Subject: Everything looks okay to me!
Author:
Posted on: 2022-05-20 18:12:05 UTC
Very readable and short, making me not very bored (even though I've read 99% of it already lol). I think it's not confusing at all!
Yeah, we need to fix the FAQ, but not right now.
But the new article looks really good!
-kA, at the summer play rehearsal
I’m likely to write my first Permission request in a few days (Sunday, I’ll have been on the Board a month) and I can’t find a working link to the Permission Prompt. Can someone give me the link?
Linstar, who has a couple of volunteer betas and is very grateful for them.
((Edit: this is now in the Serious Business tab, as it seems to be veering into that territory.))
they just get locked for no reason. Some missions unfortunately get this too.
Like Sierpinksi said, the doc was unfortunately lost recently. For my two cents, it's time for something new anyway, but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, the idea is basically to write your agents in two long-ish scenes or short-ish stories, one featuring a situation that pretty much every agent experiences at some point, and one featuring something more random:
Between the two, we want to see good mechanics, good taste, creativity, familiarity with the PPC setting, a sense of humor, and characters we want to read more about. How we get there isn't necessarily that big a deal.
~Neshomeh
I completely forgot about this, but here it is on Archive.today. I blame the heat today for making me stupid.
Now, we could use this link on the wiki, or perhaps copy it to a new live doc... but OTOH, I stand by what I said about it being time for something new, whether that takes the form of a rewrite to clear up any bits that might be unclear, new random prompt options, or something else entirely. Opinions?
~Neshomeh
In my view, the ideal Permission process is "oh, you're that fanwriter, I read your stuff, what's your plan for agents?". But that's progressively fallen down:
1) The PPC got too large and diverse for us to have all read each other's fanfic.
2) We had a run of "here's my fanfic, it's a 60K graphic horror poem, you have to read the first 900 stanzas to really get it!".
3) Lots of newbies over the last... uh... decade aren't fanwriters at all.
So there is no going back. :-/
One thought: since everyone seems to be writing PPC stories in advance of Permission these days (see the confusion over who has beta'd what for Sierpinksi), could we just ask them to post their first story? I know you were against it before, but, like... I'm not saying 'mission', we don't have to read the whole thing to form an opinion, and everyone's doing it anyway. I'd rather use that first story as a Permission piece than have them write something else, get feedback, get Permission the second time round, and then post the interlude they'd already written and had beta'd before the first set of feedback.
(Plus profiles, obviously)
hS
Rewrite the article to be much friendlier, more casual, and shorter. People can ask if it's unclear, it's not like we have enough newbies that we'll be constantly fielding the same questions.
Do NOT set a time limit. It wouldn't actually help anything. But give some qualitative indicators of When You're Ready - eg, "you have a favourite PPC writer and can cohesively explain why".
Profiles and badfic remain as they are.
"Show us a sample of your writing (at least 400 words) which you feel represents how you'd write for the PPC. It can be something you've already written, or new for the occasion. It doesn't need to be PPC-related, but some people have used interludes, cowrites, RPs, and the intro to their planned first mission.
"Make it as long as you want, but be aware that PGs are busy folks - they might not read past the first couple of pages."
If someone says they've never written anything before so don't know what to do, then the answer is "You probably shouldn't be asking to write for the PPC then". If someone uses a wildly inappropriate sample, then that in itself demonstrates that they don't understand how to write for the PPC, because that ability was the only selection criterion.
And by explicitly saying that PGs won't read your entire story, we remove some of the pressure to give a full commentary. Even if you read it all, you can just comment on a bit, either positively or negatively.
Oh, and:
hS
A lot of this comes from Nesh's posts, with a few tweaks.
Unlike some other collaborative universes you might have encountered, an author requires '''Permission''' to write [[PPC stories]]. This is so we can ensure that new stories are written well and in the spirit of the PPC.
The Permission process was started by Jay and Acacia, who asked people to email them before writing a spinoff; when Jay left, she passed the responsibility on to Miss Cam, GreyLadyBast, and Thalia Weaver, and the [[Permission Giver]]s faithfully carry the torch to this day.
== When can I get Permission? ==
There's no defined timeline for asking for Permission. You should wait until you understand how the PPC as a shared universe works, and until the community knows who you are. Some good markers to look for are:
== How do I get Permission? ==
The Permission process isn't meant to be particularly difficult: all we really want is to check that you can write decently, that you're going to stick around, and that you understand what the PPC is all about. When you're ready (see above), start a thread on the Board and give us the following:
A Permission Giver should be along fairly soon to check it out. They'll look at your agents, your writing (both SPaG/technical skill and how "PPC-ish" it feels), how well you fit into the community, and generally just whether you're prepared to contribute to the shared PPC universe we all love. Whether they grant Permission or tell you to do a bit more reading and writing practice first, they'll probably give you some [[concrit]] along with their decision. PGs are long-time members of the community who are widely trusted for their writing skill and understanding of the PPC universe, so make the most of the feedback you get! It comes from the heart.
And that's it! You only need to get Permission once. When you have it, you can write for whatever parts of the PPC you like.
== Guidance: Profiles ==
{Basically the current Profiles FAQ.}
{Different page}
Recommended Reading
On-site Reading:
Off-site Reading:
Obviously, a lot of this is rough. Bold are my additions, btw.
How does it look so far, Community?
-kA, hopefully being helpful.
Link for convenience. I ended up making a few tweaks as I went along, such as adding Jay and Acacia's original guidance for spin-off writers with a reference link. I'd hate for that bit of history to be lost. Let me know if everything looks okay.
The Permission FAQ is now here, and will also need to be edited. But not by me right now. Maybe later! Suggestions are absolutely welcome in the meantime.
~Neshomeh needs a nap.
looks pretty good! Thanks, Nesh!
One—when are we going to elect the PGs? We’ve updated the article...is there any reason there’s no PG election thread?
Two—Can I use a short mission for a Permission request? The new article’s not super clear on that.
—Ls, who hopes to finish his request in time for the new PGs.
I'd imagine we're waiting until the gigantic RP dies down before adding another gigantic thread up above it. Every new thread pushes everything else down, so we try not to post too much 'over the top of' very active threads.
The new article is very clear: it says "do whatever". There are no restrictions on what you can use as your writing sample.
hS
—Ls, slightly less clueless than before.
Very readable and short, making me not very bored (even though I've read 99% of it already lol). I think it's not confusing at all!
Yeah, we need to fix the FAQ, but not right now.
But the new article looks really good!
-kA, at the summer play rehearsal
As Guidance: Recommended Reading, with sub-sections as noted.
Otherwise, I think that covers what we wanted to cover.
I can make the actual changeover to the article on Friday, if that's cool. As for archiving the current version of the article, we can always find it via the page's edit history. It's been through many changes before now. {= )
~Neshomeh also doesn't think you come off as angry.
As the guy without Permission, of course.
Immediately hold a vote looking to elect at least 3 new PGs. Ones who have enough energy to actually do anything anymore.
Should I make a new and seperate post on this bit of voting or should we wait for people to reply to this thread about PG-ness?
-kA, not angry
Why do you end so many posts with "not angry"?
(...so I want to be clear that I am not upset or angry, just posing a question or comment.)
(-kA)
I figured we'd wait until the Wiki article was up to scratch, and then someone could dig up the last election and see how we did it. I suspect it started with a nominations thread, but honestly not sure.
hS
I would add one thing: In addition to giving a link to the badfic you intend to spork (if, indeed, you intend to spork anything), give us a paragraph summarizing why you think it's mission-worthy. Someone, somewhere, at some point suggested this, and it stuck with me. I think it's an excellent idea that will really help with giving an impression of a person's attitude toward mission-writing.
