Tiny Chat People

Tiny Chat People
RE: Tiny Chat People
Further, this thread exists for discussion, yet the bulk of it still appears in the main thread. I can't imagine that makes things very easy for the author, either. Are we at the point where we should ban discussion in the main thread in favor of moving it here, leaving only explicit commands behind? Or is that overkill?
[Image: tN4CQnw.png][Image: 6miAxpY.png][Image: xrt4V73.png]
[Image: LAbvoew.png][Image: kHYNSyp.png][Image: 2xEY8jD.png]
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
I agree, the main thread should be for commands and vetoes only, and from henceforth we should limit ourselves to doing so in one post.

I feel it would also be beneficial if (after the next update, to avoid massive retconjuration of posts made thus far) we limited ourselves to one command and one veto per 'player', for the sake of the sanity of the author and to avoid the clusterfucks we've been creating. In the event that we change our minds, we can simply edit our post and post here that we have changed something.

If we need to get multiple things done at once, this system also encourages us to discuss it here first and collaborate on doing those multiple things, rather than everybody trying to do five different things.

How do others feel about this?
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
yeah, the new official rule is one veto per update, per player

kitet's super fuckin stressed with the way this has been going (re: shitposting in the thread) so yeah, full support here
ever since i made a murder furry universe, gay terrors have been manifesting in my home
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
(09-12-2017, 01:41 AM)Dark Lord Graham Wrote: »I agree, the main thread should be for commands and vetoes only, and from henceforth we should limit ourselves to doing so in one post.

This, I think is a good idea.

(09-12-2017, 01:41 AM)Dark Lord Graham Wrote: »I feel it would also be beneficial if (after the next update, to avoid massive retconjuration of posts made thus far) we limited ourselves to one command and one veto per 'player'

This, I do not. Limiting one post per person already reduces clutter significantly enough, but limiting commands also reduces the reader's ability to support multiple people's ideas at once. Sure, making huge lists of commands has the potential to be problematic, but if I have two very strong opinions on what to do next, but can only "input" one, that reduces my ability to participate significantly. Perhaps a limit like 3-5 would be more reasonable. Not everyone is super hyped about discussion.
[Image: tN4CQnw.png][Image: 6miAxpY.png][Image: xrt4V73.png]
[Image: LAbvoew.png][Image: kHYNSyp.png][Image: 2xEY8jD.png]
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
(09-12-2017, 02:04 AM)Justice Watch Wrote: »
(09-12-2017, 01:41 AM)Dark Lord Graham Wrote: »I feel it would also be beneficial if (after the next update, to avoid massive retconjuration of posts made thus far) we limited ourselves to one command and one veto per 'player'

This, I do not. Limiting one post per person already reduces clutter significantly enough, but limiting commands also reduces the reader's ability to support multiple people's ideas at once. Sure, making huge lists of commands has the potential to be problematic, but if I have two very strong opinions on what to do next, but can only "input" one, that reduces my ability to participate significantly. Perhaps a limit like 3-5 would be more reasonable. Not everyone is super hyped about reading discussion.

My logic is that, with only one veto per player, a person who has decided to cause as much chaos as possible could enter 5 commands to cause chaos, making it difficult to prevent all of them from getting through. When implementing a system, it's important to consider how players can break or abuse that system.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
You can Veto an entire post though? I mean, it is powerful and subjective. You can (and probably should) use it selectively but you can also use it broadly.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
(09-12-2017, 02:12 AM)gloomyMoron Wrote: »You can Veto an entire post though? I mean, it is powerful and subjective. You can (and probably should) use it selectively but you can also use it broadly.

Can we? I've been under the impression that it was a one-for-one veto to command ratio.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
hmmm yeah i'll bring this up to kitet when she's around on whether its per command, good point yall
ever since i made a murder furry universe, gay terrors have been manifesting in my home
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
It is literally voting to ignore the voices in our head. You're ignoring the whole voice. It makes more sense for it to be vetoing an entire post rather than an individual command, honestly. It also means people are less likely to use Vetoes frivolously, which is a thing I'm noticing. >.>
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
we'll see how it goes, a lot goes into making these decisions and we'll do our best to make the right one for the adventure
ever since i made a murder furry universe, gay terrors have been manifesting in my home
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
The other thing to consider is, we're technically a character in the story. Things like imposing command limits and democratic vote (and readers disobeying those) is part of how frog-crimes behaves as a collective, for better or for worse. As the god to end all gods, Kitet can impose whatever rules she wants, but the chaos that ensues in the absence of rules is not without value to the story.
[Image: tN4CQnw.png][Image: 6miAxpY.png][Image: xrt4V73.png]
[Image: LAbvoew.png][Image: kHYNSyp.png][Image: 2xEY8jD.png]
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
(09-12-2017, 02:59 AM)Justice Watch Wrote: »The other thing to consider is, we're technically a character in the story. Things like imposing command limits and democratic vote (and readers disobeying those) is part of how frog-crimes behaves as a collective, for better or for worse. As the god to end all gods, Kitet can impose whatever rules she wants, but the chaos that ensues in the absence of rules is not without value to the story.

