Subject: I'm not sure if writing articles requires permission. (nm)
Author:
Posted on: 2014-02-10 08:36:00 UTC
-
Concerning the future of the Multiverse Monitor! by
on 2014-02-09 14:32:00 UTC
Reply
Howdy folks. As most of you know, in the early-mid part of last year there was an attempt to bring back the old Multiverse Monitor; this was... moderately successful. Sure, the Monitor is established as a thing again, but as actual issues go we turned out two and then everybody dropped off the face of the earth. With a total dryup of available staff and content, the whole thing went kaput.
That was, as they say, rather a downer. So recently I've been talking to Lily Winterwood about options for getting that whole thing back on its feet, and well hey, there was quite a bit of Boarder enthusiasm for it in the past so we figured we should poll the community and see what they think for making HQ's newsletter more of a presence. The way I see it, we have at least three options:
First, we just get right back to putting out monthly issues like in April and May, same general format and idea. This is simple on the face of it, but comes with a number of problems that would need to be addressed: first, we need a reliably active base of staff to actually put together stories and content every month, as well as someone who knows photoshop and design stuff well enough to assemble the final version for those times Lily is unavailable. This isn't necessarily permanent staff, people can rotate in and out as they have time to contribute, but we need to have at least a few people who will be reliably active and involved. We also need to tackle the issue (heh!) of lack of content; most months, not a lot happens on the Board and not a lot new gets published very often, so if we stick just to meta news we're going to run dry again - to counteract this, I'm open to any suggestions on recurring features people might have, and also on uneventful months I'm considering making up stories that would be newsworthy in-setting and giving them an appropriately journalistic treatment. Would people be okay with this? This is the trickiest option because of the need for active staff on hand (not terribly many, but this isn't a two-person job) and a source of content, but I feel it'd be the most fun and do a lot for worldbuilding stuff.
The second option is that we only actually make a whole issue when some major event happens, be it an Emergency, a big RP or story, some kind of milestone... you get the gist. Like how the first 2013 issue was pretty much all about the Blackout. Content would go on and the assumption would be there that in-setting the Monitor is still putting out issues every month, but what we're seeing under this option are essentially highlights. We'd still need a core of staffers willing to put together content for the issues when we make them, but it's less of a sink than the first option.
Thirdly is the simplest option: we axe the actually-compiling-issues part of Monitor stuff and ramp up a focus on writing stories featuring the Monitor staff, make their presence felt more in RPs and such, etc. I've been planning to write Monitor stories anyway, and of course that stuff's pretty much fair game anyhow, so that part of the option can really combine with either of the other two, but if people feel the MM's just more trouble than it's worth then there's this to fall back on.
It's possible (probable?) I've left some possibilities out or failed to consider others, but these seem the most doable off the top of my head. Still, most of these choices won't work out without the community's involvement, so I thought I'd see what people thought worth pursuing and if anybody's still willing to help out. Look forwards to hearing from all of you. :P -
I can help with Ps (nm) by
on 2014-02-16 06:09:00 UTC
Reply
-
Ps? (nm) by
on 2014-02-16 06:10:00 UTC
Reply
-
Hazarding a guess to say 'photoshop'. (nm) by
on 2014-02-17 08:11:00 UTC
Reply
-
Probably. by
on 2014-02-17 08:13:00 UTC
Reply
All right, so it's looking like we're leaning towards "publish actual issues only for big events and stuff, leave it assumed issues are coming out the rest of the time too". Do we have anybody up for pitching in on the actual content front? We have a few people up for doing photoshop but articles have to be written, news to be found, etc. as well.
-
Well, Time Lord Continuity Council. by
on 2014-02-17 08:22:00 UTC
Reply
That's newsworthy.
Maybe a feature on PTSD on missions? Because I just wrote a mission where Christianne's backstory comes into play again when she gets triggered by something the Sue does.
Hmm. Maybe some more reviews, a mention or two of the Extremely Lifelike Statues, and... anyone else got newsworthy things? -
That was more put out to the thread as a whole. by
on 2014-02-17 08:24:00 UTC
Reply
Except for Al's Waiter and yourself we don't really have a lot of people actually stepping up willing and able to help with the actual content, which is why I asked. We can probably fill up an issue with stuff like that though, yeah, and maybe work up a fictional news item or two; it probably wouldn't be laid out too differently from the past few issues we did.
