Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Adam J <adamj@*********.HTML.COM>
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 05:07:53 -0700
At 00:55 2/6/99 +1100, Stuart M. Willis wrote:

>Furthermore, I hardly have the time on my plate to dedicated myself (and
>just myself) to such a monumental task. I'd would've liked to have done it
>as a more open source/open content style project, because they work very
>well (witness Unix/Linux) - and while they require time to administrate,
>they're not as all consuming as writing many words.

And from what I've seen, don't work very well for RPG net.products.
Witness the lack of action on the NERPS list (or rather, don't, because
things over there are so slow you could subscribe and not see anything for
a week.). Writing via committee when you don't have a pressing need for
what comes out doesn't seem to work well.

An OS is somewhat different -- if Linus buys a new joystick for his
computer and his copy of Linux doesn't recognize it, he's damned sure going
to write a patch for it, and once he does, it's no hassle to make it available.

If the NERPS project was writing about a similar topic that I was writing
about at the moment (Which is GURPS: Pro Wrestling, in another program),
then the NERPS project would benefit more because I would finish it for my
own usage and contribute it. (Note that I'm using NERPS as an example
because it's ATM the only list I'm subscribed to doing a work as a team,
I'm not trying to pick on NERPS.)

Here's a secret that's not a secret anymore. Remember the "Newbies Guide
to Shadowrun" that Bull started up in 1997? I want to get that finished.
And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters and
Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game, stuff
about the game, so it doesn't overlap)

So "ShadowCreations" will be starting up again really soon now. I've talked
to Bull about it, and he's cool with letting me and another person take
over the project.

So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
Slow manner? How should the project be planned? How should authors be
assigned? Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be enforced?

Please post comments to the "new" ShadowRN at Jackpoint.org (Subscribe if
you haven't!), and take note that the new ShadowCreations should be up and
running by the end of this month, if not sooner.

-Adam
--
< http://shadowrun.html.com/tss / adamj@*********.html.com >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / ICQ# 2350330 >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< ShadowFAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/shadowfaq >
< "She pretty much walks around perpetually pissed at Mick." >
< - Kevin Kelly, on professional wrestler Mick Foleys wife Colleen >
Message no. 2
From: Tony Rabiola <rabiola@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 09:45:56 -0600
>Here's a secret that's not a secret anymore. Remember the "Newbies
Guide
>to Shadowrun" that Bull started up in 1997? I want to get that
finished.
>And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for
Gamemasters and
>Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game,
stuff
>about the game, so it doesn't overlap)
>
>So "ShadowCreations" will be starting up again really soon now. I've
talked
>to Bull about it, and he's cool with letting me and another person
take
>over the project.
>
>So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
>Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not
Snail
>Slow manner? How should the project be planned? How should authors
be
>assigned? Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be
enforced?
>
>Please post comments to the "new" ShadowRN at Jackpoint.org
(Subscribe if
>you haven't!), and take note that the new ShadowCreations should be
up and
>running by the end of this month, if not sooner.


I'm looking forward to seeing more about this, Adam.

Tony Rabiola
rabiola@**.netcom.com
Fourth and Sixth World Adept
(still working on the Fifth)
Proud owner BABY #972
Message no. 3
From: "Stuart M. Willis" <hbiki@****.GEOCITIES.COM>
Subject: Re: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 01:49:58 +1100
[I'm cross posting this with the jackpoint.org mailing list as soon as I
sign up :-)]

Adam J <adamj@*********.HTML.COM> doth spewth:
>[I spewth]
>>Furthermore, I hardly have the time on my plate to dedicated myself (and
>>just myself) to such a monumental task. I'd would've liked to have done it
>>as a more open source/open content style project, because they work very
>>well (witness Unix/Linux) - and while they require time to administrate,
>>they're not as all consuming as writing many words.
>
>And from what I've seen, don't work very well for RPG net.products.

I haven't contributed to any RPG net.products, but I have been involved
with (however indirectly) with a few similar kind of collective works:
dangermedia guild for one (which admittedly, does slightly from the time
problem); and various (musical) compilations. One of the latter died in the
arse, because the project leader dissapeared. However, the others have
succeeded quite easily.