I agree that a PPC mission probably shouldn't be the first story a person ever writes... OTOH I'm not sure I want to straight-up bar anyone from trying it. A Permission request is a guaranteed way to get critical feedback, which is so valuable. But back on the first hand, using us as a shortcut to feedback isn't very nice. I dunno. I'd be interested in trying it and seeing how many complaints we actually get. {= )
I'll volunteer to rewrite the article, since I wrote most of it in the first place. I think we should probably keep the FAQ, but maybe move it to a sub-page so it's not sitting there making the main body of the article look bigger than it truly is?
~Neshomeh
I like the idea of explaining why someone would want to mission a given fanfic. Helps us gently remind people not to spork out of 100% anger. There's gotta be at least 45% genuine amusement involved :P
But back to the Wiki page: Methinks a lot of people jump right to the "how do I get it". For some reason, my memory of the Permission page was simply just the "how do I get it" portion, but that could be because I hadn't really checked back on this page since, oh, the very very early days of that wiki. Imagine my surprise this afternoon when I looked at the page and saw that it was a Monster. So yeah, probably could pare the main page down to "what do you need Permission to do" and "how do you get Permission", and then a subpage with FAQs.
Also, had a chat with Tomash about potentially making a page on the Board with the cached Permission prompts set up in a random generator. I don't really code, but it's just one list, randomised, so we'll see if I can hack it.
Bits that still need filling in are in {curly brackets}. Mostly written without reference to the current article, and deliberately REALLY short. I don't think we need to hand-hold people through 'you should read some PPC stories first' any more.
Unlike some other collaborative universes you might have encountered, an author requires Permission to write for the PPC. The Permission process was started by Jay and Acacia, who asked people to email them before writing a spinoff; when Jay left, she passed the responsibility on to Miss Cam, GreyLadyBast, and Thalia Weaver, and the [[Permission Giver]]s faithfully carry the torch to this day.
== When can I get Permission? ==
There's no defined timeline for asking for Permission - you should wait until you understand how the PPC (as a shared universe) works, and until the community knows who you are. Some good markers to look for are:
== How do I get Permission? ==
The Permission process isn't (or isn't meant to be) particularly difficult: all we really want is to check that you can write decently, that you're going to stick around, and that you understand what the PPC is all about. When you're ready (see above), start a thread on the Board and give us the following:
And that's it! A Permission Giver should be along fairly soon to check it out. They'll look at your agents, your writing (both SPaG/technical skill, and how 'PPC-ish' it feels), how well you fit into the community, and generally just whether you're ready to contribute to the shared PPC universe we all love. Whether they grant Permission or tell you to do a bit more reading and writing practice first, they'll probably give you some [[concrit]] along with their decision. PGs are long-time members of the community who are {something that's not 'looked up to'} for their writing skill, so make the most of the feedback you get! It comes from the heart.
And that's it! It's not much at all, really. Once you've got Permission, you can go and write for whatever parts of the PPC you like {or something to that effect, I dunno}.
== Guidance: Profiles ==
{Basically the current Profiles FAQ. Keep the same format for any other #Guidance entries. Slice everything else off to a separate article or, for preference, cut it completely.}
hS
I am happy with this. I just didn't want this to get lost in all of the actual edits and changes being proposed.
I will say that this is probably the one time I wished I'd skipped work and D&D today because hoo boy did this thread explode when I wasn't looking.
Nova
Small suggestion, instead of "PG are looked upon for their writing" maybe something like "are recognized for their writing and PPC knowledge"?
It looks really good; however, I have a couple of things to note:
"look for something that will make a good mission, and a good ''first'' mission (not always the same thing!)." Perhaps we should find a way to define this somewhat. Maybe make a seperate page: "What Makes a Good Mission?" and include a subheader with "What Makes a Good First Mission?" Or maybe add to the FAQ for Permission. I feel like this could be confusing.
For "we encourage betas:" "We encourage someone from the PPC community to look over your writing sample or someone not you in general to catch errors in your writing sample." Or something to that effect.
"PGs are long-time members of the community who are well-versed on the PPC canon and known for their writing skill, inside the community and out, so make the most of the feedback you get! It comes from the heart." (Bolded are my additions) Perhaps this works?
"Once you've got Permission, you can go and write for whatever parts of the PPC you like, whether that be interludes, missions, AUs, or anything else not listed!" (bolded are my additions). Would this work?
Also, if we're goimg to say "write whatever parts you want," shouldn't we amend a bit about the "first badfic your agents will take on?" Maybe "first badfic your agents plan to take on" or something to that effect?
I hope these suggestions are helpful?
-kA
I think I've covered some of the same ground? Let's see...
Let me know if that works for you!
~Neshomeh
And yet ended up a PG, because they focused on infrastructure departments?
That while I've only become a PG recently, I haven't actually published a mission yet either (still working on it though).
Nova
Is it a good idea, then, to explain that if you don't want to spork badfic but want to extend PPC stuff, you should write a paragraph or two of potentional plans/ideas for the PPC, or is that too daunting? What do you think we should include? Should VM be used as an example of "you don't have to spork?"
-kA, hopefully not being too pushy (and they are not angry, just interested in this conversation)
having the alternate route of someone planning to worldbuild for the PPC submitting a pitch for what they plan to do makes sense to me. Something like:
Since Agent Hannah Rothberg works in the Arboretum, I would like to further develop the duties of Arboretum workers, including the odd encounters they run into during daily perimeter walks, outreach talks with the students of Digory Kirke and Paul Atreides, and reminding retired agents like Dafydd Illian why planting too many mellyrn could potentially disrupt the native ecosystem of New Caledonia.
Basically touch on main setting elements that might be covered in the writing, I suppose?
We do want to make sure to keep things simple, of course, so I could go either way on citing VM. But if prospies need it for affirmation that this place isn't just about sporking badfic, then it's a worthwhile addition.
Encouraging people to write for the setting is good!
But bloating the article with contingencies for fringe cases is bad!
But maybe if we encouraged it more, the cases would be less fringe!
I dunno, maybe there's a compromise? Note that you don't have to write missions, and link to a FAQ entry: "What if I don't want to write missions, but I do want to write other PPC stuff?"
~Neshomeh
Of course, what am I saying? When I wiki-walked for the first time, I had a ton of tabs opened of just PPC wiki pages.
Ahem. Anyways, we don't want to daunt newbies with tons and tons of links, which would be my only worry with "link to the FAQ question about this very topic," but I don't think we have a ton of links, so we should be good.
-kA, who actually did open tabs upon tabs of PPC wiki pages.
(Edit: Links link, tabs are pages.)
I totally forgot that was part of the wiki, to be completely honest.
And I still say that we should include "assuming you plan to spork anything at all" to not discourage newbies, but that's more of a personal thing than anything. There could be some people that just want Permission to Setting-build. Perhaps, for those cases, a paragraph or two on what they plan for the setting? Maybe?
-kA
You did a bunch of work for me! I respect the fact that you don't trust me to be both casual and brief. I don't entirely trust me with that, either. ^_~
Here's my revision, changes underlined:
Unlike some other collaborative universes you might have encountered, an author requires '''Permission''' to write [[PPC stories]]. This is so we can ensure that new stories are written well and in the spirit of the PPC.
The Permission process was started by Jay and Acacia, who asked people to email them before writing a spinoff; when Jay left, she passed the responsibility on to Miss Cam, GreyLadyBast, and Thalia Weaver, and the [[Permission Giver]]s faithfully carry the torch to this day.
== When can I get Permission? ==
There's no defined timeline for asking for Permission. You should wait until you understand how the PPC as a shared universe works, and until the community knows who you are. Some good markers to look for are:
== How do I get Permission? ==
The Permission process isn't meant to be particularly difficult: all we really want is to check that you can write decently, that you're going to stick around, and that you understand what the PPC is all about. When you're ready (see above), start a thread on the Board and give us the following:
And that's it! A Permission Giver should be along fairly soon to check it out. They'll look at your agents, your writing (both SPaG/technical skill and how "PPC-ish" it feels), how well you fit into the community, and generally just whether you're prepared to contribute to the shared PPC universe we all love. Whether they grant Permission or tell you to do a bit more reading and writing practice first, they'll probably give you some [[concrit]] along with their decision. PGs are long-time members of the community who are {respected? acknowledged?} for their writing skill and understanding of the PPC universe, so make the most of the feedback you get! It comes from the heart.
