Chronicles: Number, Name, Type, Version?

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  SMAC Fiction
  Chronicles: Number, Name, Type, Version?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Chronicles: Number, Name, Type, Version?

Borodino posted 12-21-98 10:38 PM ET
Reposting from OTF:
Octopus posted 12-21-98 01:54 AM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soon, Firaxis will be giving us new forums to post in. I'm sure one of those will be one for fan-fiction. A natural candidate for that is going to be some sort of Chronicle of Future History. My question is, how are we going to run that? Are we going to try to continue some the the old Chronicles (Borodino already has a thread about reviving the AFC) or are we going to start afresh? Are we going to have multiple competing chronicles, like the AFC and the RCFH competed (probably to the detriment of both), or are we going to try to reunite the Chronicles?
I've only started Chronicling recently (in the Chronicles of Pre-Unity, at MikeH's suggestion -- thanks Mike!) and I've found it to be quite a bit of fun, and I think I'd like to continue doing it in the future. So, what exactly are we going to do about the chronicle situation?

MikeH II posted 12-21-98 06:54 AM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last time there was a new set of chronicles started they split in two. Some chose an extremely structured Chronicle The AFC and some chose the RCFH, which was later replaced by the Flowing Chronicles. I think that I would like to carry on writing with the people who are writing in the Chronicles of Pre-Unity and set the time to 1 year after landing. Sticking with the same free approach we currently have. Of course anyone else is welcome to join in. What do the rest of you think?
Octopus posted 12-21-98 12:08 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that the AFC got an undeserved reputation for having an exceedingly strict set of rules because Thomas tried to get everybody to agree on the starting conditions before anyone was allowed to start writing. The screaming and whining coming from the non-AFC people (Imran?) made it even worse. I remember many posts where Thomas asked "What rules do you disagree with specifically? Maybe we can change them." All he ever got in reply was "Rules suck!".
I like the Chronicles of Pre-Unity, and I like the free-form way it moves, but we also have a lot of restrictions because we know the ultimate end of the plot (everybody goes to sleep and wakes up forty years later near AC). There won't be any such restrictions on a planet-side chronicle, and I'm afraid somebody might do stupid stuff that would make it less fun for me (like starting a bunch of crazy wars that make no sense).
I would certainly like to continue with my pre-Unity characters, but I think that this might be a good opportunity to bring in all of the chronicle writers on the forums, and maybe prevent our chronicles from decending into chaos.

MikeH II posted 12-21-98 12:37 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't join in that discussion for the same reason.
I think that most people here can post in a story without all the guidelines the AFC had. Why do we need any more rules than "Respect what other people have written"?
Although I can't think of a valid reason for any of them, I am willing to listen to all the arguments.
If we want a story which represents a battle between writers, each trying to get their faction to win then we need rules but I'd prefer a story where people write for the sake of the writing not for victory. In that case you need few rules. The Flowing Chronicles worked well. Someone initiated an attack on the Spartan base, then allowed YYYH and myself to defend against it. The interaction was good but no-one got carried away and it altered the direction of the story.
The comments threads can be used to check what you want to write if you think you are going to tread on someones toes, as we do at the moment.

Octopus posted 12-21-98 05:02 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If we want a story which represents a battle between writers, each trying to get their faction to win then we need rules but I'd prefer a story where people write for the sake of the writing not for victory."
You've hit the nail on the head. I don't see how we would be able to keep the "writing for the sake of victory" writers from ruining the atmosphere for me (and other conscientious writers), and I would be compelled to respect what they wrote (since I play by the rules). I can't see a good end to that. Here's something that Jimbo wrote in the chronicles of Pre-Unity comments:
"I'm sorry to tell you that I will not be contributing to this Chronicle. The excitement just isn't there without the option of war."
Frankly, I don't want the Hive to get into a shooting war with anyone (I find it much more fun to be in a cold war situation, since there's so much more room for drama) but a lot of people do want to start a bunch of shooting wars so they can write war stories (in my opinion, silly war stories).
Jimbo [in response to YYYH promising to blow up the ship in the Chronicles of Pre-Unity]: "Frankly, I also need to watch YYYH a bit more closely, he may pull another Spacestation Athena stunt. Wait was that YYYH or JB?"