Certainly it is somewhat easier when people can send you what they have
already writtem, rather than writing something specific before they send it
to you. However, it can be done if you quite ostensibly set a deadline for
the project and maintain it. If people take your assertion seriously
they'll either work towards the deadline or not even try.

>Witness the lack of action on the NERPS list (or rather, don't, because
>things over there are so slow you could subscribe and not see anything for
>a week.).

I've noticed.

> Writing via committee when you don't have a pressing need for
>what comes out doesn't seem to work well.

The thing, as much as Linux projects are 'committee' based, they are also
very open, as yoiu point out:

>An OS is somewhat different -- if Linus buys a new joystick for his
>computer and his copy of Linux doesn't recognize it, he's damned sure going
>to write a patch for it, and once he does, it's no hassle to make it
>available.

>If the NERPS project was writing about a similar topic that I was writing
>about at the moment (Which is GURPS: Pro Wrestling, in another program),
>then the NERPS project would benefit more because I would finish it for my
>own usage and contribute it. (Note that I'm using NERPS as an example
>because it's ATM the only list I'm subscribed to doing a work as a team,
>I'm not trying to pick on NERPS.)

Exactly. As far as I'm concerned the Shadowrun Archive is pretty much a
damned brilliant open content SR project.

Perhaps you could combine all the articles in net.books for offline
pursual? I'd be more than happy to do that.


>And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters and
>Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game, stuff
>about the game, so it doesn't overlap)

Getting people to start projects is easy, getting them to finish them is
the hard part.

>So "ShadowCreations" will be starting up again really soon now. I've talked
>to Bull about it, and he's cool with letting me and another person take
>over the project.

>So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
>Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
>Slow manner? How should the project be planned? How should authors be
>assigned? Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be enforced?

In regards to planning, I think some form of mailing list should be created
specifically for the project. Interested parties merely join the mailing
list. Planning starts there... fleshing out the details of what needs to be
done. The thing may halt there, though, as people tend to be undecisive and
things like this can never be resolved. In that case, a project leader
(likely you) merely should say 'This is what we are doing, comments can be
sent to me' (beign dictatorship is grand). The comments will then allow the
plan to be slightly altered on reconsideration of the facts. Beign
dictatoship is quicker than any kind of democratic process, but it sucks.

After that, there are a number of directions I think one can take:

1. The first one is a quite-organised-semi-oprganised. You assign specific
authors to a specific task, set a strict deadline, and wait for the final
products to drift in.

(a) You'd probably could make it first-come-first-serve with regards to who
gets to write what;

but a better system

(b) would undoubtedly be a 'tendering' process. People write a short
synopsis/application for their article, and submit it. Everyone one the
list pursues those applications, and everyone on the list is able to vote
for their favourite applications. You need some java code to do such, but
it shan't be hard.. I could probably borrow some from a friend of mine. :-)
Of course, only the most motivated/reliable will be able to write
applications by a set deadline - that way you have a kind of preliminary
culling process.

2. The other would be semi-organised verging on anarchy. No specific
authors are assigned to specific tasks, though I recommend a strict
deadline. You merely wait for finished articles to be sent in. From here
you have two choices:

a) Merely putting them all on line, in some kind of internally-organised
manner, for all to pursue. Yes, this would be somewhat similar to the
Shadowrun Archive, but be dedicated to articles for GM's/Players. Some
things would be covered many times, other things not covered at all. But
one would be offered many choices... which is a good thing. Certainly a
list of 'things we'd like to see written about' could be generated, with
the hope that it may inspire someone to write about a topic. However,
quality is not guaranteed. Which is probably not what you want.

b) Making them available to the list (either this one, or a list created
for the sole purpose of the creation of the net.book) only. The list is
then, like in 1, able to read and vote on those articles. The winning
articles are compiled into the net.book, and the rest are still available
for online pursual for the diehard. Of course, this is likely to annoy
people who put hours and hours in their article only to loose by a hair
margin.

I think 1b is the way to go, despite the fact that I'm a discordian at
heart. :-)

Deadlines should be strictly enforced. Its the only way to get people to
finish something by a certain time.
It is only right to give consideration to those who suddenly have
committments or whatnot that suddenly popup and they can't complete the
project by the deadline... but a deadline will scare off the ones who think
'I may be able to complete it, I may not'.

