singularityooc | Policy Discussion

Entry tags:

!mod post

Policy Discussion

Some of Singularity's players have questions about the game policies on AU character applications. This post has been put up to allow players to approach the staff to ask questions, offer suggestions, and voice concerns regarding those policies. The moderators are also available via IM/PM [contact information] if any player does not feel comfortable discussing their concerns in public.

As of the end of this application round (August 15th), AU applications will be closed until this matter can be resolved. This ban on AU apps does not apply to the exceptions listed in the AU policies (malleable protagonists and canon AUs).

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'll admit, I've been concerned about the "better off as fanfic" rule for AUs myself. I think it's too subjective to reject an app simply because it's "better off as fanfic." What constitutes 'better off as fanfic', exactly? The criteria aren't really specified.

I just feel as though any AU can be rejected on those grounds. After all, what is roleplaying but a form of collaborative fic writing, really? Furthermore, I think that saying an AU character is better off in fanfic is akin to saying that a canon character is better off in their own show--which sort of defeats the idea of roleplaying them on LJ in the first place.

TL;DR--I don't understand what, exactly this rule is trying to achieve. Explaining the criteria that determine whether or not an AU is "better off as fanfic" would be greatly appreciated! Because as it is, I think it's too vague and any AU could be ruled as 'better as fanfic.'

This is Teal who is too lazy to log out, but

Yeah, basically these are my problems with this rule as well. I feel like it's flimsy justification at best.

+1 over here from me - there are no good guidelines/rules for AUs, and the 'Better As Fanfic' catchall serves as just that - a catchall. If the system needs a catchall like that, then shouldn't the system be fine-tuned in order to fix it so the catchall isn't needed? It's like trying to repair leaky pipes by putting a bucket underneath - sure it catches everything, but it shouldn't be put in place as a permanent solution.

It's like trying to repair leaky pipes by putting a bucket underneath

by putting a bucket

dude

dude

that kind of language just

not in public man seriously

Edited 2011-08-15 03:18 (UTC)

GASP

oh god you're right FFFFF

john we have got to have a talk about your dirty mind man
seriously

OKAY ENOUGH DERAILING SRZ POST

I agree with this. It seems like a very subjective rule that is easily bent around which person of the app team is heading the conversation over a particular AU.

This this this, worded a million times better than I ever could.

In our last mod post we clarified a few things:

http://singularityooc.livejournal.com/175376.html#cutid1

In the "better as a fanfic" section we clarified that AUs that have, quote "more than one or two significant plot or character points have been altered, or which radically alter the setting, tone, or characterization." fall under this rule.

For example, Donut as a Freelancer is okay, as it follows the canon. However, something like Donut in Tex's role wouldn't be acceptable. The latter wouldn't be acceptable because Tex's role requires things that Donut, in the same position, wouldn't do.

If I may interject?

I think what we're looking for is, while that's a decent start, in practice not much changes. Examples are all fine and good, but I think Teal is onto something when AUs need to be judged more on quality to handle characters/prose, and less so of AU content itself. For instance there could be an AU were everyone is essentially the evil twin to their canon. It's a small change but could be justifiable as an AU character - but personalities could be radically different based on this.

Of course, there are some exceptions. Paper thin AU justifications obviously won't fly, but as it stands, the Better As Fanfic catchall doesn't seem like it should stay.

(Lisa/Nathan-mun here in a different journal)

I'm going to steal what Teal said earlier in this post:
"the merits of an AU should be judged on the quality of the prose and the ability of the player to handle a character, not the content of the AU itself."

Using your example, Donut in Tex's role could potentially work depending on how the applicant handles it. Maybe instead of simply swapping one character into a different position, the applicant explores how he copes with a position not suited for him and his personality--maybe he breaks the rules to abide by his own morals, maybe he can't cope and has a breakdown.

Even the most far-fetched basic concepts can be wonderfully executed if the applicant knows their character well enough, but it seems as though right now, these AU apps are being judged by their mere concept and not so much their execution.

^ +1. All of these things.

I agree with all of these things. If the execution is good, shouldn't an AU at least be given fair treatment?

+1 worded way better than mine herp

What if the AU had Donut in Tex's role, resulting in different events since Donut makes different choices?