What will keep things like that from happening? I'd like to be able to rely on the good intentions of the other posters to the Chronicles, but I'm not sure that I can, especially with new people joining these boards every day. I think that the temptation to make a "big entrance" might be too great.
"The comments threads can be used to check what you want to write if you think you are going to tread on someones toes, as we do at the moment."
That works great for nice writers not messing up somebody else, but who's to keep some irresponsible soul from writing something that messes up the plot for everybody in an unpleasant way?
As an example from the Pre-Unity Chronicles, I thought that the way that SnowFire used my characters in the interactions with his was great, because they stayed in character, but he also moved me in a way that I had not expected to go, which was a lot of fun. Contrast that with YYYH's sabotage storyline, which (to me) seemed totally out of place and confusing. As a result, I just had to wait in dread for YYYH's next post, to see what ridiculous thing he was going to try to pull, since blowing up the ship would have seriously ruined everything for everybody. I'm still not clear on what that whole gangster/secretary general crap was.
Maybe everything will work out okay, but I think that the original Chronicles failed because they got out of control. The AFC was an attempt to prevent that happening again, but I think too many people got scared off by the structure (which was overplayed by both the pro and the con side), so it sort of fizzled out (as far as I could tell). Maybe all of the potential posters in a future chronicle will be more mature than in the past, but I'm not sure that I want to invest my time if I don't have any kind of guarantee that my work won't just be destroyed because somebody else wants to start a war or something.

Jimbo2 posted 12-21-98 05:23 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll just write, I'm over the constant whining and fighting over the RCFH.
Personally, I think starting immediately after the landing on AC would be the best. Because we can then have that crucial time zone where we discuss the exploration and the first encounters with rival factions.
BTW, I'll probably write for either the Hive or UoP.

Octopus posted 12-21-98 05:41 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jimbo, the problem with that (and I'm not saying I'm against it, just pointing out a problem) is that the first encounter between two factions is likely to set the tone for quite a while in the story, so whoever writes that post has a huge amount of influence over how the story will proceed. For example, if you wrote about the meeting between the Hive and the Gaians it would probably be very different from what would happen if I wrote about the meeting (not saying that one would be better or worse, just that they'd be different). Also, the person on the "recieving end" (e.g. those factions that don't have writers at the beginning) might be locked into storylines that they don't want to continue.
I think that things might be better if we set the beginning of a new chronicle a few years after planetfall, so we're still building up our own societies, but we could set up a tense but peaceful status-quo in which the different factions could interract. I think having a plot framework will make it easier to write in. Nobody will be compelled to make new faction policy in every post.
I'd like to decide this sort of thing (e.g. what time the story starts) before the new forums to up, so we can get right into it.

SnowFire posted 12-21-98 06:12 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with Octopus. Let's advance the final parts of the Pre-Unity Chronicles by blasting off and then staging our own ruckus before landing that will get us to a seven faction situation (which will probably be a significantly different way than in the "real" story").
No offense YYYH, but the Secretary General was an odd choice to blow up the Unity, considering that the project was virtually finished and not really a drain on resources anymore. But we'll get you onboard the Unity, and I'm sure that you can take a productive part in the fight for control on Chiron.

Octopus posted 12-21-98 09:27 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It looks like the new forums are HERE. Does anybody else have an opinion about how we should proceed?

*******************************************8
Discuss. My preference is a revived AFC. I also beleive that multiple chronciles would not neccessarily be a bad thing.
Yo_Yo_Yo_Hey posted 12-22-98 06:03 PM ET
Oh God. Now I have to blow my whole story just to explain to you guys that was merely my way of getting on, & joining the Spartans. Do you think I would of actually blown the thing up, & ruin everyone elses fun?? What do you take me for some kind of idiot? I'm in fact offended you would of even considered that I would of actually blown it up, & blown all your fun with it. Expect no more posts from me in there.....
Your faithful & hell-bent NIMadier general,
YYYH
jsorense posted 12-22-98 06:40 PM ET
My observations on SMAC related fiction:
SMAC fiction is an individual creative process unique for each poster. Some of us like to contribute complete short stories. Some of us like the interaction with other writers. A few of us like to do both.
During the last discussion about how to organize SMAC chronicles my opinion was that there had to be room for all types of creativity so that new writers would feel welcome to join and not be intimidated (like I was before the chronicles restarted). I would like to reiterate that opinion here.