(Speaking of the ELSes, will we be doing those radio things bimonthly like WTNV?) -
(jumps up and down in seat) by
on 2014-02-17 16:14:00 UTC
Reply
I can help! I could write articles, or advertisements, and I had an idea for "Charlie's Dalek Advice Column" that I think could be pretty funny at least as a one-shot. I mean, I have a lot of things I need to do IRL, but I could definitely help somehow. I wouldn't be able to help with formatting or Photoshopping, though, because I'm no good with that, and technically I still don't have Permission, so I would need to have everythng reviewed by the editors first, but I don't think those are too problematic, especially the former.
Oh, and Herr Wozzeck recruited a character in a District 9 mission and assigned him to the Multiverse Monitor! I could use his identity as a pen name, like the pen names people used on the last two! I'll have to ask Herr Wozzeck if he had any plans for Johnathan. I'd link the mission, but the wiki is acting all wonky for some reason and saying that loops are happening, whatever that means, and I didn't have the link to the mission saved. -
I'm also happy to contribute from time to time. by
on 2014-02-17 21:57:00 UTC
Reply
Not entirely sure exactly what--I can do gossip and complaints and so on pretty easily, and could probably do some sort of interview or report at times? Whatever's around, really, I suppose.
I'd say I could help with Photoshop as well, but I don't know it extremely well, and it seems like something I'd end up without the time to do. I'm quite happy to write fluffy and not-so-fluffy articles and so on, though. At the very least, I could contribute the text for some ads, I think.
~DF -
Sounds good. by
on 2014-02-19 01:25:00 UTC
Reply
It sounds like we're going to work on an issue for the Continuity Council thing, so give me your e-mail and I'll cut you in. What I'm probably going to do is send it to everybody who's said they're interested in this thread.
-
Oh, sure. by
on 2014-02-19 02:29:00 UTC
Reply
dawnfire360@gmail.com. It'll also be on the previous MM gdocs.
Mind you, the next week (and probably some time after that as well) is going to be very busy for me. I'm on Reading Week, which basically means a week with no classes wherein students with a lot of work supposedly have time to catch up. So...this is me, trying to catch up with two essays and the same number of oral presentations. Good luck to me, huh?
Heh. Well. Continuity Council issue, here we come!
(Although, speaking of that, it may mean I have a timeline to fiddle around with. Unless the official founding date is a little later in the year, that is...oh well. I'll figure it out. Worst comes to worst, I'll...condense something? Change it so the Council gets a Citrine Theorist a little bit after it's been founded? Hm...things to think about.)
~DF -
When is it supposed to be founded? Thought it was January? by
on 2014-02-19 04:31:00 UTC
Reply
It's not actually that big a deal, either way. We can label the issue as being for the month the CC was founded - that's part of what makes the option we're going with so flexible.
-
I *really* hope not. by
on 2014-02-19 13:30:00 UTC
Reply
That would completely mess up the Reader's timeline. Well, unless she's a *really* late addition to the Council, which I suppose is also possible...
Hm. Actually, beyond slightly messing with my plans for Kozar and his previous partner (I'd been thinking they'd be partnered for longer), this may work out. But the Reader will probably still be a slightly later addition, unless the Council just took a really long time to get organized, which is already kind of what happened...
Ah well. Enough story plans for one morning--at least, enough thinking aloud about them. Ta for listening.
~DF -
As a semi-regular contributor... by
on 2014-02-14 08:33:00 UTC
Reply
...with a whopping two contributions to the Monitor in the past, I suggest that we follow the third option and only publish when something big happens. It's just better in terms of Real Life: that way, we only need to contribute stuff on an occasional business. Deadlines are my worst enemy.
-
That's option two. Option 3 is no issues. by
on 2014-02-14 08:34:00 UTC
Reply
Yeah though, I'm noticing a trend of nobody really being able/willing to pitch in except Al's Waiter so as much as I'd like to do 1 or 2 and think it's doable with a couple active people, suddenly not sure how feasible it is. :P
-
MM Design by
on 2014-02-10 18:00:00 UTC
Reply
I've been trained in design (that's where I had disappeared to after my MSTing days.) And if the output is PDF, I can typeset it like a magazine. I'm well versed in the bulk of Adobe programs (Ps, Ai, Id, Fl, Dw, Acrobat).
