a tl;dr - High casual is in common use. and while it's fun to debate-ify seblantics, the usage is well-understood.
Kestrel said
As a GM you're free to add rules and expectations to your games at pretty much your own wims, as long as it doesn't go below section-standards, which are all more than reasonable.
Animus said Some roleplays in Casual have 'lower' standards where most CS's are Mary Sues, incorrect grammar and punctuation and some posts so short that they're almost impossible to squeeze the word quality in.
Some 'High Casual' roleplays are more detailed with better use of english than some roleplays in advanced.
Animus said
I am not trying to mute you nor damn your opinions. This is a discussion, to which I am pointing our the flaws in your first post.
Animus said that somehow the opinions of some of the people here seem to override the opinions of many others that there is enough space between the standards of Casual and Advanced to fit in 'High Casual'.
Animus said You are currently hellbent on insisting the term is useless because it has no fixed definition.
Animus said I can tell you at least, had all the RPs that had 'high casual' were replaced and put in the Advanced, we would see the standards and segregation of Casual and Advanced be slurred and destroyed. The standards of Casual will be lower and Advanced will be bloody full of RPs with extremely wide quality variance.
Animus said Which you actually might not care for since you're only concerned with the floor. I am simply trying to get you to freaking understand that the floor? Its just the floor. It has little relevance when the median or mean post length is much much much above it.
Animus said Or will you honestly agree that with a majority of the Casual population shift to Advanced because they meet the floor requirements? That this would be ideal because then, it would truely fit these specific standards.
Animus said
My mind hurts. Technically all we've arrived at is that we both have different perceptions of what defines the sections.Which we are both going nowhere with because its like trying to convince a guy who likes the leafy part of vegetables is the best part and not the stalk. Vice versa.-.- well hope we discuss something else one of these daysA discussion that I win, hopefully.
HeySeuss said
I noticed that trying to win a discussion on the internet isn't as rewarding as one thinks. Also, one needs to know when to let it go. ;)But FWIW, I think one of the fundamental rules is never to declare, "I win." It should be evident through the use of logic and evidence who won without having to state it.That's just me and my asshole opinion, though.
Kangaroo said
You mean you don't agree with the old way of wading into arguments to win them and thus mount heads on your wall as a display of great you are?
Mahz said
Blackfire, Hyzhenhok, and I bluffed hard when we wrote the "standards" for Casual and Advanced.We knew we would never enforce them because that's a full-time job. But by using words like "moderated" and "strict", we decided to err on the side of scaring users away and created a mental barrier. Somehow the barrier still stands and Advanced is what it is."High Casual" emerged from users and is just a way of expressing a similar thing but within the Casual subforum -- the largest roleplaying block by design -- and with less of a barrier.The main goal of the entire Free/Casual/Advanced strata was to give a dedicated subforum to the people on the edges of the bell curve (Free and Advanced). Any further subdivision of Casual would have to be entirely user-driven and organic. Hence, High Casual.In the end, the distinctions are far more successful and have lasted far longer than we thought they would. After all, they were never actually moderated.