Likewise, if we can manage to self-regulate, that represents substantial character growth. Almost like the character has actually learned something resembling self-control, rather than playing lip service to the idea of redemption.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
Yoooo that's lit
[Image: tN4CQnw.png][Image: 6miAxpY.png][Image: xrt4V73.png]
[Image: LAbvoew.png][Image: kHYNSyp.png][Image: 2xEY8jD.png]
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
One other thing to consider is that I was entirely unaware the discussion thread existed until it was already on page 4 or so. It's possible, even likely, that some of the newer players or even some older ones don't know it's here.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
I have created a revision of the proposed letter, taking tronn and chwoka's concerns into account. I would like further input on its suitability for distribution.

Letter to Windy and Fennel Wrote:Dearest Windy and Fennel,

We, Frog-Crimes, regret to inform you that Fernando will not be returning home. She has chosen to leave our team. You have a right to know why. We are terribly sorry for what happened, as it was a direct consequence of our poor decision-making as of late. Our inexperience led to fear of the dangers that could lurk in the unknown. As such, we attempted to train and even manipulate the three of you in a misguided attempt to make you stronger. We sent a weak, but hostile creature into the maze, forcing Fernando to kill it. One among us felt it would teach her the dangers of the world, not realizing the hypocrisy.

[TEACH Windy and Fennel: Hypocrisy]

I know we're difficult to deal with, but we still intend to do our best to keep you safe as long as you are here with us. And we will still do so, even if you choose to leave with Fernando.

There should be a new TCP outside. Please greet them, and help them acclimate to existence.

We'll be making you a cardboard box so you can clean out Fernando's stuff. The Frog Mailman can deliver it to her, as is only fair. Our mistakes should not deprive her of the things that were meant for her.

We are also creating communicators, one of which will be sent to Fernando along with her things. We will have no access to these. They are for her to stay in touch with you; despite everything we've done, she bears you no ill will. Is there anything you would like us to create for you?

Frog-Crimes
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
I like this version better!
Vivian Quest
Tale of a small lizard, crime, and weird biology!
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
Alright so let me slide forth a proposal:

We're chasing our tails here in regards to trying to push our values and concepts onto the cats. We can all plainly see that. This as an experiment for those who consider it an experiment was a massive failure.

What I believe we should do after admitting to donking things up in the name of control and for some of us admittedly overprotection, is start looking in places other than our cats for things to try out. We went from 0 to 11 in regards to god killing implements, but that doesn't mean we can't experiment and find out what items we CAN make and the practical applications in-game.

We're paranoid about other dangers and we probably should be, but to be frank our R&D department sucks right now and we have a bunch of junk at our base but nothing of substance.

Also a small addendum: lets agree to communicate to our new cat whoever they be that we're about to give them some gifts of knowledge and items before we do so, so they're a bit more prepared for the experience.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
(09-12-2017, 02:55 PM)Gen Wrote: »Also a small addendum: lets agree to communicate to our new cat whoever they be that we're about to give them some gifts of knowledge and items before we do so, so they're a bit more prepared for the experience.

It would also be beneficial not to overwhelm them, as has been done in the past.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
Maybe let our current TCPs decide what to teach to the newcomer?
Vivian Quest
Tale of a small lizard, crime, and weird biology!
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
(09-12-2017, 06:17 PM)tronn Wrote: »Maybe let our current TCPs decide what to teach to the newcomer?

This was also an option I considered including in the letter. I believe Windy knows how to TEACH?
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
I agree with the revision to the letter, the issues that tronn pointed out are addressed.

But in my defense, I wasn't a part of the collective when there was still time to preserve our relationship with Fernando, hence my statement about there being "nothing we could do" and my not acknowledging the mind games played with Fernando. Because I couldn't do anything, the damage was already done.
I have only tried to assuage Fernando and be affectionate to Windy and Fennel since joining.
That is not how I meant it. I never said Fernando is gone, Windy and Fennel are welcome to go see her. I even provided an opportunity to do so in the form of the box of her stuff. I do not see how it is callous to want her to have her own possessions.


In regards to the new spawn slot - I agree with the Food-type as an avenue to taking better care of our TCPs but I feel something like a Doctor-type would be better. Food-TCPs have to lose health/mass by being eaten to heal others. A doctor-type would probably have like healing powers or something. I just feel like it's much quicker.

Though I find the idea of an internet-type or feather-type super appealing.
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
Is there some kind of internet-capable food we could suggest or is that too outlandish
I like soup though because it's a liquid
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
That's right we gave our little cat a diploma that certifies them to teach in this land.

Cat welcoming party is probs a good way to start
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
I think maybe we should limit the number of suggestions that are taken to the top three (one for each head) so updates don't become too overwhelming and cacophonous

i'm okay with delaying internet type if we do soup, and the soup tcp has a family friendly chicken soup for the soul aesthetic

an alternate way to choose though would be:
>teach windy and fennel love
>teach them parenting
>ask them what kind of tcp they want us to make for them
[Image: RjvYOd.png]
Quote
RE: Tiny Chat People
I think that's not necessarily an awful idea but also that maybe typecasting a new tcp as their kid might be something that the subject might not approve of.
They're a blank slate, but they don't seem to go through any actual sort of childhood state. Even with good intentions it might feel kind of patronising.

Asking the other TCPs what new one to make could be interesting but I don't know if they have like, the imagination? We know about a lot more things than they do, they mostly only know things we have shown them.
Quote