Discussion on Commenting and Critiquing

[Seraph]

Sometimes I feel like despite the stated intentions of this community that we do not critique each other's settings as much as we should.  Therefore I propose this conversation to determine what is likely to make someone comment on a setting.  I feel having this information available would help the community to establish a better base of actually helping each other and working together.  So, to begin, I'll give a few things that will make me more likely to look at a setting and comment:

1. A well written and exciting introduction that gives a bit of the flavor of the world
2. Members who comment on my setting (You do for me and I'll do for you)
3. Brevity (in chunks of text, seeing small paragraphs makes a setting seem less intimidating, especially for those ADD among us)
4. Not having to search through pages and pages (again, intimidation and ADD factor)

These are some things I've noticed facilitate posting in my mind.  What about you?

[Kindling]

I'd a say a setting which is obviously still in development.

I know the majority of those posted here are, but I think it shows much more with some than others when, rather than being in development as in "not fully written up", a setting is in development as in "not fully thought out"

While it's entirely possible to critique a setting of the first variety, I find it easier, psychologically, to give feedback on the second, because as a creative person, it makes me feel as if I am being involved in the creative process rather than just analysing something that is entirely someone else's.

Not that analysing the work of others is bad, it's just I don't find it quite as satisfying :P


EDIT: I completely forgot to get round to the second point I was going to make, Lol...

Anyhow, as for the the lack of critiquing, perhaps we should come up with some sort of system, whereby the members place their settings "on show" as it were, and one or more of those nominated into that category are chosen by random each week, for everyone to review? Even something as simple as "good work, keep it up" can make the world's creator feel so much better than a complete lack of feedback.

[Seraph]

We used to have a "Setting of the Week" where we (theoretically) did just what you suggest.  The Problem turned out to be that people still wouldn't give feedback.

Something I found to be more successful for getting feedback, at least at WotC, is posting specific elements of the campaign in their own thread.  This gives it focus and draws other demographics of people that might not otherwise be interested.

[Kindling]

Maybe we should make a blood oath to critique more settings then, and if any of us fails without a good excuse, the others hunt them down and kill them. Or not...

[Stargate525]

I've got the problem that I don't enjoy wading through enormous amounts of setting information. Thing is, the more feedback you get, the bigger your setting gets and the less likely you are to get new people to review it.

I really should try harder, I know.

[Kalos Mer]

The idea you mention about hosting different elements of the setting in their own threads is worth trying.  In my latest attempt to put Tasothilos on the CBG forums, I'm taking that approach - one central thread for core discussion of the setting, then a few different threads on 'subtopics' - one that I'm currently working on is Organizations and Societies, another that I've been contemplating is Interesting Locations, another for Personalities, etc.

Each of us (or at least most of us, I would say) have our own particular areas of interest and specialty when it comes to world design.  I myself get instantly drawn in by a setting with a well-highlighted mythology, but I generally start to get distracted a little when reading a discussion of subraces or other things like that.  The multiple-threads approach makes it easier for me both as a setting author and as setting critiquer to focus my attention on those elements that I (a) know something about and (b) enjoy.

I also agree that it's important to have a well-thought-out first post that really tries to 'sell' the setting.  I don't stop reading a thread if the first post is weak, but I read much more actively if after the first post I have a reasonable idea about what the author is trying to achieve and he has managed to make it seem interesting to me.

[Stargate525]

In that note Kalos, that's also one of the things that I don't like about settings. I enjoy reading them straight through, without having to worry if I missed something because I missed a buried hyperlink. Seeing a setting broken up into a wiki, page-happy website, or a host of threads turns me off.

That's why I think it's important that your first post has some sort of table of contents. It helps people navigate easier, and make sure that they don't miss anything.

[Kindling]

I think another thing that could be a factor in why people don't critique as much is that they either see what they percieve as a good setting and think "well, the creator isn't really doing anything wrong, so I don't need to comment" or what they see as a poor setting and think "I'd best not comment, as I'd only hurt the creator's feelings with my negative feedback"

I know this happens with me a lot, at least on a subconscious level.

[Epic Meepo]

The idea you mention about hosting different elements of the setting in their own threads is worth trying.

