Tip.It Times - 10th April 2011

[SwreeTak]

People read the Times articles for an author's perspective and interpretation of a topic and they can come to the forums to read the community's general perspective. I don't think it's the writers' responsibility to formulate and articulate what the community collectively believes. Articles are supposed to be opinionated (to an extent) and they are supposed to dredge discussion, not recapitulate what has already been said for the past week in General Discussion

I couldn't agree more with this. An Times article is as already said, the author's view on something. The whole meaning with publishing an article is to share your own view with the community. Not to just say something that the community have just discussed. And according to me, this is at least one of the biggest reason to what makes the Tip.It Times what it is today; Awesome.

[Jonanananas]

People read the Times articles for an author's perspective and interpretation of a topic and they can come to the forums to read the community's general perspective. I don't think it's the writers' responsibility to formulate and articulate what the community collectively believes. Articles are supposed to be opinionated (to an extent) and they are supposed to dredge discussion, not recapitulate what has already been said for the past week in General Discussion

I couldn't agree more with this. An Times article is as already said, the author's view on something. The whole meaning with publishing an article is to share your own view with the community. Not to just say something that the community have just discussed. And according to me, this is at least one of the biggest reason to what makes the Tip.It Times what it is today; Awesome.

 

Nothing against that, really not. But when an author presents his opinion in an editorial, its aim normally is to influence the opinion of the reader into a certain direction. If it doesn't do that convincingly, it's generally not a good one. If there are obvious counterarguments left out, it doesn't help the goal of the article. If Racheya wanted to bring the point across that livid farm is not as bad as people make it out to be, then she should have adressed e.g the usefulness of the spells in some way.

[Crocefisso]

With respect to the second article -- I found it hilarious and extremely naive and, well, downright "high school" in quality.

 

I think someone REALLY needs to learn what a corporation is and what it does.

As the author of the second article, I am afraid you are not only offensive in your interpretation, but also ignorant to the very contents of the article you are ridiculing.

 

If you found it naive, you've clearly misunderstood its message or have no experience in the creative business community in RuneScape. As stated in the article - if only you'd be as gracious as to read and understand it - people often talk of changing minor aspects of the community, e.g. starting a slightly new venture within a corporation framework, and are naive enough to believe this alone will reinvigorate the community as a whole. The proposition of abandoning the corporation model, which would, if implemented, radically alter how the community functions, is far from naive; it may be a success or a failure, but either way it will have a significant impact on the community.

 

With regards to your second comment, I am going to present to you a concept.

 

RuneScape is a game, with no basis in real life. The Tip. it Times is about RuneScape. The corporation model which serves as the basis of the article and is discussed throughout is, therefore, the corporation as it exists within RuneScape, not real life. When an article on herblore is published, do you feel the need to point out that herbs cannot be used for potions in real life? I sincerely hope not. Just because you are not aware of them within the context of the game does not mean they do not exist, and I think in future you would do better to apply common sense before posting such puerile remarks.

 

To those who made the reasonable, informed comment that the article catered only to a select audience, I accept that I was writing for said audience and the suggestion that it could have been more accessible to those unfamiliar with RuneScape's business community is a good one which I shall take into consideration in future. Those who made the effort to respond critically and constructively, regardless of their familiarity with the subject matter, your feedback is much appreciated.

[Jonanananas]

With respect to the second article -- I found it hilarious and extremely naive and, well, downright "high school" in quality.

 

I think someone REALLY needs to learn what a corporation is and what it does.

As the author of the second article, I am afraid you are not only offensive in your interpretation, but also ignorant to the very contents of the article you are ridiculing.

 

If you found it naive, you've clearly misunderstood its message or have no experience in the creative business community in RuneScape. As stated in the article - if only you'd be as gracious as to read and understand it - people often talk of changing minor aspects of the community, e.g. starting a slightly new venture within a corporation framework, and are naive enough to believe this alone will reinvigorate the community as a whole. The proposition of abandoning the corporation model, which would, if implemented, radically alter how the community functions, is far from naive; it may be a success or a failure, but either way it will have a significant impact on the community.

 

With regards to your second comment, I am going to present to you a concept.

 

RuneScape is a game, with no basis in real life. The Tip. it Times is about RuneScape. The corporation model which serves as the basis of the article and is discussed throughout is, therefore, the corporation as it exists within RuneScape, not real life. When an article on herblore is published, do you feel the need to point out that herbs cannot be used for potions in real life? I sincerely hope not. Just because you are not aware of them within the context of the game does not mean they do not exist, and I think in future you would do better to apply common sense before posting such puerile remarks.