I foresee that at least four kinds of fiction will be posted here: short stories; AFC type; Flowing Chronicle type (RCFH, The Club of the Future, CoPU); and CWAL HV type (which I find very well written, original and funny). I prefer the AFC style with some rules and an arbiter because I am more interested in "realism", character development, cultural evolution, and landscapes than action, particularly open-ended escalating warfare.
I have enjoyed participating in the CoPU because I could use characters I had already developed for AFC (as well as other SMAC posters) and there were technological and other constraints because the stories had to take place within a certain time and space. The other contributors were generally responsible in their participation as well. I will also be able to pick up on these characters anytime in the future because they are already alive and on Chiron.
In conclusion, there is no practical way to regulate what is written here. It is all totally voluntary. The writers who prefer a particular style (or styles) should work together to establish guidelines. There shouldn't be resistance if a person wants to write in more than one style. I really enjoyed the world and societies the Borodino and I constructed in the AFC. We were, however, both disappointed that there were not more regular participants (I really wanted to explore a Believer / Gaian relationship). I think Borodino and I will try to re-establish the Alternate Future Chronicles here. I hope we can lure some additional contributors to help cover most, if not all, of the factions. Any volunteers?
MikeH II posted 12-23-98 08:31 AM ET
I agree with jsorense. We can't make anyone post in our style or in our type of Chronicle and I, personally enjoyed reading the AFC even though I didn't post in them, I think there is plenty of room for two different styles of Chronicle.
For now I'd like to see the Pre Unity Chronicles continue. We are coming up to launch let's see what happens and get the demo, I think that will set us up much better for the chronicles when we arrive.
I would quite like to start where the Firaxis story leaves off but I am open to further suggestions.
Also I think the option for war should be available but we need to be carefull.
Yo, I knew you just wanted to get your character on board.
Octopus posted 12-23-98 11:42 AM ET
There's no way to FORCE people to be good, but we should be able to agree on a few ground rules. Even if people do post, we could collectively decide to "ignore" the post (like I do with the JB shuttle post in the Pre-Unity Chronicles, since he disavowed it). I don't want to ruin anybody's fun by making them post where they don't want to, I want to increase the fun by increasing the participation. Both the Pre-Unity Chronicles and the AFC suffer from too few posters. Hmmm... If only there were some way to fix that problem... It's not an either/or proposition. Just because there's no perfect solution doesn't mean there's not a good solution with only one or two chronicles.
MikeH II posted 12-24-98 06:11 AM ET
I understand your principle. Do you have a suggestion for a written form of the unwritten rules we currently have?
I'm assuming something along the lines of No killing off another poster's characters.
Don't start a war without the consent of the person you're attacking.
I'd be very wary of any system which gave out tech enhancements or set time systems. We should be able to write that stuff realistically.
Octopus posted 12-24-98 10:28 AM ET
I'd say "no wars without the consent of all parties" and "no establishment or changes in faction policy without consent of the faction". By consent, I basically mean that if there's any question about something being controversial, then there needs to be at least a day or so's notice in the comment thread, so anybody would have a chance to object. If there's objection, though, it seems reasonable that the person who's objecting might be required to somehow "defuse the situation" within the chronicle (e.g. if the Spartans want to attack the Believers, but the Believers don't want to be attacked, it might be reasonable to ask the Believer posters to put something in the Chronicle such that the Spartans calling off their attack makes sense within the story). I'm not exactly sure what I want to codify as the rules, but I think that the basic premise should be if you want to do anything "controversial" (like inventing a super-weapon, or starting a war, or assassinating someone) then you need to make sure that it's properly discussed.
MikeH II posted 12-25-98 12:50 PM ET
Sounds good.
1. No killing other posters characters
2. No starting wars without the agreement of the other factions
3. No significant alterations of Faction policy without the other faction posters agreement.
Comments?
Octopus posted 12-26-98 05:32 PM ET
The final rule (after any others that we want) should be "when in doubt, ask in the comments thread". Since new posters might not understand that we use the comment threads for so much, they might not realize that it was the appropriate place for proposing story ideas (they might be scared off from a potentially good idea, because they might be afraid it violates one of the other rules). I like the rules as MikeH wrote them: simple, to the point, and basically writing down the "common sense" we've been living by up to this point. They give a nice framework for newcomers.