And that's it! It's not much at all, really. You only need to get Permission once. When you have it, you can go and write for whatever parts of the PPC you like.
== Guidance: Profiles ==
{Basically the current Profiles FAQ.}
For the writing sample, if it's going to be one instead of two, I think the lower limit should be longer than the bios.
I don't know that we'll need other #Guidance bits? Like... I've glanced back and forth between this and the current article a few times, and the only thing I can think of is maybe Guidance: Recommended Reading?
~Neshomeh
I'm thinking that this should be added to the planned FAQ rather than the main article, although I think that's what you were implying.
-kA
But I was specifically thinking about how we were trying to find wording for why PGs are PGs, and this was a good line:
That said, PGs are selected because they know the PPC well and are widely trusted. They tend to know what they're talking about, so if they tell you that something is a bad idea, it usually is.
...since it doesn't really mention "look up to/respected" or "well-known", but rather focuses on how PGs objectively know a lot about the PPC and are trusted to judge whether or not prospies have the ability to work with the setting.
... I had "Wiki article to be rewritten by someone who is neither Nesh or hS". Because I know very well what we're both like, and it is long, detailed, and formal. ^_~
Because otherwise someone might not get the point! It's really, really hard to break myself of this habit, which is why I threw out a deliberately slender draft and will now go hands-off to let people make it better. :)
hS
Respected sounds better, honestly, than "known for" lol.
And what would you put under "Guidance: Recommended Reading?" The slash-sporking guide?
Just curious.
-kA
On-site Reading to include the Guides/FAQs:
Off-site Reading to be something like:
~Neshomeh
Shouldn't we have the Original Series under Recommended?
I was thinking more in the context of guides, but the TOS should be read before applying for Permission.
I think listing TOS would be redundant, but perhaps redundancy is needed for this sort of thing. TOS is our canon, so obviously the canon must be read to understand it, and since we require Permission to write fanfic of the canon, it makes sense to know the canon.
(Also, in terms of the original Permission article, shouldn't we archive it, like we archived the Original FAQ: For Other People?)
-kA
The Permission article needs a rewrite to be shorter and more casual. I'll be the first to admit that I... did not read the entire thing the first time because Long (and, thus, was super confused by it), so it could use some cutting down to not appear as... threatening? Is that the right word?
Also, not having a set time limit would be good. It allows newbies to go at their own pace. For example, if Linstar can explain his favorite PPC writer (or, heck, favorite pair of agents outside of Jay and Acacia, because sometimes one doesn't necessarily catch who writes what. Somehow, I didn't know Nesh wrote both Derik and Nume (despite their missions being hosted on the very same website) until later wiki-walking.), I think he would be ready for a Permission attempt. Of course, I'm not a PG, and I'm not an oldbie either (only been here for two years. Will be three in December, but still), so take that with a grain of salt.
Hmm. I'm on the fence about "writing sample" because I might have been exluded if we're talking about "have never written and "published" fanfic before" because I hadn't posted fanfic before Permission (although I have written surprisingly Mary Sue-less fanfic, like a Warriors fanfic for school one time), but, at the exact same time, I had written for fun before applying for Permission. I grew up in a household that encouraged it. It was a way to not be bothered as well, so bonus! So I wrote a lot, and thus probably would've gotten Permission anyways.
Also, with the "new vote," should we carry that to a seperate thread? It's getting kinda crowded here.
All the steps listed by hS are small but impactful, and I think it would really encourage people to hang around.
-kA
Which would make kA an oldbie.
As for my favorite agent pair, I’d have to go with the Aviator/Rina and Zeb. The way they interact is really heartwarming; Zeb’s innocence is quite endearing, and I also like the Aviator’s arcs and how tough she is while still being a good mom to Elanor. They have a bajillion Missions, often in my favorite fandoms. And they’re tacking My Immortal, my favorite badfic ever. So...favorite non-Jay and Acacia writer goes to Iximaz.
((Edit: typos fixed.))
I always thought 5+ years in the PPC makes one an oldbie, and the Oldest Oldbies have been here since 2002/2003 AKA the (almost) very beginning... which are hS and Nesh, to my knowledge.
I do not consider myself an oldbie, not by any stretch, but thank you for the compliment :).
-kA, who swore there was a hard line with oldbies, but maybe not.
Being an oldbie is as much an attitude as a number of years. If everything is all fresh and exciting and just a bit of a shock, you might be a newbie. If you've Been There, Done That, and Seen It All, you might be an oldbie. {= )
~Neshomeh
Do you remember how much you did read before you stopped? This could be a useful benchmark for the rewrite.
~Neshomeh
I started glancing through (instead of reading, really) around "Things to Avoid" and stopped at "Q. Character bio? How? What? Give me some help!" in my first read-through.
I think moving the FAQ to a subpage would help.
-kA, who is sorry for not having better/clearer information
We can still keep a prompt generator on hand for the sample, since some people might need that extra little push and it prevents excitable 13-year-olds from posting letters as a writing sample.
I'd probably put the Permission Self-Check into that qualitative indicator of being ready. It's very much lost in the big deluge of stuff on the Permission page, but I just took it and I think it's pretty comprehensive of an indicator of someone's readiness for Permission. Maybe PGs can have access to the results if they really need it to inform their decision? But I dunno, that'd just be more reading for the PGs.
Definitely agreed on the disclaimer that a PG may not read the entire sample or comment on the entire thing. I mean, if it's clear from page 1 that a prospie needs to work further on something, then why look further?
As for the votes...
I guess haphazardly scattering my documents across multiple Google accounts is good for something. I do like the Self-Check; it was fun to write questions for. I suspect some of it is outdated, though (one asks about the Wiki background, which is always a risk).
Also, I've just checked, and while I can technically review the results, they are a) anonymous, b) unreadable due to long-form answers breaking the spreadsheet, C) not in chronological order, and d) disconnected from the details of the questions. I don't see taking tests as a useful way for anyone else to check your understanding - though it's good for your own checking - so I'm against PGs having access.
(Also, any concrit on the Self-Check is appreciated & I will try to fix it.)
hS
...where if you make the overflow text wrap instead of clip, you should see the entire thing. But I don't know exactly what you're seeing with the chronology/no details of the questions. When I ran zine applications I was able to format the resulting spreadsheet so that I could keep track of all the answers.
That being said, I'm perfectly fine with PGs not having access since it's a self check, obviously. It's more for the prospie to see for themselves how well they've grasped the PPC setting and how to give and work with concrit than anything else.
As for concrit -- the Wiki background one should probably be updated, yeah. Maybe changed to just a picture of the banner and ask which flashpatches are which? I think Google lets you do that now? I could be wrong, of course.
So am I on there?
I'd probably just vote yes to any oldbie who wanted to be one.
But I do think having a few more PGs wouldn't hurt--being a PG means you can grant Permission, not that you must always look at every request. Right?
Let's see:
*Article rewrite: The Permission article could use a rewrite--it's a bit out of date.
*Agreed with the time limit removal. It seems reasonable. (Or at least better than "Make Linstar wait two more months.")
*And the take-the-pressure-off-the-PGs seems a good plan as well, as does combining sample text flexiblity.
But that's just my two cents. - Ls
I remember Leto used to request the people he gives Permission to to let him see their first mission prior to them posting it. So something like the first 5-10 pages of a hypothetical first mission could tell prospective PGs who the agents are, what they plan to do, what the writer prioritises when describing a missionable fic, what fic is being planned for said first mission, etc. Then once the Permission is granted, the new writer can go ahead and continue with the mission, or simply post the rest, if the entire thing has been beta'd and edited.