It's a long process, yes, but its the only way to ensure quality and
timeliness (long process does not mean slow). Voting shoudl be monitored,
but not mandatory. More people than articles will likely vote and, besides,
I believe in people enough to suspect people will vote for the better
application/proposal.

Of course people may become annoyed if they miss out on writing an
article, but it also puts mild pressure on the winning tenderers to
complete their article by the given time.


I think I am too tired. :-)

s.


---
"I can't help it," Michael said with discouragement. "The more I find out
about the practice of law, the more I'm surprised that it isn't illegal".
- Joseph Heller, Closing Time.

whinebox: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/8905/
ICQ: 4340513
Dangermedia Guild Assassin: http://dangermedia.com
---
Message no. 4
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 12:40:17 +0100
According to Adam J, at 5:07 on 6 Feb 99, the word on
the street was...

> And from what I've seen, don't work very well for RPG net.products.
> Witness the lack of action on the NERPS list (or rather, don't, because
> things over there are so slow you could subscribe and not see anything for
> a week.). Writing via committee when you don't have a pressing need for
> what comes out doesn't seem to work well.

It certainly doesn't...

> If the NERPS project was writing about a similar topic that I was writing
> about at the moment (Which is GURPS: Pro Wrestling, in another program),
> then the NERPS project would benefit more because I would finish it for my
> own usage and contribute it.

My guess is that goes for most people, but unfortunately you're not very
likely to find a topic that many people need stuff for, and are willing to
write about as well.

> Here's a secret that's not a secret anymore. Remember the "Newbies Guide
> to Shadowrun" that Bull started up in 1997? I want to get that finished.

I wouldn't mind seeing it finished, either. But I have a feeling that
it'll go the way of NERPS soon -- the list will do a few dozen posts a day
for a while, and then drop to virtually nothing.

> And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters and
> Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game, stuff
> about the game, so it doesn't overlap)

Everything has the potential to overlap with NERPS :) :( :/

> So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
> Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
> Slow manner?

If I did have any concrete ideas, NERPS would DO something...

> How should the project be planned?

I think Bull was doing a pretty good job at that, when the project was
still going.

> How should authors be assigned?

By asking them what they want to write.

> Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be enforced?

Very simply: you can (and probably should) set deadlines, but you can't
enforce them. If I choose to postpone my article for a few weeks past the
deadline, the only thing you can do is mail me about it and harrass me
that way. You can, in extreme cases, say "Submit the article before [date]
or it won't make it into the book," but that's about it. (This, BTW, is
where real game publishers have it easier: "Send it in before [date] or
you'll get paid less" works a lot better for most people.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
If it's no use pretending, then I don't want to know.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 5
From: Adam J adamj@*********.html.com
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 05:07:53 -0700
At 00:55 2/6/99 +1100, Stuart M. Willis wrote:

>Furthermore, I hardly have the time on my plate to dedicated myself (and
>just myself) to such a monumental task. I'd would've liked to have done it
>as a more open source/open content style project, because they work very
>well (witness Unix/Linux) - and while they require time to administrate,
>they're not as all consuming as writing many words.

And from what I've seen, don't work very well for RPG net.products.
Witness the lack of action on the NERPS list (or rather, don't, because
things over there are so slow you could subscribe and not see anything for
a week.). Writing via committee when you don't have a pressing need for
what comes out doesn't seem to work well.

An OS is somewhat different -- if Linus buys a new joystick for his
computer and his copy of Linux doesn't recognize it, he's damned sure going
to write a patch for it, and once he does, it's no hassle to make it available.

If the NERPS project was writing about a similar topic that I was writing
about at the moment (Which is GURPS: Pro Wrestling, in another program),
then the NERPS project would benefit more because I would finish it for my
own usage and contribute it. (Note that I'm using NERPS as an example
because it's ATM the only list I'm subscribed to doing a work as a team,
I'm not trying to pick on NERPS.)