MikeH II posted 12-27-98 07:46 AM ET
I agree and I think we should be flexible for good writing. If in doubt ask sounds good. I think we should post those at the beginning of any thread we start from now on.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Chronicles: Number, Name, Type, Version?
Borodino	posted 12-21-98 10:38 PM ET Reposting from OTF: Octopus posted 12-21-98 01:54 AM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Soon, Firaxis will be giving us new forums to post in. I'm sure one of those will be one for fan-fiction. A natural candidate for that is going to be some sort of Chronicle of Future History. My question is, how are we going to run that? Are we going to try to continue some the the old Chronicles (Borodino already has a thread about reviving the AFC) or are we going to start afresh? Are we going to have multiple competing chronicles, like the AFC and the RCFH competed (probably to the detriment of both), or are we going to try to reunite the Chronicles? I've only started Chronicling recently (in the Chronicles of Pre-Unity, at MikeH's suggestion -- thanks Mike!) and I've found it to be quite a bit of fun, and I think I'd like to continue doing it in the future. So, what exactly are we going to do about the chronicle situation? MikeH II posted 12-21-98 06:54 AM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last time there was a new set of chronicles started they split in two. Some chose an extremely structured Chronicle The AFC and some chose the RCFH, which was later replaced by the Flowing Chronicles. I think that I would like to carry on writing with the people who are writing in the Chronicles of Pre-Unity and set the time to 1 year after landing. Sticking with the same free approach we currently have. Of course anyone else is welcome to join in. What do the rest of you think? Octopus posted 12-21-98 12:08 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think that the AFC got an undeserved reputation for having an exceedingly strict set of rules because Thomas tried to get everybody to agree on the starting conditions before anyone was allowed to start writing. The screaming and whining coming from the non-AFC people (Imran?) made it even worse. I remember many posts where Thomas asked "What rules do you disagree with specifically? Maybe we can change them." All he ever got in reply was "Rules suck!". I like the Chronicles of Pre-Unity, and I like the free-form way it moves, but we also have a lot of restrictions because we know the ultimate end of the plot (everybody goes to sleep and wakes up forty years later near AC). There won't be any such restrictions on a planet-side chronicle, and I'm afraid somebody might do stupid stuff that would make it less fun for me (like starting a bunch of crazy wars that make no sense). I would certainly like to continue with my pre-Unity characters, but I think that this might be a good opportunity to bring in all of the chronicle writers on the forums, and maybe prevent our chronicles from decending into chaos. MikeH II posted 12-21-98 12:37 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I didn't join in that discussion for the same reason. I think that most people here can post in a story without all the guidelines the AFC had. Why do we need any more rules than "Respect what other people have written"? Although I can't think of a valid reason for any of them, I am willing to listen to all the arguments. If we want a story which represents a battle between writers, each trying to get their faction to win then we need rules but I'd prefer a story where people write for the sake of the writing not for victory. In that case you need few rules. The Flowing Chronicles worked well. Someone initiated an attack on the Spartan base, then allowed YYYH and myself to defend against it. The interaction was good but no-one got carried away and it altered the direction of the story. The comments threads can be used to check what you want to write if you think you are going to tread on someones toes, as we do at the moment. Octopus posted 12-21-98 05:02 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "If we want a story which represents a battle between writers, each trying to get their faction to win then we need rules but I'd prefer a story where people write for the sake of the writing not for victory." You've hit the nail on the head. I don't see how we would be able to keep the "writing for the sake of victory" writers from ruining the atmosphere for me (and other conscientious writers), and I would be compelled to respect what they wrote (since I play by the rules). I can't see a good end to that. Here's something that Jimbo wrote in the chronicles of Pre-Unity comments: "I'm sorry to tell you that I will not be contributing to this Chronicle. The excitement just isn't there without the option of war." Frankly, I don't want the Hive to get into a shooting war with anyone (I find it much more fun to be in a cold war situation, since