[OOC] Heroes of Beacon - the Next Chapter

[Lugubrious]

Well, screw me then, am I right? If both trusty Kray and the contest winner disagree with my standards (bad standards make a bad judge and make my decisions bad ones) then it's not just one person's malcontent. I mean, forget the idea that I might have preferred those with greater antagonistic force in a story than those with next to none, and that both Grane and Diamond both had shreds of good left in them. Also forget that this RP has been Darker and Edgier since the very beginning. The contest results are now voided; if I get another three hour span free in the next couple of weeks I'll go back and try and sort everything out less 'questionably'. Alternative, someone less questionable could step up to judge the whole contest. Please--be my guest.

@Prince of Seraphs, did you even read the last paragraph in the whole post?

@Kabensaal, when I asked for a post, I specifically mentioned 'effort and intent', both of which your post lacks. If you don't want your character to even leave the room, much less actively interact with the teammate's she's neglected for so long, much much less go on a mission, then the only thing we have to look forward from you is more happy thoughts about Skyra, excuses involving body problems, and Mokuren eventually going and eating someone when she gets hungry only to return to bed. That is not a sufficient affirmation of interest and presence, so I'll be giving the spot you've been occupying for the last age to someone who I know will deliver.

@Princeofhearts, you're called for. Care to introduce yourself?

[Princeofhearts]

Oh o.o Hello there everyone... I have no idea what is going on but I miss this roleplay and if let. I am willing to come back once again, back to the team. Real life got really really busy.

PS. I play Priscilla ^_^

[Krayzikk]

Well, screw me then, am I right? If both trusty Kray and the contest winner disagree with my standards (bad standards make a bad judge and make my decisions bad ones) then it's not just one person's malcontent. I mean, forget the idea that I might have preferred those with greater antagonistic force in a story than those with next to none, and that both Grane and Diamond both had shreds of good left in them. Also forget that this RP has been Darker and Edgier since the very beginning. The contest results are now voided; if I get another three hour span free in the next couple of weeks I'll go back and try and sort everything out less 'questionably'. Alternative, someone less questionable could step up to judge the whole contest. Please--be my guest.

@Lugubrious

Little of that is what I meant; I've said from the very beginning that I would have chosen very similar winners. Napoli and Gratia were both far and away the best entries into the contest, by my standards and yours. Even my third and fourth place winners would have been similar, were I the judge for the contest.

I never said you were a bad judge, either. In fact I never even said anything about your judgement in this contest. I said something because there was clearly a difference in standards between what you intended and what some people interpreted from the contest descriptor. I only started talking about the standards after the fact because, to be perfectly frank, I was irritated. While you had a very clear idea of what constituted a villain or bad guy in your head, it didn't match up with what the literary definitions were. And since the literary ones were the standards I (and I suspect a few others) had been working off of, it seemed as though my entry was within the parameters of the contest.

It isn't a matter of you being a bad judge, it's a matter of a miscommunication in what the standards for the contest were. If you still want to void the results and reconsider, go right ahead. But that outcome was not my intent, nor do I think it's what Onarax was looking for when he agreed with me. We both had been discussing the literary definitions of villain prior to his agreement, so I think he was endorsing my objections to the standards.

Like I said, it isn't anyone's fault. It's a case of something being lost between intent and interpretation. Hence my original feedback on perhaps being able to define things a little more clearly for the future. And in fairness to PoS, Onarax and I both were missing the last paragraph for a little while. I think the coding that would give his name a mention didn't work, so it tends to blend in with the feedback on other entries.

[Write]

Well I talked to Lug about it in PM's and was given the go ahead, can't wait to see everyone's entries for the next contest!

[Kaithas]

Well I talked to Lug about it in PM's and was given the go ahead, can't wait to see everyone's entries for the next contest!

@Write

dammit why you gotta hit me in the feels bro

i just wrote Amy's shattering, now I have to write her death too

[Lugubrious]

<Snipped quote by Lugubrious>

Little of that is what I meant; I've said from the very beginning that I would have chosen very similar winners. Napoli and Gratia were both far and away the best entries into the contest, by my standards and yours. Even my third and fourth place winners would have been similar, were I the judge for the contest.

I never said you were a bad judge, either. In fact I never even said anything about your judgement in this contest. I said something because there was clearly a difference in standards between what you intended and what some people interpreted from the contest descriptor. I only started talking about the standards after the fact because, to be perfectly frank, I was irritated. While you had a very clear idea of what constituted a villain or bad guy in your head, it didn't match up with what the literary definitions were. And since the literary ones were the standards I (and I suspect a few others) had been working off of, it seemed as though my entry was within the parameters of the contest.