I'm not a PG, but I've run fanzines that had applications, and what we would request was an idea for the piece the person wanted to do for the zine, plus writing/art samples set in the canon that the zine is focused on. Similarly, I'd want to see here the prospective agent bios, plus the opening of their prospective mission, plus a short (no more than 5 pages) non-mission setting writing sample. But again, I'm not a PG, just someone who's handled a ton of applications before.
(Edited to add, for an additional wry point of amusement, that I suddenly remembered how one of my Permission requests involved me submitting letters that I wrote to people as a writing sample. Now that's an odd writing sample!)
It's a to a very old LOTR fanfic where it rains punctuation constantly, the spelling is bad, the spacing is weird, and I’m pretty sure Laicalasse, the main character, is a Sue. Laicalasse's Tale
What if we turned the whole process on its head? Instead of Boarders applying for Permission, the Permission Givers extend an invitation to a Boarder they feel is ready.
This idea appeals to me because it takes the focus off the single goal of Getting Permission and instead places all the importance on how you interact with the community. If you're integrating well, being engaged and so forth, and the PGs feel they've got an idea of who you are and like what they see, they will ask for a sample of your writing—possibly an interlude or even a first mission, as you suggest—as the final formality.
One obvious pitfall to this idea is that people could end up waiting a little extra through no fault of their own if the PGs just haven't got the time/energy. However, I'm not sure that isn't actually a feature rather than a bug. It lets the PGs choose a time they do have the energy to engage, and makes it less of a chore, and ultimately, I think, raises the chance of someone getting that final stamp of approval.
To clarify one thing before moving on: I've been using PGs in the plural, but it would still probably be one PG extending the invitation rather than a group PG decision.
If it does remain a single PG decision, the second obvious pitfall is that this could deepen the Board-Chat divide, with Board-based PGs only able to extend invitations to people who are active on the Board and Chat-based PGs only able to invite people who are active on Discord. That is a problem.
We could set up a Permission Giver group chat in Discord, though, since I think we're all on there nowadays. It wouldn't be a bad thing no matter what we do, and under this model it would simply be expected to let others know when you want to invite someone to keep the other PGs in the loop and allow for any objections.
Again, this is radical, but people hyperfocusing on Permission has been an issue for about as long as a formal system has existed, and I think the current dynamics of the community would allow for this shift to something more relaxed. "If we like you, we'll ask you" is, I think, more relaxed than "you must tick all these boxes and also hope your judgement is as good as you think it is."
So... am I crazy, or might this just work?
~Neshomeh
Honestly, I'm not surprised it didn't fly. It's fine. {= )
~Neshomeh
From what I read down (or lurked while pondering my return), we don't have many PGs active, to the point the latest Permission Requests took a while to get answered. And a Request is a more direct propt to action for a PG rather that them realizing on their own "hey, this guy/gal should be given/should try for Permission".
Let's face it, PGs are usually our older members, and as a result tend to be busy with Real Life things like work and families (by no fault of their own, of course!). Aside from the fact this system woudl likely entail the PGs to confront with each other about the prospective candidates, the sheer fact peopel have to stand out to be noticed doesn't really sit well with me.
There's really active people who whould have no issue, f course, but the more quiet ones would risk waiting several months if not years with the new systems. We encourage activity, of course, because we're a community first. But that the same time we shouldn't encourage always-in-your-face activity because otherwise you can't get the Shiny Thing.
Storme and hS I feel covered a lot of my issues here, but this definitely creates a scenario of newbies just kind of hovering around nervously and even more overfocusing on impressing the PGs, since they don't have a clear roadmap for how to go about getting Permission anymore. I think this would actually make the problem worse. And it would definitely have some clique issues.
I'm just going to No Particular Order this:
I am on the fence. Convince me. :)
hS
Especially with worry for it becoming cliquey. One of the reasons why I left the Discord was it felt like it was becoming quite cliquey itself, especially within certain channels at least one of which I tried to participate in and felt left out as I wasn't really part of the 'clique'. The reason I didn't raise this and haven't really commented on it is, well firstly there were other issues I was having with the PPC Discord at the time but most of those were personal and I felt like this might have been a more personal one as well that wasn't intentional on other people's parts and so I left it as is.
I'm also not going to be looking at rejoining the PPC Discord in the forseeable future, so I would worry about the creation of a Board/Chat divide being a possibility through doing this kind of thing. And also, while I sincerely hope this will never become a thing (and I don't think it would at the moment), there could always be the chance of PG's themselves being a bit clique-y, with regards to who they invite, like "Oh I like you/get on well with you, I'll invite you to do a Permission request. But I don't like you, even if you do good writing so I won't offer it to you." and it becoming a case of who you know, not what you know.
But that being said, I can see the benefits of doing it this way, so I am not completely against the idea either.
Nova
I'm still for the idea of Permission invitations, just now am really against the idea of a PG chat group because of the worry of it becoming too much of a clique, but it is more towards the idea of not accepting new PGs into the group.
I can see (and have experienced) the cliquey-ness of the Discord server, although I usually see it more at my worst moments so I might be slightly biased here. And I don't want that to carry over to PGs as well. I don't want one or two (or more) PGs to feel unwelcome in their own space, to feel like they're being ignored, to feel like they aren't PGs, because, sometimes, that's how I feel on the server. But, again, I'm probably biased here, since I only seem to notice it in my worst moments or when I'm sporking badfic (the latter can be chalked up to "I'm just a terrible sporker;" the former could probably be chalked up to "no one wants to interact with whatever I was talking about" and that's okay!). I just don't want PGs to feel like they're being exluded, you know?
I can kinda see the other side of "waiting for a PG to request you try for Permission" as well, because people could be ignored again, but I feel like there are enough PGs to offset this issue. I could be wrong. It could be the same situation.
TL;DR: Against PGs chat group now due to fear that some PGs will be ignored like how I feel sometimes on the server, but my feelings are probably biased due to mental stuffs.
-kA
I'm actually rethinking my position. I thought there were more active PGs, but I just found out three people I thought were PGs aren't. Huh.
If there aren't enough PGs, I don't think the plan will work. I mean, first off, it'll overwork the small amount of PGs to constantly (or somewhat constantly) see how newbies without Permission are doing in the community, and that's stressful. Two, it does kinda feel like inviting someone into a club rather than not, if that makes any sense.
I'm on the fence now. I don't think it'll work. It'll stress out current PGs and might make some leave. It'll seem uninviting to new members of the PPC community. And I don't think that's good.
-kA
... it's me, Nesh, Zing, Ix, and now Storme. I also assume Delta is around on the Discord, but don't remember seeing her recently. Kaitlyn is officially 'here' as long as I am, but not active.
(I may well have lost track, so anyone else still around feel free to sing out!)
hS
While I'm technically still...around, and more active recently, it seems, it's been kind of a while since I felt up for handling a Permission request. Among other things, which I can write out (I have written out, actually, and managed to start doing again in this post and will now cut out so I can just...put up a short version and expand later if it seems necessary/relevant), due to the nature of my RL job, they...kind of feel like work. That's one of the strongest reasons, I think: that I look at a Permission request post when I'm off the clock and it just feels like it would be more of the same, at a time when I'm looking to do things that don't feel like an extension of my job. I like my job a lot; however, I also want to be mindful of maintaining a work-life balance, because it's pretty important. There are some other reasons, but as mentioned, in the interest of just posting the relevant information and potentially expanding on reasons later, I'll save them. (They're nothing terrible, but they have this annoying tendency to get lengthy and I'm tired of editing for readability and all that instead of just getting my message posted already.)
Essentially: I haven't been up for actually looking over Permission requests lately; it's intense (I go over them pretty thoroughly), and it feels like an extension of what I do all week, and a handful of other reasons. Anyway. I haven't been taking them on in a bit, and can't see doing so again in the near future. So, uh. I suppose I'm a semi-active Boarder, but...not exactly an active PG, especially in the Permission requests sense.
