added"
"We should add M4 carbines when the gun suggestion is added!"
OR, my favorite:
"We need astarite swords. Astarite is a new material I suggested here. And requires this new pickaxe." Don't try to click them, they're not links. Just me being a jerk!
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffI can work with the "5 Ws" thing. I don't know how often "When" should come into play because the typical suggestion's timeframe is almost always the next update, but it could be lumped in with "Where" as in "When/Where will this come into play in the game, as applicable. I'm thinking...
Who is the idea for?
What is the core idea that you have?
When/Where would your idea take place within the game?
Why should it be implemented? (The "what are the benefits/drawbacks?" would get lumped into here)
But piggybacking an idea onto another isn't really a problem from what I have seen. It occurs at times but does it really happen enough to warrant adding to the guide? This is supposed to be more of a general guideline list and that seems more like something that a small minority actually does.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Yeah, I did think it was a bit of an edge case too. Perhaps if it started appearing more frequently. Thanks :).
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
Wh...? So it's not possible for something to be witty and be taken seriously? It's not a double-edged sword at all. It's extremely simple. Spicing up the writing a bit just gives a small boost to hooking the reader better. Yoshi did this with pure perfection in his 'For the Critics' guide.
"Here's how to make a proper suggestion. Beep boop I am a robot." just screams the thought process of "yeah yeah, I assume that this guide is tell me *skips guide out of disinterest*" for some people. Then they miss out on some extremely useful tips.
Yet some people loved my guide anyway and became good posters because of it. It's not like I was voted twice to make the first two guides or anything.
Anyway, the overachiever's guide should have stayed. That had some super helpful advice there. This guide should also mention to remain neutral toward your own suggestion and not call your own ideas "awesome awesome awesome!!!" as it doesn't change the opinion of the viewer.
The Unofficial Suggestion Guide - Everything you need to know to not make goofy mistakes in a suggestion! Honestly though, you should really go there.
Yeah I'm back from my 1-month ban. Good to see my months-of-work thread unpinned. Makes me feel real good.
Anyway, I'm sure this guide could also do with some examples.
The Unofficial Suggestion Guide - Everything you need to know to not make goofy mistakes in a suggestion! Honestly though, you should really go there.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffCouple of pieces of information quick before I go off to work:
As sunperp has said recently in this thread, posts complaining that the old guides are unpinned or talking about how the old guide is better or worse are not considered on topic. This thread should be about improving this list of guidelines. Examples from the old threads are welcome, but just saying "The previous thread was better/worse" without anything to add that is on topic is not.
If people would like to talk about the old guides being unpinned, anyone is free to make a thread in Forum Discussion and Info about it, provided it all stays in a single thread there.
I will be unavailable to do much work or discussion on this from Thursday to Sunday the 26th. My grandmother passed away last weekend so I am flying out for the funeral and will not have access to a computer. I can post from my phone so I will try to keep up in this thread, but don't expect any changes or updates during the next week. sunperp and other MD staff are going to be around for any moderator needs, but I'm more or less the only one that updates the guidelines.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Would it make sense for "1 - Make sure you are in the right place" to reiterate that this is the PC suggestion board, and that other versions have their own boards?
As for merits of this guide vs previous ones, I'm in favor of the basic guidelines being a short, simple, easy-to-read list. If we want to have more detailed guides for overachievers or for going over every single possible pitfall, we could do that someplace, and possibly even link to it from the guide in a "Further Reading" section; but I do think we should separate basic guidelines from more advanced discussions, and keep the basics to-the-point.
"Most plans are critically flawed by their own logic. A failure at any step will ruin everything after it. That's just basic cause and effect. It's easy for a good plan to fall apart. Therefore, a plan that has no attachment to logic cannot be stopped. The success or failure of any given step will have no impact on the macro level."
-Red Mage, 8-Bit Theater
"90% of the Internet's statistics are made-up, and 7/8 of its quotes are misattributed."
-Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President
In the waning days of FTCs call to service as a pinned thread; I made a negativity guide.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/44180-for-the-critics-ftc?comment=843
The referenced guide is meant to help combat some negativity. I'm still willing to go and keep that updated and keep it in tandem with this guide.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffI like the content in the negativity guide. It hits a lot of good points and some of my personal pet peeves ("The very concept of this idea is always hated by everyone forever regardless of implementation" seems to be a common thing I see in response to certain subjects, although my quote is an exaggerated version of it). I also like the idea of user maintained sub-guides for additional reading. Overachiever Guide is a good example, as is the negativity guide possibly.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Hey thats preety good
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorWishlists are covered by the section-specific forum rules, so they would be covered by Guideline 0.