there's so much more room for drama) but a lot of people do want to start a bunch of shooting wars so they can write war stories (in my opinion, silly war stories). Jimbo [in response to YYYH promising to blow up the ship in the Chronicles of Pre-Unity]: "Frankly, I also need to watch YYYH a bit more closely, he may pull another Spacestation Athena stunt. Wait was that YYYH or JB?" What will keep things like that from happening? I'd like to be able to rely on the good intentions of the other posters to the Chronicles, but I'm not sure that I can, especially with new people joining these boards every day. I think that the temptation to make a "big entrance" might be too great. "The comments threads can be used to check what you want to write if you think you are going to tread on someones toes, as we do at the moment." That works great for nice writers not messing up somebody else, but who's to keep some irresponsible soul from writing something that messes up the plot for everybody in an unpleasant way? As an example from the Pre-Unity Chronicles, I thought that the way that SnowFire used my characters in the interactions with his was great, because they stayed in character, but he also moved me in a way that I had not expected to go, which was a lot of fun. Contrast that with YYYH's sabotage storyline, which (to me) seemed totally out of place and confusing. As a result, I just had to wait in dread for YYYH's next post, to see what ridiculous thing he was going to try to pull, since blowing up the ship would have seriously ruined everything for everybody. I'm still not clear on what that whole gangster/secretary general crap was. Maybe everything will work out okay, but I think that the original Chronicles failed because they got out of control. The AFC was an attempt to prevent that happening again, but I think too many people got scared off by the structure (which was overplayed by both the pro and the con side), so it sort of fizzled out (as far as I could tell). Maybe all of the potential posters in a future chronicle will be more mature than in the past, but I'm not sure that I want to invest my time if I don't have any kind of guarantee that my work won't just be destroyed because somebody else wants to start a war or something. Jimbo2 posted 12-21-98 05:23 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'll just write, I'm over the constant whining and fighting over the RCFH. Personally, I think starting immediately after the landing on AC would be the best. Because we can then have that crucial time zone where we discuss the exploration and the first encounters with rival factions. BTW, I'll probably write for either the Hive or UoP. Octopus posted 12-21-98 05:41 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jimbo, the problem with that (and I'm not saying I'm against it, just pointing out a problem) is that the first encounter between two factions is likely to set the tone for quite a while in the story, so whoever writes that post has a huge amount of influence over how the story will proceed. For example, if you wrote about the meeting between the Hive and the Gaians it would probably be very different from what would happen if I wrote about the meeting (not saying that one would be better or worse, just that they'd be different). Also, the person on the "recieving end" (e.g. those factions that don't have writers at the beginning) might be locked into storylines that they don't want to continue. I think that things might be better if we set the beginning of a new chronicle a few years after planetfall, so we're still building up our own societies, but we could set up a tense but peaceful status-quo in which the different factions could interract. I think having a plot framework will make it easier to write in. Nobody will be compelled to make new faction policy in every post. I'd like to decide this sort of thing (e.g. what time the story starts) before the new forums to up, so we can get right into it. SnowFire posted 12-21-98 06:12 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree with Octopus. Let's advance the final parts of the Pre-Unity Chronicles by blasting off and then staging our own ruckus before landing that will get us to a seven faction situation (which will probably be a significantly different way than in the "real" story"). No offense YYYH, but the Secretary General was an odd choice to blow up the Unity, considering that the project was virtually finished and not really a drain on resources anymore. But we'll get you onboard the Unity, and I'm sure that you can take a productive part in the fight for control on Chiron. Octopus posted 12-21-98 09:27 PM ET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It looks like the new forums are HERE. Does anybody else have an opinion about how we should proceed? *******************************************8 Discuss. My preference is a revived AFC. I also beleive that multiple chronciles would not neccessarily be a bad thing.
