Setting of the Week:

Xathan · January 13, 2007, 02:17:42 PM

[note]This thread is made with the assumption that there is some intention by the staff here at renewing the idea of the Setting of the Week. If the intent was to close the idea permanently, I fully understand, and I ask the moderators to simply lock this thread.[/note]
I think we should reopen the idea of the setting of the week. I'm not asking that we reinstate it: I'm merely asking us to look at what it was, why and failed, and how we could implement a similar idea in the futher.

Obviously, the failure was due to a lack of reviews. That goes without saying. However, the question I'm asking the community is "why" - why didn't you review the setting of the week. (This is not accusatory. I'm as guilty as everyone else on this count. It's just that we can speculate all we like on why people didn't post, but the only thing you can really know for certian is why you yourself didn't post.) And, also, what would make you, personally, review the setting of the week?

For me, the problem was sheer lazyness. I kept thinking "I'll do it tomorrow..." but then tomorrow came, and it was the next week.

A possible incentive for furtue settings of the weeks would be that, to be in the rolling for next week, you have to review the pervious week's setting.

Those are just some basic ideas. I'd love to hear everyones thoughts: why didn't you personally post, and what would make you personally want to review? Or, if you did post, why did you make the extra effort to? What drew you to it?

Stargate525 · January 13, 2007, 02:24:09 PM

I like the idea of not being in the list until you come up with a review, but that might just lead to posts that are just 'yeah it's great' or similar without any real substance.

Personally, I didn't review because very little of I saw peaked my interest enough to read through them and review. I think the problem was worse when the description blurb ran on past the area, and you had to click a link anyway just to see it all.

Ishmayl-Retired · January 13, 2007, 02:24:28 PM

I'll not jump in on this subject for the time being, because it's still a touchy subject for me personally. However, I just wanted to say I fully support you starting this discussion, and hopefully something good comes of it. I'll be watching.

Kalos Mer · January 13, 2007, 02:31:51 PM

I think that the idea you propose about mandating that you review the previous week's setting to have your setting in the running for the next week is a fine one. Of course some of those reviews may be of the 'Yeah it's great' variety, but inevitably some will not be.

I'm not sure whether this was implemented in the old Setting of the Week feature, (I wasn't around for most of that 'era' of the Guild), but what if the person who won had to list particular questions or areas he wanted feedback on (either because he was particularly proud of some feature or because he was at a creative impasse)? This would, at least, give potential reviewers a place to start.

Stargate525 · January 13, 2007, 02:55:37 PM

Quote from: Kalos MerI'm not sure whether this was implemented in the old Setting of the Week feature, (I wasn't around for most of that 'era' of the Guild), but what if the person who won had to list particular questions or areas he wanted feedback on (either because he was particularly proud of some feature or because he was at a creative impasse)? This would, at least, give potential reviewers a place to start.

I like that idea. If I might add to it, I think that the next week's setting should be the one of the person who answered the questions most throughly.

Kalos Mer · January 13, 2007, 02:58:19 PM

But how would that be judged? Would the first of the new "campaign settings of the week" be selected at random, and after that the 'successor' would be selected by the previous CSotW holder? Or would it be judged by the mods?

Stargate525 · January 13, 2007, 03:05:59 PM

Quote from: Kalos MerBut how would that be judged? Would the first of the new "campaign settings of the week" be selected at random, and after that the 'successor' would be selected by the previous CSotW holder? Or would it be judged by the mods?

I'd say by whoever's campaign is the current one.

I'm just thinking out loud here, mind you. This could be completely ridiculous.

Matt Larkin (author) · January 13, 2007, 04:23:01 PM

Quote from: Kalos MerI'm not sure whether this was implemented in the old Setting of the Week feature, (I wasn't around for most of that 'era' of the Guild), but what if the person who won had to list particular questions or areas he wanted feedback on (either because he was particularly proud of some feature or because he was at a creative impasse)? This would, at least, give potential reviewers a place to start.

Actually, that's very similar to a proposal Ishy did implement - that the setting writer should specify what he wanted reviewed.