What to do about that is another matter. It turns out Nova only became a PG last month or so, which I didn't initially remember; I want to suggest that potentially we should add another PG, if there's someone who seems like a good pick and, ideally, has the time and energy and all that to actually go over Permission requests, but I don't know if there is currently such a person active who actually wants a Hat. I wouldn't know, unfortunately, given the general lengthy bouts of inactivity over the last few years. So...what I'm doing about it, I suppose, is to put up on the Board that this is the situation, and let some more people weigh in. Even if there really isn't someone currently around who would be a good PG, has the time and so on, and actually wants to be, at least I'll have been clear that I'm unlikely to be doing more than occasionally nibbling on my Hat in the foreseeable future. I've been feeling a little guilty that that's been a consistent thing for longer than initially expected--somehow, I thought I might eventually take one on again, but at this point, I really don't think it'll be anytime soon, especially an entire one on my own.
~Z, now trying to place some vague memory of a character absentmindedly nibbling on their hat as though it's a perfectly normal thing to do, without much luck yet
She bites through the brim in Lords and Ladies, it's a whole thing.
I don’t think giving, or getting, permission to write PPC stories should be as arduous as it currently is. I want it to be easier, from both sides. But we've never found a way to do that that doesn't just cause more problems.
Radical suggestion of the day: scrap it. Expand the PG quorum massively (to, like, 10-15 active people) , but redesignate the role as after-the-fact: if someone writes something that doesn't fit, a PG has authority to exclude that thing from the canon until fixed, and the responsibility to guide the writer to understanding what went wrong. That way we all keep learning.
hS
I was thinking of something light-hearted and not especially plot relevant.
Re: the suggestion, people have raised good points already. I'll just add that that's kind of an expansion of something that already happens occasionally, and also that it's another format I'm unlikely to participate in even if I do someday make it back to looking over Permission requests (or whatever form they take). Especially if the guiding couldn't be handed over to someone else if necessary, though I'd be surprised if it couldn't. At any rate, we're back to the issue of time and, potentially, effort.
I don't know, I don't have time right now to fine-tune this, but those are some thoughts. Slightly scrambled, served in the pan? :P
~Z, now on a tangent about crackers and pastries shaped like hats
... is pretty much the same problem we already have, which is that we're busy and don't always get a chance to read everything. Plus the one where no one really likes to be confrontational with anyone else; and once a thing is already written and posted, I worry there is much greater mental resistance to making substantive changes.
That aside, I'd be down for giving doctorlit and/or Tomash a hat if they want one, though as I've said elsewhere, I think doc was/is pretty firmly against having one himself?
~Neshomeh
...if making the PGs the sole arbiters of what qualifies as PPC canon is the best idea.
But I could see it sort of like a driver's test: a prospective writer submits agents and like a very short (between 500 and 1500 words) interlude, and the PGs grant a Permit to write a full mission. Then after the first mission, the PGs can grant full Permission, or request the writer make certain changes to fit with continuity. The Permit would be easier to obtain than Permission, but would be a place to get a taste of the dynamic before someone commits to a much longer piece with it.
(Partly thinking about how I originally had an entirely different character working with Christianne in my first Permission prompt, and then switched her out to Eledhwen after Nesh suggested it. If I'd started writing Christianne with Agent Lily and the PGs had to swoop in after the fact... well, from my perspective now it would make for some entertaining stuff with Agent Lily probably ending up like Bucky Barnes since she eventually became Lilith Wydenbrooke, but I'm certain 2008!me would have had a bigger issue with it.)
I don't know if it'd be more or less work. But I do also support extending the amount of time before one can ask for Permission, plus giving out more Hats.
It's not like we're going out of our way to make it hard here! Permission is supposed to be agents and a short (400-800 I think) piece of writing, so your Permit isn't easier on that score. And we can't exactly say "your spelling sucks, and you think PPC stands for 'Psychopaths with Problematic opinions(C)', but eh, go for a mission". Like... I want easier! But how is this easier? I don't understand. :-/
hS
in that PGs don't feel the pressure of "well, if I approve of this agent pair without having seen them on a mission yet, I'd be giving this writer full keys to the sandbox on what's basically a long-winded elevator pitch". Like I said, Leto used to ask people to send him their first mission to check over before they post it; this would just codify that.
I think half of the reason why PGs don't have the energy to do Permission requests is because of that immense pressure of giving out Permission without having seen how the prospective agents would really work on a mission, since the request prompts have specifically been outside-the-mission. Why not make the Permission process a part of a PPC writer's spin-off material by making an introductory interlude and the first mission the materials required to get full permission? And PGs can simply say "well, these agents sound promising, you have a Permit to write a first mission with them" or "I don't know about this agent, please do a couple tweaks before you do a first mission" and then wait for the first mission to give the final okay for full Permission.
So that's the part where it's easier. Because the process is split into two and the PGs don't have to think so hard about the first part, but we're also not making PGs only come in after-the-fact and thus potentially clash with a more resistant-to-change writer.
ETA: Thinking again about my own trajectory here. I can't even remember if I actually posted my first mission in 2008. I did write it then, but it languished on my computer hard drive for a bit. Maybe I sent it to Leto and then just never posted it until 2012? Basically all of my 2008 missions might not have been posted until 2012.
Anyway, my thought is that sometimes people put a lot of effort into getting Permission and then flake out of actually writing the first mission, because the first mission can be hard to do! Mine was obnoxiously short and kinda shallow because 2008!me didn't really understand why the fic was missionable, and just wanted to do a LotR fic for the first mission. (Though, since I'm down memory lane anyway, I do recall wanting to mission a HP Sue named, like, Andi Black as the very first mission, but that one never got finished.)
Point is, with this system, someone can get a Permit to write that first mission and then they might take forever to get the first mission done, and thus possibly never actually get Permission until they've been around for a while and experienced how difficult mission writing can be.
It's more like Zingenmir says: reviewing a Permission request requires (for me) some fairly intense focus and mental processing power. Looking at a whole mission would require as much or more of my brain; looking at an interlude and a whole mission later would require much more. For that reason, I'm gonna come out and say I'm against adding another step with more reading to the process.
I generally feel like I get a good enough sense of the person's writing ability from the samples, and if I don't, I can ask them to expand on it in a revision or in the next attempt anyway.
What I don't always feel I get from the first Permission attempt is a sufficient sense that the person gets the PPC as setting or as a community, which is why my pitch to revamp the system involved majorly downplaying the "prepare a writing sample" aspect of the process and placing all the importance on interaction. I'm less concerned about technical errors than I am about paving the way for people to write "Psychopaths with Problematic opinions(C)," as hS put it. {= ) Flawed writing can be improved much more easily than a flawed attitude. And I feel that my best sense of a person's attitude comes from watching how they get on with other PPCers, not from any kind of prepared show piece.
But it's rather frowned upon to deny Permission based solely on "I have a bad feeling about this," and see previous remarks in this thread about people potentially assuming we only allow our friends or whatever. (Never mind that being Old and Busy pretty well keeps us from becoming super-tight chums with most newbies—and from the other side, we PGs are scary, right? {; P )
As you suggested somewhere before, explicitly lengthening the recommended amount of time before someone should try for Permission might address this. I don't look forward to the debate about how long is long enough vs how long is too long, though. To throw a number out there, though: how about three months? Would three months feel good?
~Neshomeh
Under that system, I definitely wouldn't end up doing both steps of the process. Even when I did feel up to doing Permission requests, I don't think it would have worked well. Especially if the mission was on the longer side. It feels a bit like adding on having to beta a mission, but potentially especially thoroughly, and I was already having to heavily limit both how much betaing I committed to doing and putting a page limit on what I was willing to take on. The writing samples gained a preferred word range for a reason.
