Temple of Kraden News:
| Greetings, heathen. Perhaps some fortuitous blessing of Kraden's grace hath led you to our humble Temple, or perhaps you are simply curious about this strange and wonderful cult. Should you be willing - and dare to hope - to achieve enlightenment, the door opens before you. Lo! Leave your old life behind! For once you step through, you become something more than just yourself. You become a Kradenette. Are you willing to make the rapturous plunge? Do you have what it takes? One of us! One of us! One of us! Already one of us? Make your presence known: |
| Theme Weeks | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 15 2011, 03:05 PM (8,080 Views) | |
| Momentime | Oct 17 2011, 04:32 PM Post #141 |
|
uh oh
![]()
|
i just defined it for you what else do you need? |
![]() |
|
| Kiki | Oct 17 2011, 04:50 PM Post #142 |
|
Kiki Martius Chantico
![]()
|
XD Unfortunately, I don't think we can pin "mainstream" down to something specific, unless we want to argue about numbers some more. I think we'll just have to use our best judgment with each potential theme week. But we can count on mainstream being: Harry Potter, Disney, Pokemon, etc... Not mainstream would be, say, Haruhi, Touhou, Redwall, etc. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Oct 17 2011, 05:01 PM Post #143 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
Alright, I've caught up on the topic again. Good things have happened. I think Ulta's compromise was a reasonable one. Just for the sake of reiteration and not having to go back pages, here is what he initially suggested, paraphrased:
I don't see much of a point of Rule #3 if Rule #1 is enforced and followed properly, but I'm not averse to it going into the books anyway. In addition, I still think that there should be some sort of Rule #4 which deals with a minimum number required to have a name-change Week. I initially threw out 15 as a number in my last post, which seems to have struck a chord with some individuals. Going much larger risks being inhibitory, but going smaller risks an endless parade of niche Weeks taking up the allotted Weeks allowed. I think if the 3 above Rules are adopted and a Rule #4 is drawn up about number limits for name-change Weeks, there will be less of a need to ask whether or not something is popular enough to be a name-change Week. In any case, I'm glad that we're talking about solutions and ways to enforce them at this point. Ulta's Compromise does not reflect my views perfectly on how Weeks ought to be dealt with, but I think it is an elegant solution to this issue, and I highly recommend its adoption. Also, Simple, I do indeed support and love unofficial avatar-only Weeks. From my perspective, those are truly the best kinds. |
![]() |
|
| UltaFlame | Oct 17 2011, 05:05 PM Post #144 |
![]()
Thanks Poui.
![]()
|
I am saying 20 is too high because that completely excludes anything that isn't pokempn levels of huge at temple. And I am not willing to accept that. I would rather not put a number on it at all. But we're past that point of contention despite your poll favoring leaving things as is. Allow me to turn the question back on you: why is 10 - or 15 as everyone else is suggesting too low for you? |
![]() |
|
| UltaFlame | Oct 17 2011, 05:08 PM Post #145 |
![]()
Thanks Poui.
![]()
|
Would edit but on phone - addy I revised it in a later post perhaps that one would be better if you change 10 ti 15 |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Oct 17 2011, 05:13 PM Post #146 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
I also feel compelled to point out that I literally haven't been to a single forum which allows more name changes than we do. >_> |
![]() |
|
| Peytral | Oct 17 2011, 05:14 PM Post #147 |
![]()
peytral pls
![]()
|
I have! |
![]() |
|
| UltaFlame | Oct 17 2011, 05:15 PM Post #148 |
![]()
Thanks Poui.