Here's a secret that's not a secret anymore. Remember the "Newbies Guide
to Shadowrun" that Bull started up in 1997? I want to get that finished.
And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters and
Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game, stuff
about the game, so it doesn't overlap)

So "ShadowCreations" will be starting up again really soon now. I've talked
to Bull about it, and he's cool with letting me and another person take
over the project.

So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
Slow manner? How should the project be planned? How should authors be
assigned? Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be enforced?

Please post comments to the "new" ShadowRN at Jackpoint.org (Subscribe if
you haven't!), and take note that the new ShadowCreations should be up and
running by the end of this month, if not sooner.

-Adam
--
< http://shadowrun.html.com/tss / adamj@*********.html.com >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / ICQ# 2350330 >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< ShadowFAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/shadowfaq >
< "She pretty much walks around perpetually pissed at Mick." >
< - Kevin Kelly, on professional wrestler Mick Foleys wife Colleen >
Message no. 6
From: Stuart M. Willis hbiki@****.geocities.com
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 12:44:00 +1100
[I'm cross posting this with the jackpoint.org mailing list as soon as I
sign up :-)]

Adam J <adamj@*********.HTML.COM> doth spewth:
>[I spewth]
>>Furthermore, I hardly have the time on my plate to dedicated myself (and
>>just myself) to such a monumental task. I'd would've liked to have done it
>>as a more open source/open content style project, because they work very
>>well (witness Unix/Linux) - and while they require time to administrate,
>>they're not as all consuming as writing many words.
>
>And from what I've seen, don't work very well for RPG net.products.

I haven't contributed to any RPG net.products, but I have been involved
with (however indirectly) with a few similar kind of collective works:
dangermedia guild for one (which admittedly, does slightly from the time
problem); and various (musical) compilations. One of the latter died in the
arse, because the project leader dissapeared. However, the others have
succeeded quite easily.

Certainly it is somewhat easier when people can send you what they have
already writtem, rather than writing something specific before they send it
to you. However, it can be done if you quite ostensibly set a deadline for
the project and maintain it. If people take your assertion seriously
they'll either work towards the deadline or not even try.

>Witness the lack of action on the NERPS list (or rather, don't, because
>things over there are so slow you could subscribe and not see anything for
>a week.).

I've noticed.

> Writing via committee when you don't have a pressing need for
>what comes out doesn't seem to work well.

The thing, as much as Linux projects are 'committee' based, they are also
very open, as yoiu point out:

>An OS is somewhat different -- if Linus buys a new joystick for his
>computer and his copy of Linux doesn't recognize it, he's damned sure going
>to write a patch for it, and once he does, it's no hassle to make it
>available.

>If the NERPS project was writing about a similar topic that I was writing
>about at the moment (Which is GURPS: Pro Wrestling, in another program),
>then the NERPS project would benefit more because I would finish it for my
>own usage and contribute it. (Note that I'm using NERPS as an example
>because it's ATM the only list I'm subscribed to doing a work as a team,
>I'm not trying to pick on NERPS.)

Exactly. As far as I'm concerned the Shadowrun Archive is pretty much a
damned brilliant open content SR project.

Perhaps you could combine all the articles in net.books for offline
pursual? I'd be more than happy to do that.


>And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters and
>Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game, stuff
>about the game, so it doesn't overlap)

Getting people to start projects is easy, getting them to finish them is
the hard part.

>So "ShadowCreations" will be starting up again really soon now. I've talked
>to Bull about it, and he's cool with letting me and another person take
>over the project.

>So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
>Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
>Slow manner? How should the project be planned? How should authors be
>assigned? Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be enforced?

In regards to planning, I think some form of mailing list should be created
specifically for the project. Interested parties merely join the mailing
list. Planning starts there... fleshing out the details of what needs to be
done. The thing may halt there, though, as people tend to be undecisive and
things like this can never be resolved. In that case, a project leader
(likely you) merely should say 'This is what we are doing, comments can be
sent to me' (beign dictatorship is grand). The comments will then allow the
plan to be slightly altered on reconsideration of the facts. Beign
dictatoship is quicker than any kind of democratic process, but it sucks.

After that, there are a number of directions I think one can take:

1. The first one is a quite-organised-semi-oprganised. You assign specific
authors to a specific task, set a strict deadline, and wait for the final
products to drift in.