I understand your point, but I don't think you're looking at the whole picture here. As I've mentioned, AU'd characters should still be recognizable and make the same sorts of choices, as that's what makes them who they are. Swapping around characters and leaving every other thing the same wouldn't make sense, since characters would have to make decisions that wouldn't always make sense for them, but if they did make different decisions based on their personalities, that isn't wrong or out of character. That's what making an AU is all about!

Personally, I don't have a problem with that rule and I think it's meant to address AU concepts that pretty much take the character and turn it into something it really isn't or shouldn't be. Some AU concepts turn a canon character into someone unrecognizable - and really, AUs of a character should still be recognizable as that character, even if their circumstances are different.

Yeah, but the problem is it doesn't really clarify anything. It's so subjective that each mod is going to have a different idea as to what is recognizable and what isn't, and what circumstances make a character too different from canon, what's "good" and what's "bad"

When it comes down to it, all application judgement is subjective. Some people disagree on character characterization when it comes to pure canon characters. Some people disagree on what makes a good original character and what doesn't. Ultimately, the app (and/or) mod team have the final say. Even if we went to a system where the whole game voted on apps, there'd still be subjective interpretation regarding what makes a good AU or doesn't that varied from person to person.

This is essentially how I feel. I mean, the "better as a fanfic" rule is into place because while I think a great writer can definitely make an awesome story out of "what if" scenarios, it gets a lot harder to determine what is IC for the character after that if there are radical changes. It doesn't make the story/scenario bad, but it becomes harder to determine "is this what they would do" and how would it affect possible castmates already in place.

Pretty much this is why the rule is currently in place. We do allow OCs for a reason.

This sounds kind of ridiculous and a more than a little silly, but. A possible example.

Say I wanted to app, for whatever reason, some sort of Jade Harley that was, oh man I can't even make this ridiculous enough -- OKAY say that Jade lived in Japan with two parents who loved her very much and never had a nuclear omnipotent dog or a robotic session-crashing bunny but still played SBURB. Under your rules, this would most likely be a "better as fanfic" idea (and on that, I totally agree for this particularly horrible AU). If I were to change her name and app her in as an OC, changing the name of the game and the lands (possibly even her name), but essentially keeping the story the same -- kids play a game that destroys the world, they fuck it up, they have to Scratch to fix it -- would that be appable?

I know this sounds completely off the wall, but that is kind of what I just got from this conversation.

(no subject)

singularitymods.livejournal.com - 2011-08-15 05:29 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

memorymodus.livejournal.com - 2011-08-15 05:37 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

ecto-biologist.livejournal.com - 2011-08-15 05:10 (UTC) - Expand

+1

barkstabbark - 2011-08-15 05:22 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

totallynotaspaz.livejournal.com - 2011-08-15 05:43 (UTC) - Expand

While I agree that it's a good rule, I also agree that it's very subjective. Which moderator gets to decide when a character is/isn't themselves? I think it's a difference in nature vs. nurture, personally -- if we believe that a character is given a set of traits at the beginning of their lives, those fundamental things should stay the same even if, say, Foxface had been from District 11 instead of District 5. This also applies to other AUs where people take the character and put them in different situations or living experiences. It's the challenge of a good AU to find ways that make their base personality remains the same when the entire setting changes.

Yes, I agree it's very subjective. But I think all application processes are subjective. When it comes down to it, the mods are making a call about whether or not they think a character or concept or player would make a good fit for the game they run. I don't think it's a judgement call on whether the AU is a "good" one, or not.

I think that decision rests with the group supervising apps. As I mentioned, even if we went to a system where the entire game got to throw input into the app process, we'd still have disagreements about what does or doesn't make a good AU. And ultimately, we'd still have to work them out (although in that case, it'd probably simply be by virtue of a majority vote or what have you).

Edited 2011-08-15 05:01 (UTC)

That's true! And I suppose that someone always comes out with the proverbial short end of the stick. It just feels like some of the hesitations that the mods have against AUs are a little too stringent, perhaps even biased against certain types of AU characters. But then again, I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes, so I don't really want to point fingers, just bring it up as a thought.

Oh god the entire game voting on AUs would be positively horrible.

'Any biases that moderators and app team members may have, whether it be regarding types of AUs, particular canons, or particular characters, are left at the door when we process applications. AUs are not judged based on whether we like them or not, but rather whether they will fit into the setting of the game without disrupting current or future players while still remaining recognizable as said character.

(deleted comment)