 

To those who made the reasonable, informed comment that the article catered only to a select audience, I accept that I was writing for said audience and the suggestion that it could have been more accessible to those unfamiliar with RuneScape's business community is a good one which I shall take into consideration in future. Those who made the effort to respond critically and constructively, regardless of their familiarity with the subject matter, your feedback is much appreciated.

 

:thumbup:

[cnconrad]

To the first article: I disagree 100% it doesn't matter how much people play RS or how long they train. No single minigame/piece of content should force us to do the same thing for 40+ hours.

Training skills is one thing. Minigames are completely different. I am not going to stay in one place and throw money in a hole for 40 hrs just to get a spell that should be unlocked via quests.

 

To the second article:

WTF are you talking about? Most of what was written is gibberish. It sounds like you were writing it to a specific person. It has no appeal to anyone else. I will try to reply to some of the points I think you made.

 

Businesses are and always have been pointless pyramid schemes in RS. A single person can do everything a business could do. And that was b4 the GE. It has made almost all trading for profit via p2p inefficient.

 

The only reason anyone runs or works for a business is they either like to role-play or have never been to the GE.

[cnconrad]

In addition if I seem overly critical. I'm sorry but I just do not think it was put together very well.

 

To be constructive and not flaming I will list the problems.

 

1 A very specific audience - few people even understood what you were talking about.

2 Obvious facts are obvious - saying that corporations are not efficient in RS is like saying killing goblins is not efficient.

3 Too detailed with out enough information - Goes hand in hand with problem 1 you gave no history no explanations of corporations. Yet you went into details naming specific people/corporations that no one has heard of.

4 Too hard to read - You drifted from subject to subject. There were no transitions and it was put together more like a train of thought than an article.

[Crocefisso]

To the first article: I disagree 100% it doesn't matter how much people play RS or how long they train. No single minigame/piece of content should force us to do the same thing for 40+ hours.

Training skills is one thing. Minigames are completely different. I am not going to stay in one place and throw money in a hole for 40 hrs just to get a spell that should be unlocked via quests.

 

To the second article:

WTF are you talking about? Most of what was written is gibberish. It sounds like you were writing it to a specific person. It has no appeal to anyone else. I will try to reply to some of the points I think you made.

 

Businesses are and always have been pointless pyramid schemes in RS. A single person can do everything a business could do. And that was b4 the GE. It has made almost all trading for profit via p2p inefficient.

 

The only reason anyone runs or works for a business is they either like to role-play or have never been to the GE.

 

 

In addition if I seem overly critical. I'm sorry but I just do not think it was put together very well.

 

To be constructive and not flaming I will list the problems.

 

1 A very specific audience - few people even understood what you were talking about.

2 Obvious facts are obvious - saying that corporations are not efficient in RS is like saying killing goblins is not efficient.

3 Too detailed with out enough information - Goes hand in hand with problem 1 you gave no history no explanations of corporations. Yet you went into details naming specific people/corporations that no one has heard of.

4 Too hard to read - You drifted from subject to subject. There were no transitions and it was put together more like a train of thought than an article.

 

 

Thanks for the feedback, Conrad. It was largely very useful, though I must point out that I disagree with some of your criticisms. Firstly, the idea that "a single person can do evertything a business can do" is true but, as a criticism of the business microcosm, I am afraid it's redundant, for the same criticism could be applied to clans (mostly) and pretty much every other communal activity within the game. Secondly, having read over the article, I can attest to the fact that it's not "gibberish" :P.

 

Much of the criticisms in your second post are only too true. The fact is, I wrote the article for a business-specific publication on the RS forums as an Op-ed piece, but before I could submit it the owner disappeared and the publication - for want of a better word - has since fallen into disrepute. My intended audience would not have needed any explanation and would have known the names mentioned, and I accept responsibility for my negligence in not changing this for Tip.It readers. I did give an explanation of corporations, though looking back it was insufficient.

 

The only criticism I feel is unjustified from this post was the fourth point. I feel that the structure was perfectly clear, especially when it is considered that it was a subjective piece. However, I acknowledge that it may not have been the clearest article when it came to transitions, and I will seek to rectify this in future.

 

I'll be sure to consider your feedback when writing my next article, Conrad, and I thank you for taking the time to post it.