It isn't a matter of you being a bad judge, it's a matter of a miscommunication in what the standards for the contest were. If you still want to void the results and reconsider, go right ahead. But that outcome was not my intent, nor do I think it's what Onarax was looking for when he agreed with me. We both had been discussing the literary definitions of villain prior to his agreement, so I think he was endorsing my objections to the standards.

Like I said, it isn't anyone's fault. It's a case of something being lost between intent and interpretation. Hence my original feedback on perhaps being able to define things a little more clearly for the future. And in fairness to PoS, Onarax and I both were missing the last paragraph for a little while. I think the coding that would give his name a mention didn't work, so it tends to blend in with the feedback on other entries.

@Krayzikk

I don't understand how you can maintain that I messed up and miscommunicated my methods but aren't a bad judge because of it, and that the winners wouldn't be any different, and that it's not my fault. If I had better standards and communication, then people would have had a better idea what to expect, and some of the people who I disqualified could have ranked anywhere among the top places. Because of the fault, my results are invalidated. It's like getting mad at people for arriving late to a meeting when it was my watch that was fast.

[Write]

@Kaithas

Cry for me!

[Forsythe]

IFRA, you wanna go be mad at some kohais for having extra work instead of a free weekend?

[Kaithas]

@Kaithas

Cry for me!

@Write

actually that should really be directed at Plank

I'm a heartless, unfeeling bastard a lot of the time XD

[Plank Sinatra]

<Snipped quote by Write>

actually that should really be directed at Plank

I'm a heartless, unfeeling bastard a lot of the time XD

@Kaithas

fuck you fam

[Krayzikk]

<Snipped quote by Krayzikk>

I don't understand how you can maintain that I messed up and miscommunicated my methods but aren't a bad judge because of it, and that the winners wouldn't be any different, and that it's not my fault. If I had better standards and communication, then people would have had a better idea what to expect, and some of the people who I disqualified could have ranked anywhere among the top places. Because of the fault, my results are invalidated. It's like getting mad at people for arriving late to a meeting when it was my watch that was fast.

@Lugubrious

Because what you intended was clear, to you. And clearly a lot of people did understand what you wanted. Some people, who went for something a little different, just misinterpreted the exact parameters. The standards are flawed, but your judging based on them was perfectly fine. It's less that your watch specifically was out of synch, and more that everyone agreed on a time but not everyone's watches were set to the same time. So some people showed up early, some people showed up right on time, and a few people narrowly missed the mark.

A little more clarity for the future would be fantastic. But completely retallying the results (in my opinion) isn't necessary.

[Write]

One question.

Does my entry have to be set in the present day or can it be in the future?

@Kaithas

Again, other than the parameters I have set, any other choice is yours to make. Though I do ask that if you plan on using someone else's character, get their permission prior.

I will say though, this is your canon version of your character in the RP.

@Write

Just in case anyone was thinking similar thoughts.

[Lugubrious]

<Snipped quote by Lugubrious>

Because what you intended was clear, to you. And clearly a lot of people did understand what you wanted. Some people, who went for something a little different, just misinterpreted the exact parameters. The standards are flawed, but your judging based on them was perfectly fine. It's less that your watch specifically was out of synch, and more that everyone agreed on a time but not everyone's watches were set to the same time. So some people showed up early, some people showed up right on time, and a few people narrowly missed the mark.

A little more clarity for the future would be fantastic. But completely retallying the results (in my opinion) isn't necessary.

@Krayzikk

Hm...

Anyone else have an opinion on retallying the results?

[Write]

@Lugubrious

Personally, I'm under the opinion that while miscommunication always sucks for everyone involved, it's best to just put everyone's collective best foot forwards, congratulate the winners, and move on with more contests making sure to be as clear and open to questions as we progress.

[HereComesTheSnow]

Well shit.

Plank if I'm hearing this right, team Jumpercable might finally become a thing.

Welcome aboard, @Princeofhearts!

[Plank Sinatra]

J U M P E R C A B L E

[Onarax]

@Lugubrious

Can't really say much here without being biased now can I?

That said, I do think Kray's original intention was again to simply offer up constructive criticism to allow for more clear standards going forwards, as the definition of what a villain was supposed to be a was a little unclear. I don't think he was asking for a re-tally or anything else of the sort, merely that going forward definitions and stuff can be clear.

Asking for definitions, god you can tell we're debaters. Ay Kray?

[HereComesTheSnow]

J U M P E R C A B L E

@Plank Sinatra

Bitches gonna get supercharged up in this

[Onarax]

<Snipped quote by Plank Sinatra>
Bitches gonna get supercharged up in this

@HereComesTheSnow

Quite a shocking turn of events.

[HereComesTheSnow]

Just had a spark of an idea-- Priscilla's supposed to be missing, right? What if we pulled a pseudo-Bianca and found her stuck in the Distillery mid-mission?

Don't ask me why she's there though, evil kidnappings and shit.