What's more: some people, myself included, end up finding it easier to write interludes than missions. I had all kinds of mission plans, back when plotbunnies were eating my brain back in 2013; I'd have to go back to check, but...no, actually, I really don't. I remember now: my first posted mission was an April Fool's Day version of what was planned to be my first one. After that, I began cowriting, and I'm not at all sure any of those first cowritten missions have been released. I do think some interludes were, and I contributed to an edition (two, actually, I think) of the Multiverse Monitor and similar things, and ran an RP, and participated in others...and then I was doing Continuity Council interludes, and then began cowriting an arc's worth of missions and interludes that were released, and, all in all, I can tell you I'm pretty sure I've never released an actual solo mission. I say this because the first one I finished, complete with an a/n talking about it, is currently sitting in a folder called "Ready to go up", because I did that final edit and updated the a/n and it's now ready to be part of an effort to put up a bunch of story pieces and fragments that I know I'm not going to continue but feel I should maybe share to kind of...close out that chapter of my writing.
I have been a Boarder for over nine years.
All this to say: in my opinion, adding having to go over a first mission seems impractical both from a PG perspective and from a non-PG perspective. Unless cowritten missions count for this (I suppose logically they might well), I would still not have Permission under this system today, or would have gained it something like 3-5 years in (I think the first draft of that solo mission was completed around 2016, and needing to post it to finish getting Permission might have pushed me to finish editing faster...or else it would have made me take even more time with it, given how thoroughly I polished my writing sample). Going by posted cowritten missions, I think it would have taken me about two years, which isn't as bad--until you consider all the non-mission writing I did in those two years. I developed my characters, made new ones, wrote all kinds of things, contributed to a bunch of silly meta things...I had many plotbunnies, and because I had Permission, I was able to do much more with them than I would otherwise have done. Getting Permission actually sparked a fair amount of it, I think, because it opened that door.
Just as we have Boarders who never get Permission, we also have Boarders with Permission who may never write a mission, or take years upon years to finish and release one, while still writing other stories. I can't possibly be the only one. Moreover, even if we shifted it to allow multiple interludes before a first mission, unless the second interlude could take the mission's place, ultimately there would be people writing stories in this weird sort of limbo that I can't imagine would be comfortable or welcoming. If anything, I feel like this system would add stress to completing a first mission, which just...isn't the point of writing in general. So that's another part of it.
As to "being Old and Busy pretty well keeps us from becoming super-tight chums with most newbies" - ohh, yes, for sure. I used to make a lot more effort to engage, to the point where at one time I had a goal to do a bunch of cowrites with people I never had before, including or with a focus on (don't remember now) newer Boarders; however, by now I've become thoroughly inactive on the Discord (I might occasionally lurk in the food channel, but shh, that's a secret) (I do appreciate not being removed from it, though - there's story planning in there that I don't want to lose access to, for one thing), and infrequently active on the Board, and I just...don't have the energy to try too hard to make those connections these days. I'm sure we get many nice newbies, but at this point I'm more concerned with maintaining and hopefully reactivating what have become essentially long distance friendships/relationships with friends and family, including some who live relatively close by. I kind of...made my bubble and mostly stuck to it. So...welcome to all the newbies I never welcomed. I hope you've been having a good time, and apologize that we're unlikely to have much interaction. The reasons are very much on my end. I'm sure other people have been talking to you plenty, though, at least.
And with that, I really need to get moving already...but at least I'm thoroughly awake now!
~Z, apparently back to making long Board posts for the moment. Who knew?
if the worry is that a writer doesn't have "a sufficient sense [of] the PPC as setting or as a community", then maybe we should have some additional questions alongside the activity check?
So if we do three months before requesting Permission, then the prospective writer might have some time to read other spin-offs. They can answer questions like "What is your favourite TOS mission", "What is your favourite non-TOS PPC writing", and/or "What part of the HQ worldbuilding is most interesting to you" as part of confirming that they've looked at what's come before?
The pitfall for at least the 2nd question is, ofc, that some writers will probably be mentioned more than others, and that'll lead to hurt feelings. So I'm not sure how to phrase it in a way that won't end up insulting someone.
But, basically: 3-month preparation time + a bit more of a detailed activity check + hS and Zing's idea of just straight up using 5 pages of an interlude for the sample?
(Edited for clarification with the quoting.)
In spirit, the requirements for Permission are simple: show us you're not a big jerk, get what the PPC is, and can write it well. It shouldn't be a big deal.
Maybe the process has just been over-written...? Could it be as simple as slimming down the word count on the Permission article......? Or something.........?
~Neshomeh will stop abusing the ellipsis now.
Linstar will stop now as well.
Not necessarily easier than the current system. Apologies for not being clearer.
-kA
This solves the overworking issue I had earlier, and seems similar to my modifications except less missions to check.
I still say we should spot check from time to time, but at least two PPC members write reviews consistently for new mission (and those would be Doc and Tomash, of course :) ), so I could see doing away with that as well.
I feel like it would be less work. We just need to grade less harshly, so to speak, when it comes to Permit Requests (and keep a list of Permit holders that possibly only PGs would see).
-kA
Are there enough people to fit the 10-15 active PGs under the current definitions (which means at least six months of activity and a dedication to the PPC) or would we have to modify it? Do we even have enough members that are active and want the Hat?
It sounds like an easier system, but not something we can implement right now. Sure, we can get another PG (probably) but about 5-ish extra minimum? I'm not so sure.
I'm not a PG, so take this with a grain of salt, but that's my two cents.
-kA, who is not angry, just curious.
Looking at this thread alone, there's you, Lily, Sergio, Thoth, and Scape who would all meet those two criteria. I'm not saying all those would feel comfortable as "nuPGs"! But that five in one thread - possibly more, I'm not sure how long several of the others have been here. Multiply that across the Board and Chat, I think we'd have a whole slew of candidates. Then you just run an election and see what pops out.
Because we're a community aimed squarely at concrit. All the "PG" role would be would be a direct use of that concrit as an active filter on what is considered PPC canon.
I dunno. It's more radical even than Nesh's idea. But if we don't bounce ideas, things will never change.
hS
... I wasn't nominating (or non-nominating) anybody, just literally counting heads. :)
hS
In fact, I've sounded both of them out about it in the past, but unless something has changed, neither one is interested. Same with doctorlit, IIRC, for someone not in this thread.
So, uh, has anything changed, guys?
~Neshomeh
This community is important to me, and that's why I make such an effort to review every story that gets posted*, including hS's +20 project, but I'm literally squeezing in my R+R during breakfasts and dinners. Most of my work days right now are sleeping from roughly 9pm to 4:30am, and being out of the house from 6am to around 7pm. A lot of my weekend gets wasted on recovering sleep, and of course, laundry and packing lunches. (I do usually have two mornings a week when I can stay a couple hours longer in my condo in the morning, but that's dependent on none of my coworkers taking days off or getting sick.) It's already pretty rough, so adding more to my plate doesn't sound wise for me, and that's putting my own personal misgivings about not having a discerning critical eye aside.
(Not to sob-story on the Board, but the current zoo situation, for anyone who cares: The extremely austere and resource-hoarding founder of the zoo passed away early this year. His daughter has taken over, but her financial decision-making is hindered by a probate agreement made between the founder and our bank, such that the bank can veto increases to our budget if they feel it will threaten getting paid back the money the founder owed them when he died. She's actually managed to make decent progress on that goal, and has secured some major benefits for us so far, including increasing our internal minimum wage by almost $3.00 an hour, and starting to give us vacation pay. Unfortunately, having more money can't buy me more free time, and the increased staff we need has only begun to trickle in so far, with Hoofstock department getting an additional keeper, and Birds & Primates, by far the largest department by exhibit numbers, finally getting a long overdue restructure into a Birds department and a Primates department. None of that helps me directly, though I'm hoping the relatively swift increases to pay and benefits are first steps towards wanting to attract other keepers here, so we can fill out the buildings departments where I work. We're currently projecting to finish paying back the bank and end the probate in 2024.)
