🌟 [The Future of C&C] Part 3 - New Rules [Rough Draft]

ModEchoing··14 votes·1,527 views

Good day to you, fellow summoners and conceptors!

Based on some of the feedback we've gotten from the previous thread, along with our own personal musings and observations of common patterns, we've gone and whipped up a rough draft of a new set of rules. Ideally, they should be able to replace the rather vague culture blurb under Guidelines at the bottom-left of the screen. We're showing you this draft to give you an idea of what's on our minds and get an idea of what's on your minds regarding acceptable RULES OF NATURE guidelines for this board.


#1. Follow the Universal Rules. Read them. Abide by them. Accept no substitutes.

#2. Be polite and respectful. Critique constructively. We’re a community first and foremost. Treat each other with respect. If you dislike someone’s content, be polite in voicing that opinion, and consider providing a friendly and constructive critique. If you disagree with someone’s opinion of your work be respectful in how you respond. #3. Foster creativity, learning, and discussion. No one likes getting their work torn apart. Creativity has value, and everyone starts somewhere. Be aware of opportunities to encourage creativity, to suggest avenues of exploration and improvement, to engage in meaningful discussion, to teach, and – perhaps most importantly – to have your views challenged and learn from those challenges. Remember that no one is ever beyond improvement. #4. Post content with value. Threads should either showcase a full or partial creative work, or invite discussion on creative works or creative processes. Concept threads that merely name an idea without at least some exploration of how idea could be designed or implemented may be subject to removal.

For example, “We should have a new Master Yi skin!” doesn’t really contribute much value. "We should have Power Ranger Master Yi!" with a picture of a power ranger for reference is better, but we’d encourage still more. Expand upon it! Maybe his sword should glow red! Maybe his ultimate transforms his outfit! Maybe his recall animation is a digital-themed teleport! Does he have any unique particles? These little things help make your post better, help to sell your concept when you pitch an idea to the community, and offer more starting points for interesting discussion.

Alternatively, “Let’s brainstorm ideas for a new Master Yi” skin followed by a few descriptive examples of your thoughts is a fantastic thread. It sets the direction of the discussion, gives some concepts to discuss as a starting point, and opens the door to community involvement and interaction.

#5. Reach out. Participate. This is less of a rule and more of a request. Expand your horizons. View and discuss content you aren’t normally familiar with. Be an active part of the community and explore beyond your own creations.

We actively encourage trading critique and sharing your own content – with one criterion. If you’re posting links to your own work on someone else’s thread, make sure your post contains some meaningful feedback or contribution. No one likes seeing something as simple as “Looks good. Please look at my creation.”

Remember, this is a rough draft! We're eager to hear your thoughts! The Archivists are here to help you enjoy yourselves and facilitate creativity, and we need your support and feedback to make that work.

25 Comments

ModThe Djinn6 votes

Speaking for myself, I'm gonna specifically ask the following three questions:

  1. Are these rules clear and easily understood?
  2. Do these rules help the community, or are there places they are too restrictive or too lax?
  3. Are we missing any rules we should have, or do we have any we shouldn't?

All other feedback is totally welcome, of course!

Candurill1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=HUaVKQ4E,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-06-25T22:37:16.146+0000)

They seem good enough. They are clear (to me at least) and pretty easy to understand. I do think that either 2 and 3 or 3 and 5 can be grouped together into one, since 3 is in part the same as both. Although, maybe having it as a separate rule will hammer the idea into someone's head XD Other then that, good rules, nice and clear, great job.

DrCyanide1 votes

What's not clear is how this effects videos of gameplay that aren't focused on highlighting bugs or balance issues.

Last time I posted a video of Gameplay I thought was funny (only one person on the enemy team defending a push from Top outer turret to Nexus exploding), it was removed from Memes and Games and I was instructed to post it here. These rules make it look like such a video would be unwelcome here as well, which leaves me asking "where does it go then?"

Fancyanceypants1 votes

If I remember correctly, the (maybe-not-so) near future of C&C and the Archivists might include creating a separate board for video content.

ModCaptainMĂĄrvelous1 votes

Indeed! One of the main plans is to separate videos/streams from fan art/fiction/etc.