I'm not in fandoms much lately but I do love to typeset. (Wow, that sounded so nerdy. lol)
Give me a shout if you want my help. :)
Al's Waiter
(PS, we should have Ch 5 of Fellowship of the Urn out soon enough) -
Well hello there! by
on 2014-02-11 00:04:00 UTC
Reply
Looks like Lily's already said her piece, and I for one would love to have you aboard! You two can alternate or you can take over if Lily gets too overwhelmed, we can probably hash that out later. If you've got an e-mail I could talk this stuff over with you too.
(With somebody on design stuff, either 1 or 2 are much more feasible if we can get some people actively willing and able to do writing, too. So yay!) -
Ze email by
on 2014-02-11 04:52:00 UTC
Reply
alswaiter@gmail.com
-
Awesome, we'll be in touch. (nm) by
on 2014-02-11 08:22:00 UTC
Reply
-
You and I could alternate in the whole typesetting thing. by
on 2014-02-10 20:44:00 UTC
Reply
I've been outputting it as PDFs, so yeah.
-
Oh! Actually, I have a related question for you. by
on 2014-02-10 18:28:00 UTC
Reply
Right about when I joined the Board, back in 2003, I have vague memories of the first incarnation of the Multiverse Monitor (this being the third). It was an out-of-continuity newsletter-type-thing which included, among other things, a Plotbunny Adoption Centre.
In my admittedly-vague memories, I'm inclined to think you were somehow involved. Do you have any idea what I'm talking about, and if so, do you remember any more details?
hS -
Your vague memory serves you right by
on 2014-02-11 04:26:00 UTC
Reply
I was involved with it. I wrote kinda like editorials in related to writing, fandom related topics, rants and I think I did a Thanksgiving special. It was titled 'Elf Corner'.
I still have the text for those on one of my websites. I had six written:
What's Love Got to Do With It?
Happy Turkey Day
Harry Potter: The Book that Leavened
The Parent Lack
Tinfoil: Not Just for Cooking
The Christmas Commercial
That enough detail for you? -
Fantastic! by
on 2014-02-11 13:09:00 UTC
Reply
(You may imagine that in a Ninth Doctor voice if you choose)
Thank you very much! After all this time, I was beginning to think I'd invented the whole thing.
For my own reference, the editorials AW is referring to are here. They appear to date the original MM to the end of 2003, based on the following:
-The site implies the editorials were originally written for the MM.
-The MM is said to have 'died after only a few weeks'.
-The second-to-last editorial is clearly dated to Thanksgiving, while the first dates to sometime in the Christmas shopping period. This suggests dates in October-November 2003, because...
-The header suggests that at least one editorial may postdate the MM.
-The front page dates the final editorial to Feb 15, 2004.
-That is significantly outside the 'few weeks' suggested by the other text, and thus appears to be the only post-MM editorial.
If someone wants to update the Wiki page, which I think already briefly mentions this version, that would be brilliant.
hS -
"A few weeks" by
on 2014-02-11 16:25:00 UTC
Reply
As apposed to a year or so, it lasted a few weeks. Six editorials for six issues is not very many, though they may have got a few out before I did the editorials. I don't honestly recall. I also seem to remember the last issue took a lot to get out. *shrug*
I have a vague recollection of doing a few things more than just that for the MM, but I don't remember what. I've started getting old and the internet ten years ago seems so far away. Memory isn't what it used to be.
~AW~ -
Fair enough. by
on 2014-02-11 17:02:00 UTC
Reply
Although... wait, you've somehow managed to forget what must have been the most important act of your life - one might even say the pinnacle, nay, the culmination of your very existence - the act of taking part in the creation of the glorious[Citation needed] Multiverse Monitor? Inconceivable!
hS -
Ha! by
on 2014-02-11 19:56:00 UTC
Reply
You have no idea how many big projects I've been a part of in different fandoms. Lord of the Rings/Msting/PPC (I group them because they were during the same time) was just the second phase of my internet/fandom life.
I used to be net famous!
I kinda miss that some days.
~AW~ -
Hmmm... by
on 2014-02-10 10:10:00 UTC
Reply
I've loved reading all the MM and personally, I would go for Option 1. But seeing that it needs a rather big amount of effort to compile one issue, I'd say, go for Option 2. Like Lily said below, you could publish an issue of the establishment of the Time Lord Continuity Council. I'd love to read that. :)
~Autumn -
If it helps... by
on 2014-02-10 10:12:00 UTC
Reply
A bit down the thread I broke down how much effort it would probably need to compile issues. In short: not that massive, but I need people who are willing to be actively involved issue after issue or we're dead in the water.
-
Oh! by
on 2014-02-11 08:59:00 UTC
Reply
Then I think Option 2 would be better then.