—doctorlit, oversharing?
*As long as they don't spoil something I haven't read yet!
That does sound frustrating. Hope your sitch improves.
...Not being able to keep up with what's happening in terms of fic over here. I mean, I still haven't finished reading hS's new stuff (which is excellent so far, by the way). I've just been falling behind on reading stuff.
I don't have the strongest trust of my own judgement, but I do trust Nesh, so I suppose I'll have to trust her judgement of my judgement.
... you'll have to sack every current PG. ^_~
hS
is that I'm a flight risk ;P
But I suppose as long as you all keep DMing me I'll still be around.
I'm gonna be completely honest: I thought a little over half of those five were PGs.
I know Thoth isn't and I know I'm not, but I could've sworn Lily was...
The idea still kinda makes me nervous, but I feel more on the side of agreement now. We have the possibility of getting more PGs, making your plan work more, but how active would some of them stay? And the idea of "publishing a mission then having it declared Out of Canon until mistakes are fixed" seems... iffy-ish. Would we do this with every mission? Could a PG look back at previous missions and strike them out of canon until issues are fixed?
I think both answers are "yes," but doing it with every mission seems like a huge task. More than what 10-15 PGs could handle.
I'd say do it with the first couple of missions with a new author, then do "spot checks" to see if they keep up the quality. If they don't, then tell them what went wrong and how to fix it, then repeat as necessary. That would require less work, even with a slightly larger chance at error. We don't want to overwork the PGs.
On the other side of my arguement, the only extremely active poster of missions is Kі nо Shirayuki, so it wouldn't be a problem to check every mission (but most missions don't really get published due to lack of betas, which is a different issue in of itself).
Where do I stand? I say that the idea is plausible with a few modifications: Not every mission gets checked (or not every mission gets checked within a week of publishing), or else we overwork the PGs. The election (which is a different idea) I'm kinda eh on, but only because I'm afraid it'll turn into a popularity contest.
-kA
(PS: I would be okay with being a PG. I feel like I know enough about the PPC (and am devoted to the PPC) to catch errors in Permission Requests (or in Missions, if this idea passes) and tell the author how to fix it. So, at least one of the five is okay with the hat :).)
Not sure that's relevant and/or helpful, but thought I'd throw that out there.
And here's a full list.
It's kind of random when you'll get a response on anything you're doing. Sometimes there are a ton of people who are super interested in what you're doing and sometimes there isn't. It's not even necessarily anything you do, it's often a product of who's around at that exact moment. I've definitely had this happen to me as well.
(And I've been burnt out to hell so I haven't been interacting with people anywhere so much. Sorry everyone!)
I apologize. I really do try not to ignore stuff but sometimes I genuinely can’t help, am too busy/too tired to formulate an answer, or saw it and forgot to write an answer. So my apologies, I’m really not ignoring just scatterbrained.
The ignoring bit hasn't happened recently (as in, the past 2-3 weeks?), but it has happened before.
-kA
Also, there is a lot of talk about fandoms I'm not in and some of which I barely know exist, so I'm not sure what to say to them.
(And Bookworm? I noticed a couple typos. ( “ad” and “i”.))
So that's what gets me a bit eeeeehh about "PGs will approach newbies and offer an invitation to apply for Permission". Reminds me a bit too much of the whole ~elite group invites you to do this initiation~ trope so prevalent in boarding school/university experiences. It gives me a hierarchical vibe that... well, I mean, PGs are a little bit like that, since y'all are the ones with the keys to the sandbox, but it would feel more like it if Permission was done by invite, you know?
This is a valid concern.
I would offer a counterpoint: Any sufficiently large group will always have subgroups. They may form around shared interests, preferred method of interaction, personality types, or any number and combination of factors. The fact that subgroups exist doesn't necessarily mean there is toxicity present, and I don't think that's currently the case with the Discord or anything else.
Is the group chat between me, Zingenmir, and Lily a clique, or just a sensible way to discuss things that concern the three of us but no one else? I feel it's the latter.
If the PGs (all four maybe five of us?) had a group chat to run Permission-related questions by the other PGs, why would that inherently be worse than the above?
Re. people drifting away, I'm pretty sure you can leave a group chat if you want to.
Quick post at work, so this is not comprehensive and I apologize for anything that may be confusing.
~Neshomeh
Yeah, I know that subgroups are inevitable in a big group -- such is the case in big fandoms I've been in. But, and let me butcher Gandalf here, one might form a PG group chat out of a desire to do good, but from that, they would end up wielding a power too great and terrible to imagine.
Plenty of things are discussed in private, or are best left to be discussed in private, sure. But creating a system where a prospective newbie must impress a ~council of PGs~ who then deliberate in their secret group chat whether or not to give said newbie the opportunity to apply for Permission is incredibly vulnerable to toxicity. Like the Ring itself, the ability to be invisible turns into, ironically, a lack of transparency regarding a process that affects the entirety of the community. It might begin with good intentions, but we're all human and therefore fallible, therefore corruptible. You could end up with newbies trying to curry favour with PGs instead of connecting with non-PG Boarders, or a big Drama about how newbie A was invited to apply for Permission within a couple months but newbie B had to wait a year. Or worse, jilted newbies start trying to incur a(nother?) schism with some crazy conspiracy theory of the PGs being evil puppetmasters of the rest of the PPC.
Believe me, that last one is inevitable. I've run application-based fanzines with invites and there were definitely subgroups complaining that some evil cabal of Yuri on Ice fanwriters were controlling all the zines and only inviting their friends. You can point to the merit of those writers' works all you want, some people are still going to believe there's some conspiracy out to get them instead of improving on their writing, simply because that would make the rejection go down easier. And you need only one malcontent to mess the whole thing up for everyone.
I know those three scenarios I brought up have also happened in the current system, but at least the current roadmap to Permission is transparent and doesn't rely on a subgroup to initiate the process. While the Permission success rate would probably increase on an invite-based system, it still moves the potential for wank from the application results up earlier to even being able to apply for Permission. That, to me, would make becoming a PPC writer even more intimidating for prospective newbies. I mean, I've personally told you that I found you intimidating for a good portion of my PPC career (if it can be considered that); if 2008 me found out she had to impress a ~council of PGs~ to apply for the Holy Permission, she'd probably freak out worse and run for the hills.
Anyway, tl;dr: not a fan of relegating the burden of initiating Permission on PGs, because of way too much experience in various subgroups in other parts of the Internet, including ones that required applications. Still think it's high time Permission prompts got streamlined. Maybe extend the amount of time needed before a newbie applies?
(ETA: clarified the process used for the fanzines. We had guest writers and application-based writers. There were accusations of cronyism for both, but the guest writer invites were especially scrutinised. We initiated a blind reading process for the applications and still got accusations that we only accepted our friends.)
... is that you're not talking about "several PGs happen to hang out together". You're talking about "this is the Official PG Chat, in which the fate of all seekers of Permission will be decided. You will never know what goes on there - just whether you pass."
Also, like... what if we get a really obnoxious Permission Giver I don't wanna hang out with? ^_~ Or, more seriously - one who doesn't use Discord. Which, actually, we have, since Kaitlyn is a PG.
Re: leaving a group - I'm sure you can! And if someone was actually quitting, they would. But people just drift away from the PPC all the time, and I'm not sure they'd recognise it was happening. They'd maybe wind up feeling uncomfortable in the chat without knowing why - but also feeling obligated to stay in, because it's The Job.
hS
It seems clear enough that's not gonna happen, and I'm fine with that. It was, after all, a radical idea. {= )
But I still want to talk about PG group chat and why I don't think it's something to be afraid of.
Fact: We have so far resisted becoming a committee, much less a clique, much less a cabal or a hive mind.
Conclusion: We can be trusted with the ability to talk to each other.