(a) You'd probably could make it first-come-first-serve with regards to who
gets to write what;

but a better system

(b) would undoubtedly be a 'tendering' process. People write a short
synopsis/application for their article, and submit it. Everyone one the
list pursues those applications, and everyone on the list is able to vote
for their favourite applications. You need some java code to do such, but
it shan't be hard.. I could probably borrow some from a friend of mine. :-)
Of course, only the most motivated/reliable will be able to write
applications by a set deadline - that way you have a kind of preliminary
culling process.

2. The other would be semi-organised verging on anarchy. No specific
authors are assigned to specific tasks, though I recommend a strict
deadline. You merely wait for finished articles to be sent in. From here
you have two choices:

a) Merely putting them all on line, in some kind of internally-organised
manner, for all to pursue. Yes, this would be somewhat similar to the
Shadowrun Archive, but be dedicated to articles for GM's/Players. Some
things would be covered many times, other things not covered at all. But
one would be offered many choices... which is a good thing. Certainly a
list of 'things we'd like to see written about' could be generated, with
the hope that it may inspire someone to write about a topic. However,
quality is not guaranteed. Which is probably not what you want.

b) Making them available to the list (either this one, or a list created
for the sole purpose of the creation of the net.book) only. The list is
then, like in 1, able to read and vote on those articles. The winning
articles are compiled into the net.book, and the rest are still available
for online pursual for the diehard. Of course, this is likely to annoy
people who put hours and hours in their article only to loose by a hair
margin.

I think 1b is the way to go, despite the fact that I'm a discordian at
heart. :-)

Deadlines should be strictly enforced. Its the only way to get people to
finish something by a certain time.
It is only right to give consideration to those who suddenly have
committments or whatnot that suddenly popup and they can't complete the
project by the deadline... but a deadline will scare off the ones who think
'I may be able to complete it, I may not'.

It's a long process, yes, but its the only way to ensure quality and
timeliness (long process does not mean slow). Voting shoudl be monitored,
but not mandatory. More people than articles will likely vote and, besides,
I believe in people enough to suspect people will vote for the better
application/proposal.

Of course people may become annoyed if they miss out on writing an
article, but it also puts mild pressure on the winning tenderers to
complete their article by the given time.


I think I am too tired. :-)

s.


---
"I can't help it," Michael said with discouragement. "The more I find out
about the practice of law, the more I'm surprised that it isn't illegal".
- Joseph Heller, Closing Time.

whinebox: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/8905/
ICQ: 4340513
Dangermedia Guild Assassin: http://dangermedia.com
---
Message no. 7
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 12:40:17 +0100
According to Adam J, at 5:07 on 6 Feb 99, the word on
the street was...

> And from what I've seen, don't work very well for RPG net.products.
> Witness the lack of action on the NERPS list (or rather, don't, because
> things over there are so slow you could subscribe and not see anything for
> a week.). Writing via committee when you don't have a pressing need for
> what comes out doesn't seem to work well.

It certainly doesn't...

> If the NERPS project was writing about a similar topic that I was writing
> about at the moment (Which is GURPS: Pro Wrestling, in another program),
> then the NERPS project would benefit more because I would finish it for my
> own usage and contribute it.

My guess is that goes for most people, but unfortunately you're not very
likely to find a topic that many people need stuff for, and are willing to
write about as well.

> Here's a secret that's not a secret anymore. Remember the "Newbies Guide
> to Shadowrun" that Bull started up in 1997? I want to get that finished.

I wouldn't mind seeing it finished, either. But I have a feeling that
it'll go the way of NERPS soon -- the list will do a few dozen posts a day
for a while, and then drop to virtually nothing.

> And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters and
> Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game, stuff
> about the game, so it doesn't overlap)

Everything has the potential to overlap with NERPS :) :( :/

> So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
> Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
> Slow manner?

If I did have any concrete ideas, NERPS would DO something...

> How should the project be planned?

I think Bull was doing a pretty good job at that, when the project was
still going.

> How should authors be assigned?

By asking them what they want to write.

> Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be enforced?