Heh heh, I'd actually love to be involved, but I have no Permission, or time, or patience,(mostly) no hardworking-ness to work on it. :( I'm really very lazy.
Heh.
Heh.
I'm still crossing my fingers on that Time Lord Continuity Council issue though!
~Autumn -
I'd love to help... by
on 2014-02-10 07:33:00 UTC
Reply
...but I don't think I can. I don't know Photoshop (I can work with GIMP a little, but I'm not a design mage in any way), and I don't think I could write for the MM, seeing as I don't have permission (not that I'm complaining).
I'd still love to help though.
I generally love the idea though. -
I'm not sure if writing articles requires permission. (nm) by
on 2014-02-10 08:36:00 UTC
Reply
-
If it doesn't... by
on 2014-02-10 23:01:00 UTC
Reply
We should probably have someone designated for those without Permission to run ideas past. It would be sort of similar to how someone without Permission can write a PPC story if they cowrite with someone who does so that the person who does have Permission can catch their mistakes and address or correct problems if necessary. We still need that sort of watch, but it could be altered to fit the Multiverse Monitor's format. One associated editor, separate from your editor-in-chief position, could make sure that the submitted articles make sense, are well-written, fit the Monitor's style, and the like, so that people without Permission wouldn't have to hunt down people who do to cowrite with and the Multiverse Monitor can have a unique solution to the issue more specific to its function.
What no I'm not saying this because I'm planning on writing a few articles in the future and would like to streamline the process what are you talking about. -
I was thinking on doing that, but good idea. by
on 2014-02-10 23:41:00 UTC
Reply
My thought had been I already have experience both as a PPCer and journalist so all that would just come with the territory of me checking everybody's stuff to make sure it's good, but if anyone's interested in stepping up and doing that, they can feel free.
-
*extends general support to the ideas* by
on 2014-02-10 04:13:00 UTC
Reply
I haven't Permission, nor am I likely to get it anytime in the near future, so I probably won't be of any use, but I definitely support the rejuvenation of the MM.
-Aila -
We could also . . . by
on 2014-02-10 03:10:00 UTC
Reply
. . . just compile entries from various people over time, and put them together when there are enough. That way the timing isn't so demanding. We could still do dedicated issues for big events.
The drawback is that the span of time between stories might not make sense in a single monthly issue, but I don't think we need to be that strict, anyway. Perhaps these versions are digests that collect articles from past years' MMs, being red by agents in the future? -
What if... by
on 2014-02-09 18:02:00 UTC
Reply
...the MM got huge issues (that is, the regular size) after newsworthy events, or else a set number of times per year, and became more of a newsletter in other months? As in, it could have one or two articles, plus ads and the rumors/complaints/etc sections--or, y'know, it could be something completely different?
...it occurs to me that I'm actually kind of suggesting that the Multiverse Monitor gets some sort of sub-publication, wherein it becomes more of, well, a rumor mill or tabloid...more than it already is, I mean. It could run brief interviews with new agents, report on the rarely-seen weather of HQ, and talk about upcoming (or ancient) attractions in New Caledonia...I don't know. Feel free to either develop or ignore this, I'm not entirely sure of this idea--especially as-is. Mainly, what I'm trying to suggest is that the MM gets both its full-size issues and a smaller, more limited edition...hm.
What do you think? Is there anything to this, or did I just ramble for two paragraphs without coming up with anything useful? (If it's the latter, I won't be offended; it's a half-baked idea, and I know it! Just wanted to get it out there in case there's something helpful in it...)
~DF -
Hm... by
on 2014-02-09 18:05:00 UTC
Reply
I don't like the idea of altering the nature of the in-continuity MM. But a possibility is doing smaller releases out of continuity except for when events merit making the full one - the understanding would be the full issue is still what's being made and read by the PPC agents, but what we see is different. That's pretty much all that seems to be forming though...
-
Ooh, yes. by
on 2014-02-09 18:09:00 UTC
Reply
It could even reference the articles we aren't seeing (specifically in the comments sections, although also possibly in interviews or articles)...it could work! And that way, once we've got, say, a limit of four or five pieces (articles, interviews, ads or a series of ads, comments section(s)), it could be published...with the understanding that the 'real' issue contains more.
It could work...
~DF -
Let's see what others think, because I'm still unsure. by
on 2014-02-09 18:11:00 UTC
Reply
Once we have an idea of what shape this is all taking we can put heads together and figure out what the heck.