Yo_Yo_Yo_Hey	posted 12-22-98 06:03 PM ET Oh God. Now I have to blow my whole story just to explain to you guys that was merely my way of getting on, & joining the Spartans. Do you think I would of actually blown the thing up, & ruin everyone elses fun?? What do you take me for some kind of idiot? I'm in fact offended you would of even considered that I would of actually blown it up, & blown all your fun with it. Expect no more posts from me in there..... Your faithful & hell-bent NIMadier general, YYYH
jsorense	posted 12-22-98 06:40 PM ET My observations on SMAC related fiction: SMAC fiction is an individual creative process unique for each poster. Some of us like to contribute complete short stories. Some of us like the interaction with other writers. A few of us like to do both. During the last discussion about how to organize SMAC chronicles my opinion was that there had to be room for all types of creativity so that new writers would feel welcome to join and not be intimidated (like I was before the chronicles restarted). I would like to reiterate that opinion here. I foresee that at least four kinds of fiction will be posted here: short stories; AFC type; Flowing Chronicle type (RCFH, The Club of the Future, CoPU); and CWAL HV type (which I find very well written, original and funny). I prefer the AFC style with some rules and an arbiter because I am more interested in "realism", character development, cultural evolution, and landscapes than action, particularly open-ended escalating warfare. I have enjoyed participating in the CoPU because I could use characters I had already developed for AFC (as well as other SMAC posters) and there were technological and other constraints because the stories had to take place within a certain time and space. The other contributors were generally responsible in their participation as well. I will also be able to pick up on these characters anytime in the future because they are already alive and on Chiron. In conclusion, there is no practical way to regulate what is written here. It is all totally voluntary. The writers who prefer a particular style (or styles) should work together to establish guidelines. There shouldn't be resistance if a person wants to write in more than one style. I really enjoyed the world and societies the Borodino and I constructed in the AFC. We were, however, both disappointed that there were not more regular participants (I really wanted to explore a Believer / Gaian relationship). I think Borodino and I will try to re-establish the Alternate Future Chronicles here. I hope we can lure some additional contributors to help cover most, if not all, of the factions. Any volunteers?
MikeH II	posted 12-23-98 08:31 AM ET I agree with jsorense. We can't make anyone post in our style or in our type of Chronicle and I, personally enjoyed reading the AFC even though I didn't post in them, I think there is plenty of room for two different styles of Chronicle. For now I'd like to see the Pre Unity Chronicles continue. We are coming up to launch let's see what happens and get the demo, I think that will set us up much better for the chronicles when we arrive. I would quite like to start where the Firaxis story leaves off but I am open to further suggestions. Also I think the option for war should be available but we need to be carefull. Yo, I knew you just wanted to get your character on board.
Octopus	posted 12-23-98 11:42 AM ET There's no way to FORCE people to be good, but we should be able to agree on a few ground rules. Even if people do post, we could collectively decide to "ignore" the post (like I do with the JB shuttle post in the Pre-Unity Chronicles, since he disavowed it). I don't want to ruin anybody's fun by making them post where they don't want to, I want to increase the fun by increasing the participation. Both the Pre-Unity Chronicles and the AFC suffer from too few posters. Hmmm... If only there were some way to fix that problem... It's not an either/or proposition. Just because there's no perfect solution doesn't mean there's not a good solution with only one or two chronicles.
MikeH II	posted 12-24-98 06:11 AM ET I understand your principle. Do you have a suggestion for a written form of the unwritten rules we currently have? I'm assuming something along the lines of No killing off another poster's characters. Don't start a war without the consent of the person you're attacking. I'd be very wary of any system which gave out tech enhancements or set time systems. We should be able to write that stuff realistically.
Octopus	posted 12-24-98 10:28 AM ET I'd say "no wars without the consent of all parties" and "no establishment or changes in faction policy without consent of the faction". By consent, I basically mean that if there's any question about something being controversial, then there needs to be at least a day or so's notice in the comment thread, so anybody would have a chance to object. If there's objection, though, it seems reasonable that the person who's objecting might be required to somehow "defuse the situation" within the chronicle (e.g. if the Spartans want to attack the Believers, but the Believers don't want to be attacked, it might be reasonable to ask the Believer posters to put something in the Chronicle such that the Spartans calling off their attack makes sense within the story). I'm not exactly sure what I want to codify as the rules, but I think that the basic premise should be if you want to do anything "controversial" (like inventing a super-weapon, or starting a war, or assassinating someone) then you need to make sure that it's properly discussed.
MikeH II	posted 12-25-98 12:50 PM ET Sounds good. 1. No killing other posters characters 2. No starting wars without the agreement of the other factions 3. No significant alterations of Faction policy without the other faction posters agreement. Comments?
Octopus	posted 12-26-98 05:32 PM ET The final rule (after any others that we want) should be "when in doubt, ask in the comments thread". Since new posters might not understand that we use the comment threads for so much, they might not realize that it was the appropriate place for proposing story ideas (they might be scared off from a potentially good idea, because they might be afraid it violates one of the other rules). I like the rules as MikeH wrote them: simple, to the point, and basically writing down the "common sense" we've been living by up to this point. They give a nice framework for newcomers.
MikeH II	posted 12-27-98 07:46 AM ET I agree and I think we should be flexible for good writing. If in doubt ask sounds good. I think we should post those at the beginning of any thread we start from now on.