[Racheya]

I was wary that the topic might go into flames and such but I'm glad some constructive criticism has come out from this. :)

 

As for my article: I've both been told "You should stop saying just what everyone is posting on the forum." and now that I SHOULD be. I'm not quite sure what you want from me :P

 

Also I resent the idea that I'm in love with MMG these days. In the past it was true but the last year hasn't been so magical and we're divorced :P I would like to direct you to these critical articles. And when I'm not taking a negative stance I try to maintain a more balanced one, looking at pros and cons. I don't pretend it to be unbiased. If you gave two people the same subject matter to write about they'll both write different articles.

 

To anyone who really has a differing opinion on any topic and want to counter what we've wrote then please go ahead and write a guest article for us! Talk about why you think that article is wrong and put forward your own viewpoint. I'd actually like to see this happening now and again to promote more dialogue and discussion on articles and give people the chance to voice their opinion on the much more exposed platform of the Times, than the forum :)

[Slayer_Jesse]

imo, the lunar farm is just bad game design. i get that you should have to work for it. but having to have the high level AND grind for another 40 hours is just absurd. plus the fact that the good spells have no tie to farming whatsoever makes me question the desions made in the dev process. this is grind scape, but theres a freaking LIMIT!

[Bangin_Blonde]

People read the Times articles for an author's perspective and interpretation of a topic and they can come to the forums to read the community's general perspective. I don't think it's the writers' responsibility to formulate and articulate what the community collectively believes. Articles are supposed to be opinionated (to an extent) and they are supposed to dredge discussion, not recapitulate what has already been said for the past week in General Discussion

I couldn't agree more with this. An Times article is as already said, the author's view on something. The whole meaning with publishing an article is to share your own view with the community. Not to just say something that the community have just discussed. And according to me, this is at least one of the biggest reason to what makes the Tip.It Times what it is today; Awesome.

 

Yes, but the Editorial Panel is so often pro-Jagex it's a bit tiring. Yes we have guest articles, but that doesn't quite balance the scales.

 

And Rach divorced MMG. Glad I didn't spring for a wedding present in the first place. :thumbup:

[Ts_Stormrage]

If you think I'm pro-jagex, you havent read ANY of my articles... At all!

 

I've actually been struggling myself to voice a pro-jagex opinion, cuz I found myself being quite negative over the past months... Not that I didn't have a good reason...

[Bangin_Blonde]

If you think I'm pro-jagex, you havent read ANY of my articles... At all!

 

I've actually been struggling myself to voice a pro-jagex opinion, cuz I found myself being quite negative over the past months... Not that I didn't have a good reason...

 

No, but I don't seem to see many articles out of you lately. Maybe I passed over them.

[cnconrad]

Nice to hear you got the point of my replies. Too many people flame without any backup and make fools out of their selves.

 

To Racheya

The main problem with your article isn't that it's bias. Which it is. The problem is that you are not giving any info or reasoning to back up your point or dis prove the other point. The one thing that people like less than something they don't agree with is something they don't agree with stated as fact with no backup or evidence at all.

 

Btw

How does one get an article posted for tip.it times? I have been using this site since 04-06 but never saw how get one posted.

I would like to see how well one of my articles would hold up to the flames around here.

[strilmus]

There's a link for that info on the bottom of every issue.

 

- send neato article

- get response about it

- wait an indeterminate amount of time

- go "wha, when did I write that" when it actually gets published

 

Yall should consider submitting if you want to prove that your biased argument could be explained better than hers.

[Range_This11]

4 Too hard to read - You drifted from subject to subject. There were no transitions and it was put together more like a train of thought than an article.

There was no drift, I can assure you. While using transitions like "Another reason x affects y is..." may help readers who have trouble comprehending the main argument and remembering that argument as they read the article (maybe that includes you?), those same transitions make the writer sound like a high-schooler and are extremely cliche. Croce wrote the article in an essay style rather than the editorial format we're used to seeing. Maybe that's why some people are having such a hard time following it.

 

Edit:

Yes, but the Editorial Panel is so often pro-Jagex it's a bit tiring. Yes we have guest articles, but that doesn't quite balance the scales.

 

I don't know where you're getting this from, because it's not true. Racheya is the only panel member that could come anywhere near being "pro-Jagex", but I think she's more optimistic than she is pro-Jagex. I know I've openly opposed Jagex before, most recently with the absolutely horrid Smithing update. The writers write what they want to--there is definitely not a pro-Jagex consensus among the panel members. Usually, the Jagex-bashing is done in General Discussion and, like I said earlier in this thread, we try not to recapitulate topics that have already been exhausted. There is a time and place for all kinds of discussion, but I don't think it would be a good decision for the Times to turn into a negative Jagex-bashing monster week after week.

[cnconrad]

There's a link for that info on the bottom of every issue.