Doctor Fail3 votes

Rule number 4 is not a good rule. It is awfully subjective and as such can risk causing constant friction between people who perceive thread value differently, while giving very little to no casually noticeable payoff in return.

To elaborate, using your "bad topic" example: "We should have a new master yi skin!". Such a thread technically IS an invitation to brainstorm new master yi skins in an open door community interaction. It is at its root undeniably an invitation to talk about the idea of concepts, so where else would it go if not in concepts? The rule writer, obviously, does not see such threads as being of value. However, since it technically adheres to all but one of his/her listed criteria, other people are going to feel it belongs. Sometimes a topic creator simply wants to fish for ideas and have an in the moment discussion on what would be cool without necessarily having a direct pre-emptive, and there really isn't anything wrong or harmful with that as long as they arn't massively overrunning everything else to massive detriment. As of right now they are not, and with the upcoming board split they won't be sharing space with as many other things and as such will probably be even less in the way of "serious" and "professional" topics.

While I wouldn't ever create or perhaps even actively participate in such a topic as it isn't my cup of tea, I feel the need to bring this up simply because there just isn't much gain here and the rule feels put in place mostly because the current wardens have a strong and obvious list towards the super serious concept creations, rather than the more casual. Do not take that as a negative trait, as it's not meant as one. It isn't necessarily good or bad. It just exists.

In addition, if you need three paragraphs to clarify on a single rule then it probably isn't intuitive enough to be a good strong public forum rule.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Doctor Fail,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=HUaVKQ4E,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-06-25T23:25:25.085+0000)...and the rule feels put in place mostly because the current wardens have a strong and obvious list towards the super serious concept creations, rather than the more casual....

Your post has a lot of merit to it, and I appreciate the comments. I want to address this point though, because we've actively put a lot of thought into NOT only tailoring the boards to serious concept creators -- just ask Echoing about our discussions on topics like the CCOS and how we could make it more welcoming to new or more casual champion creators, for example. Speaking purely for myself here -- I actually think there's not enough support for new creators and amateur artists here, and I'd like to improve on their experience.

We would like to cut down on threads that don't result in discussions or engagement of any sort though, which was the idea behind the rule. Casual posting is something we're totally on board with, but it seems, from board interaction trends, that threads without meaningful content just sit around occupying space and drawing no comments. I think there's a difference between "casual" and "low effort," if that makes sense?

The problem emerges less from the "this is inherently a problem" and more from statements like "While I wouldn't ever create or perhaps even actively participate in such a topic as it isn't my cup of tea." From what we've seen, the community in general agrees with this. Does a thread have value to a community if no one wants to interact with threads of that sort? I'm unsure, and hence the proposal.

It's probably the most controversial rule up there, definitely. Your thoughts on other ways to address this are appreciated. Is there a line somewhere? Is a thread titled "We need a Farmer Nasus skin" and containing the content "Riot make this happen" the sort of thread we want to say belongs here? I legitimately am unsure. I feel there's a point where it becomes spam -- or, at least, a thread better posted on another board.

For reference, this thread is a brilliant example of the sort of "I have an idea" that's casually posted AND has a lot of value, in my mind.

Doctor Fail2 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=HUaVKQ4E,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2017-06-25T23:49:04.677+0000)

Your post has a lot of merit to it, and I appreciate the comments. I want to address this point though, because we've actively put a lot of thought into NOT only tailoring the boards to serious concepts -- just ask Echoing about our discussions on topics like the CCOS and how we could make it more welcoming to new champion creators, for example.

Make no mistake. My intent is not to accuse the warden team of not trying to be universal or anything like that. I am well aware that thought is being put in. My comment's purpose was simply to point out that the current warden team, as seen through the forum interactions so far, is naturally inclined more towards one side of concepts than it is the other. Think of it as the most baseline idea of a two party system. One party is more inclined towards certain behaviors and values than other party, but both want success of the project as a whole. Currently I would say all of the current warden team is of the same basic "party". Nothing more, nothing less.