Very simply: you can (and probably should) set deadlines, but you can't
enforce them. If I choose to postpone my article for a few weeks past the
deadline, the only thing you can do is mail me about it and harrass me
that way. You can, in extreme cases, say "Submit the article before [date]
or it won't make it into the book," but that's about it. (This, BTW, is
where real game publishers have it easier: "Send it in before [date] or
you'll get paid less" works a lot better for most people.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
If it's no use pretending, then I don't want to know.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 8
From: Adam J adamj@*********.html.com
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Sun, 07 Feb 1999 04:35:37 -0700
At 12:44 2/7/99 +1100, Stuart M. Willis wrote:
>[I'm cross posting this with the jackpoint.org mailing list as soon as I
>sign up :-)]

Thanks :-)

>problem); and various (musical) compilations. One of the latter died in the
>arse, because the project leader dissapeared. However, the others have
>succeeded quite easily.

I assure you I won't dissapear. And if I do, it will be wholly planned and
orchestrated, so I'll leave somebody with the virtual keys. :)

>Certainly it is somewhat easier when people can send you what they have
>already writtem, rather than writing something specific before they send it
>to you. However, it can be done if you quite ostensibly set a deadline for
>the project and maintain it. If people take your assertion seriously
>they'll either work towards the deadline or not even try.

I think that was a big problem with the whole ShadowCreations list before.
The project was cool, everyone jumped on it, and there was a huge lack of
planning. Things went fine until people needed guidance, and then it all
came tumbling down.

>Exactly. As far as I'm concerned the Shadowrun Archive is pretty much a
>damned brilliant open content SR project.
>
>Perhaps you could combine all the articles in net.books for offline
>pursual? I'd be more than happy to do that.

Doubtful. I don't like the idea of using peoples articles without expressed
permission, and most of the stuff on the Archive that's actually hosted on
the Archive is so old it needs updating to the new edition, or it's not so
useful.

Plus, quality is a big factor. The Archive has some really great stuff, and
some really great stinkers.

>1. The first one is a quite-organised-semi-oprganised. You assign specific
>authors to a specific task, set a strict deadline, and wait for the final
>products to drift in.
>
>(a) You'd probably could make it first-come-first-serve with regards to who
>gets to write what;
>
> but a better system
>
>(b) would undoubtedly be a 'tendering' process.

I covered this in my last message, and my feelings haven't changed in 5
minutes :) If two people want to write a similar article, I suggest they
either team up, decide which one could best write the article, or both of
them write it and people vote on which one is best (Or throw them both in
if we need a bigger page count<g>)

>b) Making them available to the list (either this one, or a list created
>for the sole purpose of the creation of the net.book) only. The list is
>then, like in 1, able to read and vote on those articles. The winning
>articles are compiled into the net.book, and the rest are still available
>for online pursual for the diehard. Of course, this is likely to annoy
>people who put hours and hours in their article only to loose by a hair
>margin.

I like this. The best stuff makes it into the final product, and the things
that either didn't fit, were similar to other articles, or had dubious
qualities were put online too, but not as part of the final product.

>I think 1b is the way to go, despite the fact that I'm a discordian at
>heart. :-)

Hail Eris! :)

> Deadlines should be strictly enforced. Its the only way to get people to
>finish something by a certain time.

This is the big problem with net projects -- deadlines slide, often
drastically. And because people Expect deadlines to slide, they don't worry
about it.

>It is only right to give consideration to those who suddenly have
>committments or whatnot that suddenly popup and they can't complete the
>project by the deadline... but a deadline will scare off the ones who think
>'I may be able to complete it, I may not'.

I can understand previous committments, I can understand sudden lifestyle
changes -- heck, I nearly dropped off the face of the earth when I started
working 12 hour days, and even now, 3 weeks after being laid off, I'm still
not back into the swing of things, really.

>It's a long process, yes, but its the only way to ensure quality and
>timeliness (long process does not mean slow). Voting shoudl be monitored,
>but not mandatory. More people than articles will likely vote and, besides,
>I believe in people enough to suspect people will vote for the better
>application/proposal.

I would hope so. One thing I would think is maybe votes from people who
submitted an item are weighed more heavily than those that didn't.