I think one reason the Setting of the Week didn't do as well as we wanted was because of flucuations in the amount of time people have. It's like the site. Some weeks it sees lots of activity. Other weeks, people are caught up in work, school, or real life. About the time we dropped it, the site was quieter (IMO) than it is now. I had been trying to review each setting, but often I didn't get to one until the following week. And once you fall behind, you're left with either staying behind, or just skipping one...

But now that I have more time, I find I miss it, or that I'm sometimes filtering through the Homebrews to see if anything looks new or catchy to review. Could be we re-impliment the SotW and find out everyone is getting busy again. Maybe it's one of those things where a setting should only be featured during summer weeks (since many members are in high school or college; even those of us who aren't may have more time during those months). Or maybe a setting should be featured until it has had several reviews (minimum 1 week, but longer if necessary; maximum 3 weeks).

Or another idea would be to have a list of featured settings. These could be settings submitted by members they are currently working on and want feedback from. These settings should be removed from the list if the author is not currently working on them, has no new material for review, or otherwise hasn't updated in a while. So that it doesn't just turn into a list of the Homebrew's forum, an author should only submit something when he has moved beyond a certain developmental stage (i.e. more than conceptual, more than just cool ideas). That would give everyone a recent list (as a sidebar) of current settings, when they are looking for something to review. Maybe the list could even display the last time the author updated the setting.

Endless_Helix · January 13, 2007, 09:15:08 PM

A quick little thought I had was that one of the traits of this forum is the quality of the writing and the tendency for long, erudite posts; this is great normally, but in this case it can be somewhat off-putting. Perhaps having the comments right under the little setting of the week blurb would be useful? Kind of like the polls? I mean, while the four-page long reviews are great, most of us don't have the time to write those consistently.

Ishmayl-Retired · January 13, 2007, 10:01:28 PM

Actually, if you will check the Showcase Archives, you will see that under each "blurb" (or article, as I like to call them), there is an option for posting comments. Some people took advantage of it (mostly Cymro, who unfortunately, doesn't come around anymore), but it was mostly an ignored option.

Túrin · January 15, 2007, 08:28:58 AM

Just checking in that the Showcase Archives is quite an awesome page, giving a nice overview of some of the CBG's most famous settings, including many of the "classics": Red Valor, Jade Stage, Xiluh, Sleep and a couple of Xathan's. ;) Even if the SotW is restarted, this page should stay.

Túrin [/off-topic]

Hibou · January 15, 2007, 09:03:59 AM

What about just having the setting of the week appear in the CBGuide, and not on the front page of the site as it used to be?

Matt Larkin (author) · January 15, 2007, 09:24:14 AM

You just the description (teaser) for the SotW? I assume you weren't talking about putting the entire setting in there? While it would go well with the idea of continuing interviews, I think having it on the site will get get more members to see it more often.

I'd guess not all members read the guide, and those of us that do probably do not read as many times as we visit the site in a week.

Still, a highlight in the mag might also encourage reviews.

Hibou · January 15, 2007, 10:22:42 AM

Well, I mean just having the teaser and maybe an interview with the author of the setting asking some key questions for people's understanding of the setting. Then if people see it in there and like it, they'll come to the website and read up on it more fully, and if not they're not left feeling so guilty from not being able to review the one that was posted on the site each week.

Kalos Mer · January 15, 2007, 01:18:17 PM

I do think that some sort of crossover with the Guide could help the Setting of the Week, but the Guide isn't weekly - wouldn't that compel us to slow the pace to "Setting of the Month?"

Another thought I had on how to generate more reviews (and stop me if this has already been proposed or is already an implicit assumption) - but what if groups that PbP together have some kind of mutual-reviewing agreement amongst them?

The Campaign Builder's Guild

News:

Setting of the Week:

Xathan

Stargate525

Ishmayl-Retired

Kalos Mer

Stargate525

Kalos Mer

Stargate525

Matt Larkin (author)

Endless_Helix

Ishmayl-Retired

Túrin

Hibou

Matt Larkin (author)

Hibou

Kalos Mer