Back in the olden days when I was still posting info on my setting, that strategy worked well for me. I always got more (and more useful) feedback when I posted one element at a time, as opposed to posting everything in one big chunk. (Though I always included links to other threads, for those who wanted to see the complete picture.)

I also found that people were more likely to respond to poll questions (like "What should I name this race?" or "Would this technology make sense in this setting?" or "Should I have magic work in this way or in that way?").

[Xeviat]

Seraphine, I'll admit that I don't critique settings as much as I should. Every couple of weeks I go on a critiquing spree, but this is usually brought on by my feelings of guilt for not contributing as much in the group I founded.

I do agree that presenting ones settings in separate threads, rather than one master thread, is the best approach. It is the approach I will be taking when I finalize a few more things. My suggestion is to put links to these threads in one's signature, so they can be found without bumping them. I'm also going to make a couple of suggestions to the mods, and see if I can't get a new idea going.

[LordVreeg]

I think that often, the initial attempt to post info on a setting is all stuffed into a thread.  I am incredibly guilty of using my thread as a 'stream-of-consiousness' disaster monologue.

I think that that might be a really good thing to put in the FAQ so that people can learn how to make their posts more accessable, from the start.  I certainly made that mistake in the beginning.  And unfortunately for those averse to reading large chunks, I know my verbose meanderings can be difficult to put together.


As to the critique, I try to
A)  Critique whatever is current for the person who verbally admitted being on my thread.
B)  Write 2 responses for every post I write onto opne of mine.  Keeps me busy.  

BTW, Seraphine, I think this post of yours was very timely and appropriate. Kudos.

[Seraph]

Yeah, I noticed as a casual observation that I personally was not getting much reviewing done, nor was my setting getting much review, and it seemed that this was true of several settings.  I also noticed a relatively large influx of new members lately, so it seemed like an appropriate time for such a discussion.

Stargate also brings up the point that someone might not want to search through the archives to make sure that they did not miss some part of a setting that is in fragments across the Forums.  So I think it is good to have a master thread, but perhaps leave it open to begins with, with maybe just an introduction to begin with if you haven't worked everything out yet, and then open up threads to talk about things and get feedback, then when you have finished up a certain section, add it to your main thread.

[sparkletwist]

My own two cents on what attracts me to a setting are:

- A good mix of flavor text and substance. I'm not talking about crunch vs fluff per se, simply a good balance of encyclopedic-sounding accounts of who, what, where, and so on, and various "in character" accounts (sections from the holy book, various quotes, and so on)

- Linkage and definitions. This is contrary to at least one opinion from above, which I guess just means no one thread will ever satisfy everyone, but I like having a somewhat wiki-ized feel. If there are a lots of new words (or words used in a new way), it's nice to be able to easily get a definition of the word. It's also nice to be able to hop around the concepts, and such things.

- Pretty maps! It's a bit superficial, but a picture is not only worth a thousand words but takes less time to absorb, and it can be nice to be able to get the feel of the lay of the land.

That said, I've enjoyed reading quite a few of the settings here that don't really do any of that, so... it's hard to quantize, really. :)

[Kalos Mer]

I agree with Sparkle about maps.  A nice map (by which I mean one that's pretty clear, not necessarily one that looks 'authentic' or whatever) draws me in pretty well.

[Jharviss]

I'll throw in my two cents on this one, as it's an interesting topic.

Sparkle's right. Whenever I start reading about a new setting I look immediately for a map and it doesn't have to be a good map, just something that's legible and let's me visualize how the world is set up and where its nations are. When there's no map, odds are I don't spend much time there.

I've been reading Urbis most recently, and there's a lot to read through. I have a PDF for my world and it's 90,000 words, so mine's pretty hefty.  His is that and a half.  I love his world, but I don't know where he feels like he wants help (I'm sure I could look that up, but laziness prevails). My world's about the same way -- I have my large PDF, but I don't direct anything.  I've been considering just sitting down and asking for help finalizing my races, and that is something that I could get traffic for.  But when I ask people to critique my PDF nobody is going to respond.

So I think the best way to get responses is to direct everyone's attention, and direct it often.  Then, when people become familiar enough with your setting because you've asked for help on a variety of problems, then you'll get more general critiques.  It really is about feeding them a little at a time.

But that's just my thought.