- sunperp
But it's easy to miss that if you come straight to this forum.
Anyway, I think there should be a mention of the "what fits and doesn't" argument. Something that people misuse and usually don't know what they're talking about when they say that. A suggestion should stick to the experience of the game, and not be so out there and random that it breaks what Minecraft tries to be. Example: "Minecraft isn't realistic so endernukes is coooool" or "Laser-eye ocelots?" is a failure sandwich.
I know that can be very subjective, but I think there should still be a small entry about it.
Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.
Unofficial Suggestions Guide (2.0) - by Theriasis
Unofficial Critics Guide - by yoshi9048
I always argue toward intermediate technology when determining if something would fit or not.
Jets in Minecraft would be a great example. There's just too much of a stretch between what the player has available to conceive of a jet. There's too much there that has to be explained; and too much there that must be prerequisitely included before we can even consider a jet.
This means that muskets and low-tech guns would fit; too bad they generally fail at scale tipping and their inclusion would either be overpowered or irrelevant.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffThe main issue with "does it fit?" is as you said, it is basically entirely subjective. What fits is going to vary from person to person and the reason why something does or doesn't fit can be greatly different depending on who you are. Examples for saying something does or does not fit:
"Space Aliens fit because Minecraft doesn't have to be realistic" - Bad reasoning
"Muskets fit because it is relatively within the technology range of other crafted items such as TnT" - Good reasoning
"Space Aliens do not fit because it does not thematically jive with other aspects of the game, which are more low tech and fantasy based" - Good reasoning
"Muskets don't fit because this is an idea that has been disliked by people in the Suggestions section before" - Bad reasoning
There might be room for discussing the "theme" of the game though, without saying thing X or Y can never fit and while explaining that the theme is not officially established by anyone.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
The best word is "feasible".
It's not a weasel word; but the most concise and exact word needed in this case.
I'll use an official dictionary definition and a personal definition here.
OFFICIAL Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Feasible - adv.
MY definition
Feasible - adv.
Plausible within the scope of what's already expected and confirmed.
Realism has no place here. No one cares how (un)realistic. Instead, we care how well things confirm to established rules: Minecraft's "reality". If we keep discussions of "real" to what's real to the game universe; then "does it fit" becomes a much easier discussion. Now we're restricting the argument to "what's allowed in the game universe" not "game universe vs real universe". We are no longer talking "medieval vs steampunk vs industrial" when discussing setting. We're now talking "Minecraft".
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
I don't think the Space Aliens was the best example for that. I should have clarified that when people suggest something that's so stupid and out there that no developer with even a 5th of a brain would add it. The idea of adding a Nick Cage or Deadmau5 has the plausibility of... adding a Nick Cage or Deadmau5 mob. A good chunk of those are obvious joke threads anyway.
Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.
Unofficial Suggestions Guide (2.0) - by Theriasis
Unofficial Critics Guide - by yoshi9048
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffIn those cases they are either joke threads as you said (meaning they already ignored all our rules anyways) so you can report them as likely being trolls, but if they are 100% legitimately serious, I would say that is an extreme edge case as I can't really recall any time that has occurred recently and it certainly isn't common.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
I have a question. Actually, two.
Earlier today I posted on an old thread to give my support to a suggestion I liked. But I was then advised not to revive a thread if I have no interesting new information to provide.
First of all (ignoring the fact that all I did was offer support): This advisement got me wondering, if I consider the very many styles and ways each person plays MC, then the standards of what is considered new and interesting information is going to be different for each person. So who is it that determines for everyone else what is classified as interesting/important information, and what is not?
Secondly: Why is reviving an old thread to give support to a suggestion that is appreciated by the reader considered unimportant enough to be eligible? If I'm not mistaken, this is a forum where we are free to express our ideas and opinions ("opinions" being appropriate to offering support to an idea). I can't for the life of me see why the age of a thread determines a threads "worth of attention". It's kinda like telling my history teacher that things that happened before I was born aren't worth my consideration.