 

- send neato article

- get response about it

- wait an indeterminate amount of time

- go "wha, when did I write that" when it actually gets published

 

Yall should consider submitting if you want to prove that your biased argument could be explained better than hers.

 

 

Sorry I misspoke myself. I wanted to know "how" to get an article published. Not how to submit one. I.E. What does an article need, what are you guys looking for that kind of stuff. I submitted one years ago and don't remember getting any feedback on if it would ever get published.

 

And yea I think my bias opinions would be more convincing than that. Heck I think i could write two articles one defending bots and one demonizing them and have both be more convincing.

 

I just got back into RS after about 2.5 year boycott so I'm sure few will recognize me.

[Racheya]

There's a link for that info on the bottom of every issue.

 

- send neato article

- get response about it

- wait an indeterminate amount of time

- go "wha, when did I write that" when it actually gets published

 

Yall should consider submitting if you want to prove that your biased argument could be explained better than hers.

 

 

Sorry I misspoke myself. I wanted to know "how" to get an article published. Not how to submit one. I.E. What does an article need, what are you guys looking for that kind of stuff. I submitted one years ago and don't remember getting any feedback on if it would ever get published.

 

And yea I think my bias opinions would be more convincing than that. Heck I think i could write two articles one defending bots and one demonizing them and have both be more convincing.

 

I just got back into RS after about 2.5 year boycott so I'm sure few will recognize me.

There's nothing fancy. You PM it to me and I say 'thanks' then put it away with all our other guest articles. When we're looking for a guest article, for whatever reason, or if the article submitted is particularly good and I feel we should publish it that week, a decent looking article is picked out. It's then edited for grammar, spelling ect and published. We don't have time to inform authors beforehand if their article is going to be used.

 

But what we're looking for is just a 'good' article. An interesting opinion, different take on a subject... something unique.

[cnconrad]

Thanks, I really do appreciate the answers.

 

I have dozens either thought out or half written. I guell I'll randomly pick one dress it up and submit it unless there is any particular subject you would be interested in me taking a stab at.

[cnconrad]

Oops 2 posts

[Ags_K0]

Wouldn't it be a nice idea if two authors decided to contradict each other's articles, and have the readers judge for themselves who to believe? I think that could work, but I'm unsure whether the editorial panel would approve of such a notion.

 

I feel that people like Bladewing (pre-ban), Grimy Bunyip, sees_all1, etc should post the devil's advocate version of the times. It could be interesting to see who persuades the most people in their articles, perhaps swaying some who used to believe what they were made to believe.

 

As a sidenote: I find it amusing that CaJ posts negative remarks about the flaming/trolling in these threads, whilst participating in it himself.

 

I've actually skimmed through the articles and didn't find anything too appealing to discuss really...

[Ts_Stormrage]

If you think I'm pro-jagex, you havent read ANY of my articles... At all!

 

I've actually been struggling myself to voice a pro-jagex opinion, cuz I found myself being quite negative over the past months... Not that I didn't have a good reason...

 

No, but I don't seem to see many articles out of you lately. Maybe I passed over them.

Once a month again since Januari (November and December saw a fictional of me :))... So... yea...

[Ts_Stormrage]

Wouldn't it be a nice idea if two authors decided to contradict each other's articles, and have the readers judge for themselves who to believe? I think that could work, but I'm unsure whether the editorial panel would approve of such a notion.

 

I feel that people like Bladewing (pre-ban), Grimy Bunyip, sees_all1, etc should post the devil's advocate version of the times. It could be interesting to see who persuades the most people in their articles, perhaps swaying some who used to believe what they were made to believe.

 

As a sidenote: I find it amusing that CaJ posts negative remarks about the flaming/trolling in these threads, whilst participating in it himself.

 

I've actually skimmed through the articles and didn't find anything too appealing to discuss really...

 

Sees_all1 is already part of the EP... Thing is, if you put 2 people in a room discussing opposing ideas about the same subject; someone is going to change his mind, or they end up killing eachother... It's rather hard to actually write down two opposing ideas... RuneScape isn't that complicated, neither are the people in general that play it... It is hard enough to come up with a balanced article, but if you do two biased ones (to opposing ends of the argument), the flaming it envokes is likely to be worse than usual...

 

We write because we like to, and given a chance, shine a (new) light on a subject that needs one... How our articles are interpreted is not something we can 100% control (see my last attempt as being lighthearted), but we do aim for people to at least enjoy the read, even if they disagree with the article's premise...

[Troacctid]

Wouldn't it be a nice idea if two authors decided to contradict each other's articles, and have the readers judge for themselves who to believe? I think that could work, but I'm unsure whether the editorial panel would approve of such a notion.