Based on that, here's my logic:
And finally,
So, why fear?
~Neshomeh
Thinking about it, with the current Permission set up I can definitely see the good points to having one. I guess another point for it is if one PG sees a Permission Request but doesn't have the time/ability to deal with it at that point in time they can always drop a message in the chat to see if there's another PG who can pick it up.
Nova
You've seen for yourself how patchy I am with a 3-person chat. The last time I was in one larger than that was a GDocs chat function when Iximaz was fairly new. It grew to about 5 people before I had to close the window and get away.
So if you want a chat group with Zing, Ix, Storme, and Delta, I mean, go for it! I'm not stopping you. But I will not be able to join. It breaks me.
hS
I was trying to be sensitive to Lily by not making both my argument replies to her, but I'm afraid I was insensitive to you instead. I meant to reply to "this and everything above it on this subject," but I neglected to actually say so. If it felt like I was haranguing you personally, I didn't mean to and I'm sorry.
Since the whole point of this would be to keep everyone in the loop, I'd be happy to relay information to you one on one.
~Neshomeh
Could you possibly demote a toxic PGs? I mean, is that a thing? Just kinda wondering, not really being serious.
—Ls, who hopes hasn’t bit off more than he can chew by accidentally unleashing a huge debate on Permission. Of course, igniting huge debates is kinda what he does. Though really, it wasn’t just him. Also, Ls is neither a Discord user nor a Permission Giver, and thus is not the most sure of why he’s all that concerned.
I could just... not get on with them. That's happened. Heck, at one point I didn't get on with Nesh (a very long time ago).
To answer your question, a permanent ban from the community would obviously revoke PG status. I suspect a temporary ban would too, but... it's never come up, and I hope it never does.
hS
And you and Nesh didn’t always get along? Huh. I really don’t know everyone’s histories here.
But yeah, I assume you would lose PG or Permissioned status on being banned. Right?
(Side note: SRPA’s, (whom I have no affiliation with) ban is over in like two weeks. )
It definetly could get rid of the whole "being active long enough to get Permission then dropping activity" problem, as well as allowing a person to become more familar with the community. Sure, it might take a little while longer, but I think the "extra" time could be used to get more used to us and let them be a bigger part of the community. It also lets us get used to them and know more about them as a person. The more time someone spends with us, the better.
I think, to clear up the problem with chat PGs vs. Board PGs, a PG Discord chat (or, well, any chat system) should be made, mostly to, as you said, keep PGs in the loop. The only problem is that some (most? IDK how many PGs there are, to be completely honest) PGs aren't really that active on Discord in the first place or don't have Discord accounts. That's the only catch.
But, otherwise, good idea.
-kA
As not everybody even wants to get Permission, it might be good to have people mention that somewhere at some point. On the other hand, it would certainly be simple enough for a person being approached to just say, oh, thanks, that's really great, but I actually wasn't thinking of getting Permission to begin with. That would also logically cover cases of "I do want to, but it's a busy time for me right now" - once the invitation is given, it could basically be a standing invitation unless rescinded. If someone's ended up leaving for a year or so and then coming back, they might want to check, or something, but...anyway, yeah. I don't entirely know what I think of this idea as a whole, but that's a bit of it to fine-tune slightly.
Hm, another thing, this one a potential issue: Permission requests can take a while to put together. At least a few weeks, though I admit it might take only a week or two if someone's already been developing their agents and putting together an interlude and so on. By the time the request is ready, the PGs might have gotten busier again. Just something to think about, though tbh that kind of exists in every form of the process, I think.
~Z
Not sure how I feel about that. shrugs Maybe we could try both? That is, if a PG so decides, you needn’t wait a full month to ask? Rather than overturn the whole process, as there should at least be a way to request Permission still. Regardless, it’s still a good idea, Neshomeh.
(Side note: I thought hS wasn’t on the Discord? Then again, what do I know?)
...actually, come to think of it, I kind of wrote something like that myself, as a way to develop the characters, since I found that easiest to do by writing them. I never posted it, largely because it remained unfinished (and unedited/not mildly rewritten) and was kind of chaotic (the concept is that Charlie's kind of...test mission involved going into her own badfic with a temporary partner/supervisor, and then Brenda followed her in to see what was taking her new partner so long, or something like that) - anyway, that's fairly irrelevant except to say that I understand why the trend came to be. I vaguely remember a whole discussion on it, too, some years back (several, actually, I think).
Anyway, the prompts were kind of unofficial interludes anyway, so I don't see a problem with shifting to the Permission piece being a first interlude. A suggestion: the prompts could be an optional part of it - sort of the best of both worlds, so that people who don't feel they need a prompt can just write the interlude they'd like to write, and people who aren't quite sure where to begin or would enjoy a challenge can cycle through some and pick something that looks interesting.
I do wonder if there should be a length range (like, "ideally 5-10 pages" or something, since interludes can get very long), and whether or not it would be good to require it be an interlude that is at least partially set in the PPC - on the one hand, the profiles should be enough to give a sense of understanding of HQ and so on; on the other hand, it's a little different, seeing it in action. I'm really not sure.
Actually, as an alternate to a length range: when I went for Permission, I used a chapter of a fic I'd been writing (and polished that chapter a lot). As it was the...fourth chapter, I believe, I also provided a couple contextual notes. In that kind of vein, if someone writes a very long first interlude, they could potentially choose what they feel is the best ~5 pages (I include ~ because I don't feel it makes sense to quibble over a paragraph that spills over onto page 6 or something like that - this is not, in fact, a school assignment of the sort with a very strict word or page limit) and, if necessary, add a note about skipped parts for context. Theoretically, the full interlude could be available upon request? Or the rest of it quickly summarized so that something glaringly obviously not PPC-appropriate doesn't get missed? But on the other hand, that kind of thing could easily be caught and corrected post-Permission, as occasionally does happen with posted material.
This way, we'd be kind of...blending a few Permission piece concepts. We get a writing sample, the prompts are there for those who want or need them (but are not obligatory, leaving more choice and freedom in the content of the piece), the Permission piece is an actual PPC story that would be written anyway (and this way gets extra polishing and feedback)...odds are this could use a little more fine-tuning, including the question of what people have been writing as their first story and if missions should be included in the options here, but overall, I think this could be a decent new version.
~Z, unexpectedly more active on the Board for the first time in ages
I really like this idea. I'll admit it's probably partially because my Permission piece was part of an original 'fic that I was writing at the time (that served as the background for one of my agent ideas) just severly polished with a lot of help from a couple of people (Irish and hS at least IIRC), but also because it gives a wider breadth of options for people who want to get Permission.
I think 5-10 pages is probably a good length for the writing samples, maybe leaning more towards the lower end of that range but allowing longer if that's what's needed? But allowing excerpts of potential missions or even maybe changing it so that it's missions with hypothetical badfics in them so that actual badfics aren't tied up in people who are trying to write Permission Requests if people with Permission want to mission them? I don't know how much people actually use the badfics on the Unclaimed/Claimed pages of the wiki anymore.
Nova
I like the idea of having a more flexible way to apply for Permission that would actually be used as an interlude. :)
Yay for being more active! Have a slice of life pie!
And ooh. Goodness, whatever does a slice of life pie taste like? Does it vary based on whose life it's a slice of? :P
~Z, batting away an unexpected plotbunny >.>
I just like giving away as many pun-based imaginary items as I can think of.
On second thought, it does taste like a person’s life. Hmm...wonder what flavor mine would be....Dark chocolate, perhaps?
For clarification, for updating prompts, and also... it would be nice if it could just directly be hosted on the Wiki to avoid future repeats of this issue. Instead of a table, maybe we could run a random prompt generator script instead? It takes a bit of the guesswork out of rolling dice and people can just click a button to get a different prompt.
Totally seconding this. Might do it myself.
There's a link in the Permission section on the wiki, but it's one of those things that got eaten by Google.