It's probably the most controversial rule up there, definitely. Your thoughts on other ways to address this are appreciated. Is there a line somewhere? Is a thread titled "We need a Farmer Nasus skin" and containing the content "Riot make this happen" the sort of thread we want to say belongs here? I legitimately am unsure.

I would not only say that it belongs here, but I would also say that it could not possibly belong anywhere else. Even though it is the most absolute casual non-commital discussion one could broach on the subject, it is still a broached discussion on the subject. In addition, if absolutely nobody valued the idea of such topics, they would not continue to get posted.


However, for further discussion let's assume for a moment that such a thread has absolutely no value to the community or anybody in it, but still gets posted repeatedly anyway.

Even in this situation, the ideal grounds for rule 4s existence, there is still no real gain for rule 4. It is, at best, extraneous.

Because of the way the forum works, at least with its default settings, any topic with no value will sink of their own accord without dispute, drama, or hassle. Because of this, the only topics that have managed to be at all invasive (in my experience) are ones intentionally designed to be invasive, such as:

"AP GANGPLANK OP?! | ECHOING THICC! | THE DJINN SAYS CONCEPT USERS ARE RUINING HIS LIFE?! | DR. FAIL IS_ A LITERAL BUTT_!?"

But because very few topics have that kind of invasive title, a completely innocent "worthless" topic will sink itself with no work or drama and minimal distraction, whereas if a mod team goes in and removes the post under the guise "Breaks rule 4: Is not of value" then they are opening a needless can of worms. Firstly because rule 4 is by nature subjective and will never mean exactly the same thing to ten out of ten people, and secondly because you just told new forum user John Wick that the innocent thread he was looking forward to discussing concerning a new skin for his favorite champion doesn't have enough value to exist and now he's pissed and is coming after your dog. While doing so it is inevitable that he is both creating pressure on the mods and is at the same time pushing himself away from any sense of community he could have on the forums. Both of which are a losing condition to all parties involved.

EDIT: I think you edited your post while I was creating mine. Give me a moment to make sure everything still checks out.

EDIT 2:

Sure, that thread is a brilliant example of the absolute top end of such threads, but it is not particularly casual and will never be the norm for that type of topic. Its barely-casual nature also means it isn't something that other topics should be held to. It goes more in depth about an idea from the very start, but honestly doesn't do notably more in terms of discussion attempt than a thread that is much more representative of the middle to upper-middle line such as this thread despite the second thread being much, much more loose. Some people would say the thread you posted has value to the boards where this one does not (inaccurate, in my opinion), and that is at root one of the biggest issues with rule 4.

I am not going to link to any "low" threads because I'm not going to offend someone by linking their thread in such a way, but I will also say that I have seen "FARMER NASUS WE NEED THIS, RIOT PLEASE" skin threads gain more in terms of voice than threads closer to the one you linked.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Doctor Fail,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=HUaVKQ4E,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2017-06-26T00:22:35.367+0000)-snip-

Excellent thoughts, and precisely why we posted this. I really appreciate the feedback. I think most of what you've mentioned here is an excellent point, and it's possible I'm mistaken with what I feel a casual post is. I'll make sure all of us on the Archivist team have read this.

On the other hand, I'm glad that the "we're not sure of this one" rule has been, so far, the only one with significant issues. :)

Warlord Scrap2 votes

Tbh i think number 4 is gonna cause problems. Anytime the community doesnt see a clear line in the sand theres problems.
Now number 5 seems like the furthest departure from prior guidelines in nothing off topic. I dont mind it so much and i really do hope it works.

Also have you made a decision on how many subboards your breaking into. (Small follow up from part 2) or are you planning on discussing that in a later post.

ModCaptainMĂĄrvelous1 votes

We're still gathering info right now and talking with Rioters. Community consensus leaned more towards A than anything else but we're always open to the option of adding more boards later.

As for four, it's quite simple: We're hoping to encourage more content that's deeper than "OMG WHAT ABOUT <x>". Some threads just say "Riot I want a champion that has <x>" and nothing beyond it. I myself think that's not really adding much to the board at all. I'm all for threads with brainstorming and creation, but there needs to be stuff to work off of rather than just a pixelated JPG.

Warlord Scrap1 votes

{quoted}

We're still gathering info right now and talking with Rioters. Community consensus leaned more towards A than anything else but we're always open to the option of adding more boards later.