 

I feel that people like Bladewing (pre-ban), Grimy Bunyip, sees_all1, etc should post the devil's advocate version of the times. It could be interesting to see who persuades the most people in their articles, perhaps swaying some who used to believe what they were made to believe.

 

As a sidenote: I find it amusing that CaJ posts negative remarks about the flaming/trolling in these threads, whilst participating in it himself.

 

I've actually skimmed through the articles and didn't find anything too appealing to discuss really...

 

Sees_all1 is already part of the EP... Thing is, if you put 2 people in a room discussing opposing ideas about the same subject; someone is going to change his mind, or they end up killing eachother... It's rather hard to actually write down two opposing ideas... RuneScape isn't that complicated, neither are the people in general that play it... It is hard enough to come up with a balanced article, but if you do two biased ones (to opposing ends of the argument), the flaming it envokes is likely to be worse than usual...

 

We write because we like to, and given a chance, shine a (new) light on a subject that needs one... How our articles are interpreted is not something we can 100% control (see my last attempt as being lighthearted), but we do aim for people to at least enjoy the read, even if they disagree with the article's premise...

Pff, nah, writing counterpoint articles is easy. I do it all the time. See? http://forum.tip.it/blog/39-troacctids-runescape-blog/page__tag__point-counterpoint

[Crocefisso]

Wouldn't it be a nice idea if two authors decided to contradict each other's articles, and have the readers judge for themselves who to believe? I think that could work, but I'm unsure whether the editorial panel would approve of such a notion.

 

I feel that people like Bladewing (pre-ban), Grimy Bunyip, sees_all1, etc should post the devil's advocate version of the times. It could be interesting to see who persuades the most people in their articles, perhaps swaying some who used to believe what they were made to believe.

 

As a sidenote: I find it amusing that CaJ posts negative remarks about the flaming/trolling in these threads, whilst participating in it himself.

 

I've actually skimmed through the articles and didn't find anything too appealing to discuss really...

 

Sees_all1 is already part of the EP... Thing is, if you put 2 people in a room discussing opposing ideas about the same subject; someone is going to change his mind, or they end up killing eachother... It's rather hard to actually write down two opposing ideas... RuneScape isn't that complicated, neither are the people in general that play it... It is hard enough to come up with a balanced article, but if you do two biased ones (to opposing ends of the argument), the flaming it envokes is likely to be worse than usual...

 

We write because we like to, and given a chance, shine a (new) light on a subject that needs one... How our articles are interpreted is not something we can 100% control (see my last attempt as being lighthearted), but we do aim for people to at least enjoy the read, even if they disagree with the article's premise...

Pff, nah, writing counterpoint articles is easy. I do it all the time. See? http://forum.tip.it/blog/39-troacctids-runescape-blog/page__tag__point-counterpoint

 

I have to say, I don't really see the point of writing opposing articles - it doesn't leave much room for debate as I see it, and may lead to people having to write articles they don't agree with for the sake of having an opposing article. I think it's better that articles remain unplanned and genuine.

[Kthx]

I'd like to remind people of the rules pertaining to Times threads:

 

[hide=Read these rules before posting in this thread]

Rampant flame wars have taken control of virtually every week's times discussion topics. The following guidelines must be followed when posting on this topic. Posts that ignore these guidelines will be removed.

 

1. You are invited and welcome to express like or dislike on articles and a particular author's writing style. It is not acceptable, however, to flame or personally insult an author. Posts that aren't anything but an attack will be removed from the topic.

 

2. Spelling and grammar errors can be reported to Racheya by PMing her and they will be fixed promptly. It is not necessary to post them on the discussion topic.

 

3. Off topic posts that do not discuss the content of that week's articles will be removed. This is not the place to discuss the direction of the times, how much you love or hate the times, etc. Off topic posts will be removed.

 

By keeping within these guidelines, Times discussion topics will mean more for the Panel and Administration than just a place for flame wars. Flame wars do not provide any useful feedback to the Times, which is mainly what we're aiming for with these topics: feedback.

 

This policy is effective as of now, November 17, 2010. Any posts prior to the creation of this policy may or may not be removed according to the new guidelines.

[/hide]

 

 

In all seriousness, I'm going to take a good long stay at Livid Farm. Once I buy a few ten-thousands of runes. It'd be more interesting if there was more to do, I'd like to see Jagex expand it.

What episode did that happen in braw? The only other time I remember ever seeing him smile was on that episode where they were trying to make hoverboards out of leaf blowers.