-
Sounds good. (nm) by
on 2014-02-09 18:12:00 UTC
Reply
-
You know I'm all for just releasing things after newsworthy by
on 2014-02-09 16:15:00 UTC
Reply
The establishment of the Time Lord Continuity Council, for instance, is newsworthy and I've been meaning to do something about it.
However, given my style for extreme attention to detail I am not certain if I will have the time to do layout, design, and/or writing all the time, so I am also definitely supportive of the third option.
Regularly monthly options seems tiring on my end. College does that to you, and I'm looking at a writing position on my college's satirical news show, so I wouldn't have much time for MM anyway if I get in. -
We could always divide responsibilities a bit. by
on 2014-02-09 16:21:00 UTC
Reply
Which is to say, you don't really need to take over on everything, we can always hash out organisational stuff for a given issue and I can deal with directing writing and such while leaving layout to you or whomever's around for the times you're not available. I might have a harder time with that now I work for my paper again and am trying to get schooling started back up, but as long as we can get some people actually present and not flaking out it's doable.
Totally get where you're coming from though, which is why I've presented the options as we talked about them in the e-mail. :P -
Well, if we do actual issues, by
on 2014-02-09 16:25:00 UTC
Reply
Then I would be in charge of layout and design while you direct the writing. I mean, we might as well play to our strengths since everyone here is a decent writer to some degree.
-
Pretty much what I said, yeah. :P by
on 2014-02-09 16:27:00 UTC
Reply
My point being like you could take mostly a backseat until that point and I can direct people for actually putting together stories, if it'd work better for you that way. And if all else fails, we can release issues as gdocs until you're available to do design, then update with the laid-out version.
-
If we time it right, by
on 2014-02-09 16:30:00 UTC
Reply
We might be able to make this sync with the production cycle of the Wellesley College TV show thing that I'm applying to. Provided, of course, that I do get in.
They put out an episode every two weeks, and the first week is more writer intensive than the second, so... -
Interesting! by
on 2014-02-09 16:31:00 UTC
Reply
Let's see how much support this gets from other Boarders, but I'd be interested in hashing that out once there's more an idea of which way the wind is blowing.
-
Hm... by
on 2014-02-09 15:51:00 UTC
Reply
What if we made it a bi-monthly thing instead of a monthly thing? It would be a lot of work to make it happen on a monthly basis, and I think if we spaced it across two months that would be easier on everyone. But I don't know. If push comes to shove, the third option doesn't sound too bad, and it could actually help to flesh out the PPC's universe a bit.
Either way, I would love the Monitor to return, so whatever it takes to bring it back would be awesome! -
All three would flesh out the universe. :P by
on 2014-02-09 16:01:00 UTC
Reply
In theory, doing it as a monthly thing isn't that much extra work. We need people on hand and need to figure out a) what to do about content and b) some kind of organised plan to tackle the issue, but my school's paper puts together issues with a similar amount of content every week, and some of the more active people can take on multiple things (I'll probably be doing so). Bi-monthly is /doable/, but my worry is at that point it gets a bit too easy to lose track or forget about - monthly seems to hit that sweet zone of not so often there's no time to get content but not so rarely people drift off.
-
True that. by
on 2014-02-09 16:31:00 UTC
Reply
Yeah, that's a good point. I just worry that the opposite would be true--that a month becomes too much work for everyone--but I guess that's also true that it would be easier to forget stuff.
No matter what, I'll go with whatever you guys go with, but I'd like to see a semi-regular Monitor again. -
Looking at the layout of the two issues that got made... by
on 2014-02-09 16:54:00 UTC
Reply
What it comes out to is a bunch of briefing sections (news, sports, gossip, feedback, want ads, etc.), a few ads to send in, Canon of the Month, Location of the Month, and one to three cover stories, plus the review I added as of the second issue. The briefs are stuff anybody can add to easily, which just leaves a few people who need to be around to cover the features and cover stories plus any editorials, which aren't typically all that lengthy anyway. That means, except for the layout and design, we don't actually have that intensive a schedule or demand on/for staff - we need writers who are going to stick around, who'll get their stuff done, and who won't get burnt out doing it month after month (keep in mind a 500-word article can be churned out over the course of a day pretty easily if you can make some time). I bet a sufficiently dedicated team of maybe five could do it. I suspect we'd still have to have a lot of "fictional" stories, but hey, they'd be just as real as the meta stuff in-universe so who gives a hoot.