I probably should have waited until sunday night to start this thread, so
it would have gotten more attention, because everyone is away for the
weekend :/

-Adam
--
< http://shadowrun.html.com/tss / adamj@*********.html.com >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / ICQ# 2350330 >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< ShadowFAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/shadowfaq >
< "She pretty much walks around perpetually pissed at Mick." >
< - Kevin Kelly, on professional wrestler Mick Foleys wife Colleen >
Message no. 9
From: Stuart M. Willis hbiki@****.geocities.com
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 22:24:29 +1100
>At 12:44 2/7/99 +1100, Stuart M. Willis wrote:
>I assure you I won't dissapear. And if I do, it will be wholly planned and
>orchestrated, so I'll leave somebody with the virtual keys. :)

That's if you want it *that* heirarchial. In the case of a musical
compilation it needs a project leader, cause someone needs to hold the
physical DATs and CDs and the like.

This project [Casting Shadows - which I like as a title, Shadowcreations,
ReFrag, or whatever we want to call it] will require a project leader to
inspire the masses and keep them in line fersure. However, if well planned,
the project should be able to survive the PL depature, unexpected or not.

In other words, I think there needs to be FTP space which open to all
project members. You can work on editing material offline, on your hard
drive, but if something goes bad [maybe your hard-drive] there are backups
which can be utilised.

I should hopefully be getting my hands on a 2gig backup DAT drive [for
free], maybe even a 10 gig one, so I can happily back up stuff too [on top
of the FTP site] - but the FTP site must be as up-to-date as possible.

As any runner should know, contigency plans are everything.

>>Certainly it is somewhat easier when people can send you what they have
>>already writtem, rather than writing something specific before they send it
>>to you. However, it can be done if you quite ostensibly set a deadline for
>>the project and maintain it. If people take your assertion seriously
>>they'll either work towards the deadline or not even try.
>
>I think that was a big problem with the whole ShadowCreations list before.
>The project was cool, everyone jumped on it, and there was a huge lack of
>planning. Things went fine until people needed guidance, and then it all
>came tumbling down.

Which is why you need team leaders. People charismatic enough to inspire
the troops, and kick their arse when necessary.

Committees suck and all that, but maybe you need some kind of informal
'executive' planners for this? Overseers, if you will.

>>Exactly. As far as I'm concerned the Shadowrun Archive is pretty much a
>>damned brilliant open content SR project.
>>
>>Perhaps you could combine all the articles in net.books for offline
>>pursual? I'd be more than happy to do that.
>
>Doubtful. I don't like the idea of using peoples articles without expressed
>permission, and most of the stuff on the Archive that's actually hosted on
>the Archive is so old it needs updating to the new edition, or it's not so
>useful.

[hits.head] That one is pretty obvious.

>Plus, quality is a big factor. The Archive has some really great stuff, and
>some really great stinkers.

Perhaps a 'Best Of' compilation then? Only including articles where you've
been granted permission. [shrug]

But it is not that important.

>>b) Making them available to the list (either this one, or a list created
>>for the sole purpose of the creation of the net.book) only. The list is
>>then, like in 1, able to read and vote on those articles. The winning
>>articles are compiled into the net.book, and the rest are still available
>>for online pursual for the diehard. Of course, this is likely to annoy
>>people who put hours and hours in their article only to loose by a hair
>>margin.
>
>I like this. The best stuff makes it into the final product, and the things
>that either didn't fit, were similar to other articles, or had dubious
>qualities were put online too, but not as part of the final product.

After some consideration, I realise this is probably the way to go.

Why? Because you need to be able to enforce a deadline. With this method
only articles received by the deadline will be included in the final vote.
You won't have to wait until specific people have written their articles.
That way you can be strict with the deadline, and people will not exploit
yo [generic]. In terms of organisation it is a lot easier too.

Certainly what needs to be written needs to be worked out before hand, even
if just in general terms.

As for putting up the failed-candidates, I think that the html version
[assuming one is created] of the net.book (if not all versions) should
include links to the other articles... either as an appendix to the entire
book, or [which i prefer] at the end of every chapter include a link to the
'other articles' that were in the running for said chapter. That way people
are made quite aware the existence of the articles, and contributors who
didn't get in the final book are still kept relatively happy.