![]()
|
Honestly the freedom we have here at temple to that end is one of the things I enjoy most addy |
![]() |
|
| Bane Martius Agni | Oct 17 2011, 05:17 PM Post #149 |
![]()
Archon Agni, of Clan Martius
![]()
|
I prefer liberty over freedom. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Oct 17 2011, 05:22 PM Post #150 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
Yeah, there's just gotta be a line between freedom and chaos, you know? Rules don't exist because leaders like to be dicks. Rules exist because they're necessary to keep stuff in line, or to prevent things from getting out of control. Ulta's compromise up there does a good job and striking a middle-of-the-line approach. It still allows freedom to do crazy shit, but does not let it go unbridled for the sake of those who prefer more stability. |
![]() |
|
| Phoenix7 | Oct 17 2011, 05:24 PM Post #151 |
![]()
Odyssey, ya see~ Odyssey, ya see~
![]()
|
This is the only place I go to where we do forum name changes. I'm planning to suggest Zelda Week at another forum though. Also, I approve of the compromise so far. /o/ |
![]() |
|
| Jenn-uh | Oct 17 2011, 05:25 PM Post #152 |
![]()
hunny bunchkins sugarcube lettuce chamomile sweetie pumpkin schnitzel fries
![]()
|
Ulta - I consider anything mainstream to be of interest to at least 1/5 of the temple population. Pokemon, Disney, Legend of Zelda, Tales of..., Monocles, Cats, and more I can't think of off the top of my head all fit this 1/5-main stream-temple culture. Since these events are limited (and therefore naturally spaced out) I think the temple at large wouldn't mind putting up with name changes. Most small weeks have at least ten participants, so setting the limit to ten isn't going to cut down on name change confusion. Limiting these niche weeks to just avatar changes (surely not such a terrible loss, right?) cuts down on the confusion and still lets smaller groups celebrate their fandom. That said, I agree with Adnarel's revised version of Ulta's proposal, and am willing to accept a minimum of fifteen. |
![]() |
|
| Peytral | Oct 17 2011, 05:31 PM Post #153 |
![]()
peytral pls
![]()
|
Hey, I resent that. My weeks are much more obscure than as to have ten people, thank you very much. >>>>>>>>:U |
![]() |
|
| Hell | Oct 17 2011, 05:32 PM Post #154 |
![]() ![]()
|
Thank GOD I'm not the only one thinking this. It almost seems like people are taking it way to personally about not being included in these little weeks. Just because it can't be appreciated doesn't mean it should automatically be hated. Jeez. Doesn't that seem just a little childish? ... *can't* be appreciated? What am I talking about. Why are we acting like fandoms are top secret knowledge? If it's bothering you so much, take five minutes out of your day to read a plot synopsis. Ask a member why they like the series so much. It's not hard. Furthermore, what exactly is so difficult about enforcing names in titles or gender as opposed to enforcing theme weeks? It probably wouldn't be much of a big deal if rules enforcing weeks were put in place; most of the numbers suggested are honestly pretty reasonable. However, I do think these rules on name changes within theme weeks and the minimum person counts restrict the Temple's fun, spontaneous nature, which is a little sad. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Oct 17 2011, 05:40 PM Post #155 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
Did you go and read my post explaining what we mean when the word "exclusionary" is thrown around? It's the best possible explanation I can muster. It's not as if we think having niche Weeks is rude. It's that we think that Weeks are supposed to be fun for the whole Temple, and niche weeks are not. Therefore, they exclude those not involved. That's just basic semantics. We prefer that Weeks involving name changes include as many people as possible, so that the fun can be spread around. |
![]() |
|
| Hell | Oct 17 2011, 05:41 PM Post #156 |
![]() ![]()
|
I did. It's the kind of "exclusionary" that happens all the time in daily life. Again, I think people are making mountains out of molehills. Edit: And hey, it's not like they're getting in the way of Temple-wide, 'official' theme weeks. |
![]() |
|
| Adnarel | Oct 17 2011, 05:43 PM Post #157 |
![]()
I'd rather be outside.
![]()
|
I went and clarified my previous post just up there while you were posting. Perhaps it will help you understand what I'm trying to get across a bit better. I have italicized the relevant portion. |
![]() |
|
| Hell | Oct 17 2011, 05:56 PM Post #158 |
![]() ![]()
|
Isn't that a similar thing, worded differently? It's "exclusionary" in an admittedly weak sense of the word, and even so, because they are niche they should be banned? Perhaps you may not think is it rude. Why do you want to place rules over the weeks, if they don't offend you? Is it the inconvenience of looking down to a person's title to see their name? If anything, the less people there are, the less noticable the week is. Again, nobody's going to stop a Temple-wide week from happening. |
![]() |
|
| Kula Diamond | Oct 17 2011, 05:59 PM Post #159 |
![]()
atlus tracts
![]()
|
i'm so tempted to spam this topic with bad voice acting you have no idea b7 |
![]() |
|
| simplechild | Oct 17 2011, 06:23 PM Post #160 |
|
My only feel is murder
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Adna did not say that niche Theme Weeks should be banned; he said that these kinds of weeks don't involve enough people and popularity to justify getting people confused and therefore "excluded" about name changes. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Feedback and Suggestions · Next Topic » |






















![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)

3:16 AM Jul 11