As for four, it's quite simple: We're hoping to encourage more content that's deeper than "OMG WHAT ABOUT <x>". Some threads just say "Riot I want a champion that has <x>" and nothing beyond it. I myself think that's not really adding much to the board at all. I'm all for threads with brainstorming and creation, but there needs to be stuff to work off of rather than just a pixelated JPG.

No i understand that. Its just im sure weve both seen how you can ask for a report just dont be a dick arguement turned out. Its definately a step in the right direction and i hope the rest of the sub boards add this policy to there guidelines.

ModCaptainMĂĄrvelous1 votes

Exactly. I really want to encourage people with creativity but it's hard when we keep getting reports with threads where it's just a single picture. So either we dismiss them or we take the other route of removing the threads.

Skylarke2 votes

I think in general that the rules are fine - loose enough to not stifle ideas but providing a basis for enforcement with the exception of Rule 4.

Quality is subjective, and we have already had cases in the past where some have used quality, or their narrow and inclusive stance and view on such as grounds to go after others.

A formal codified stance in this regard will not help matters as it will only legitimise their actions and give them a viable excuse beyond deluded ranting. Thus, if such a rule were to be enforced it should be as an informal one.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}

I think in general that the rules are fine - loose enough to not stifle ideas but providing a basis for enforcement with the exception of Rule 4.

Quality is subjective, and we have already had cases in the past where some have used quality, or their narrow and inclusive stance and view on such as grounds to go after others.

A formal codified stance in this regard will not help matters as it will only legitimise their actions and give them a viable excuse beyond deluded ranting. Thus, if such a rule were to be enforced it should be as an informal one.

Fair. I had thought the "may be subject" rather than "will be" was sufficient there, but I think you're right.

THE RlVER KlNG1 votes

Man, you really can't drop a grudge.

At this point you're just being nasty.

ModEchoing1 votes

I don't see him naming anyone.

If anything, he's probably referring to regonas, but Skylarke's been active on the board longer than me, so there's plenty of people that could fit that description.

Either way, let's not start a fight.

Skylarke4 votes

I was just hoping to identify a potential issue in the rules such that it could be fixed and help everyone.

Of course, if you believe you are one of the individuals who would fall under said exception and wish to identify yourself, then that's also OK - but that's your prerogative, not mine.

THE RlVER KlNG3 votes

It's not like you had a whole thing where you were explicitly rude to me and accused me of all those types of things. I'm not ascribing anything to myself, I'm reacting to the thinly veiled insults you continue to make for some tribal reason.

Now you continue to act rude and snarkish behind my back out of jealousy, despite an apology I made (something you never did.....).

It's quite sad, really.

ModEchoing1 votes

Okay I'm clearly not firm enough here, so let me make myself clearer.

Cut the fighting out. Let the whole thing lie. Both people go to their corners and go make cool concepts. Nobody gets hurt.

Skylarke1 votes

That would be true...if any part of it was aimed at you, which it was not. I don't even mention anyone in the original comment.

That you took the initiative to reply to the first comment, when there was no relation at all to anyone seems to me like you're trying to be offended, which is ironic given your stance stating you wish to put everything prior behind you.

I have neither been rude nor overly snarkish towards you. I stated the circumstances present, and noted that, if you wished, could apply said circumstances to yourself. I have not forced said circumstances upon you, a mantle which you apparently take upon yourself.

It doesn't seem like I'm the one trapped in the past and refusing to move forward here.

ModEchoing1 votes

Can we not egg him on? Please?

Skylarke1 votes

Yeah, I'm cool with that. I hadn't seen your comment while I was writing my last one.

Gushis1 votes

I feel like the rules are clear and straightforward, but I also feel like it NEEDS to include a section talking about downvoting and what it's used for. People shouldn't downvote stuff that they disagree with or don't like, they should downvote things that don't follow the rules or clearly don't show effort.

Wigglepufftuff1 votes

Just wondering, if someone who can't draw well (like me) wants to post something, do we just post it while describing it or do we need art and pictures? thanks!

More from Concepts & Creations

More by Echoing