>Hail Eris! :)

Heil Aris! :)

[hmm, i wonder what storm that created?]

>> Deadlines should be strictly enforced. Its the only way to get people to
>>finish something by a certain time.
>
>This is the big problem with net projects -- deadlines slide, often
>drastically. And because people Expect deadlines to slide, they don't worry
>about it.

Exactly, thats why I think 2b is the best option now. You simply make
people aware that there is no way in hell that the deadline will slide.

>>It is only right to give consideration to those who suddenly have
>>committments or whatnot that suddenly popup and they can't complete the
>>project by the deadline... but a deadline will scare off the ones who think
>>'I may be able to complete it, I may not'.
>
>I can understand previous committments, I can understand sudden lifestyle
>changes -- heck, I nearly dropped off the face of the earth when I started
>working 12 hour days, and even now, 3 weeks after being laid off, I'm still
>not back into the swing of things, really.

I think we can all sympathise with that. :-)

This 'personal consideration' is the one thing lacking from 2b. [sigh]
>>It's a long process, yes, but its the only way to ensure quality and

>>timeliness (long process does not mean slow). Voting shoudl be monitored,
>>but not mandatory. More people than articles will likely vote and, besides,
>>I believe in people enough to suspect people will vote for the better
>>application/proposal.
>
>I would hope so. One thing I would think is maybe votes from people who
>submitted an item are weighed more heavily than those that didn't.

I'm not so sure about this... but thats probably more a personal thing that
anything else. But I suppose if you want to encourage people to submit
articles, then this is the way to head... that, and it gives greater
control to those directly contributing to the project. Perhaps only by a
ratio of 2:1 or something. :-)

I think you need to use a preferential system, cause its better. :-)

hmm.

care,
s.



---
"Wait a sec," Case said. "Are you sentient, or not?"
"Well, if feels like I am, kid..."
- William Gibson, Neuromancer.

hi tech. no life.

egoshrine: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/8905/
ICQ: 4340513
Dangermedia Guild Assassin: http://dangermedia.com
---
Message no. 10
From: Ojaste,James [NCR] James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA
Subject: Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-))
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:42:06 -0500
Adam J wrote:
> Here's a secret that's not a secret anymore. Remember the "Newbies Guide
> to Shadowrun" that Bull started up in 1997? I want to get that finished.
> And I want to start and finish MORE -quality- resources for Gamemasters
> and
> Players devoted to the game. (ObNERPSComment: Not stuff for the game,
> stuff
> about the game, so it doesn't overlap)
[snip]
> So now -- who has ideas for making a medium to large project about
> Shadowrun with multiple authors to work in a semi-organized and not Snail
> Slow manner? How should the project be planned? How should authors be
> assigned? Should deadlines be made and how strictly should they be
> enforced?
>
First off, don't build in terms of "issues" - you'll always have some
laggards, the issue won't seem big enough, it'll get put off until
some more stuff comes in... Downhill from there.

A continuous contribution mechanism would be my favourite, but I guess
it depends on exactly what you're trying to achieve. Newbie-type
info will have to be in prose form - easy to read, easy to understand.
It should explain everything they need to know gradually (ie, don't
give them *everything* about Seattle in one place - give them the
big details early on and fill stuff in later if necessary). The
big problem is that newbies don't know what they're looking for - you
need to know what they'll need to know, but don't.

Frequently, when something of interest comes up on the list, the
discussion boils down to a couple of distinct viewpoints (two
alternate mechanics for poison, say). It'd be nice to have both of
those viewpoints represented (obviously, this is more useful for GM
stuff). The shadowtalk format handles that sort of thing well. It's
just a pain to write code for (I guess I'd start by limiting comments
to following only complete paragraphs - you've got to be careful with
the interface, though)...

Which brings up another point - we end up discussing a lot of stuff
on this list that's generally useful. Somebody should be appointed
to comb the list and post stuff (with the author's permission, of
course) that's appropriate to the site.

James Ojaste

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Open Source SR (Was Re: Introduction. :-)), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!