Thanks for clarifying things a bit more, Pro -- some of the "rules" are still not specific enough for me, but we're getting there.

For instance, you say:

Quote:

5.) The use of the support staff in the main story is limited to the logical use of their intended purpose of creation (i.e. Huerta is a Psychiatrist, Grissom is communications/security, the B-Team are comedy relief, etc). If Charlie's the mechanic, then, let Charlie be the mechanic, and develop her personal life in a solo thread. If Miss X is so mysterious, and Nuriko so cool, then let's see more of that....in a solo thread."



Does this mean that, under the new rules, I wouldn't have been able to post the short flashback scene where Chance and Charlene kinda "get it on" the night before the mission in which Chance died? If so, I seriously object -- writing that short flashback in a solo thread separate from the main story would've diluted any emotional impact when she learned of Chance's death later on. Clarify please.

Also, when you say "Personal sub-stories are to be limited to Solo Threads" I wonder whether the mission Dr. Quantos sent Chance on when the team went to Mandelovia would thus be out of the question under the new rules. Issue #14 was an anomaly in many ways (such as using multiple characters in the main action, bringing back former team members no longer being used by their posters, etc), but that mission (finding Quantos' daughter) could not have been done at any other time. I don't see how it distracted from the story at all, considering the fact that each of the team members in Mandelovia were each doing their own thing there, anyway.

Also, going back to rule #1 again:

Quote:

One character per writer in the main story. Period.



This isn't very self-explanatory, as the subsequent questions posted by Jackie and others has shown. I'll use #14 for another example, here. I killed off Chance halfway through the story, and he was my main character. Does this mean I have to sit out the rest of the story under the new rules? Or can I do what I did and continue writing the story with my new character (in this case, Axel)? If not, what exactly is the problem? Clarify, please.

As far as your suggestions go, I'm not at all convinced at the logic for restarting the numbering. It really doesn't add anything to the stories, and it takes away the practical numbering system which make it easy to keep track of the stories. God, if there's one thing I can't stand, it's when a series with the same character or characters (such as Aquaman, Supergirl, Legion of Super-Heroes, etc) has multiple issue #1's! It's so pointless! They always use the "clean break" reason for it, too, but it just causes confusion [example: "Euro fought that guy in issue #3." "No he didn't -- Euro was in space during issue #3." "No, I mean the original numbering!" "You mean the old universe?" "No, I mean the new universe, but the numbering we had before we restarted the numbering!" "Oh. Well, this is confusing. Maybe we should restart the numbering again." "Sigh."]. Let's be pragmatic and continue the numbering we have now, whether or not we call it "Hero Revolution" or "Vanguard International"...

As far as the idea of "editor" goes, well, I can see this getting really out of hand really easily. It's too authoritarian and dictatorial for me to accept. And I don't think this group needs one. Saying we need an editor is like saying we can't trust each other to follow the rules. The honor system will work just fine, thanks. The rest of the stuff is just typical moderator's duties.

I do think that the person who begins a team story should have the responsibility (like that of a "gamemaster" in a Role-Playing Game, changing each story) of moving the story along when it needs to be moved along and of mentioning in the talk thread when someone strays out of acceptable territory as defined by the guidelines, but not to the point where we get someone editing other peoples' posts without their permission and shit like that. Let's treat each other like adults, please. A person's writing is a very personal thing, and I don't know anyone who likes their stuff edited or cut out without notice. If it becomes a big enough problem to do some cutting (such as real disagreement between the posters and the guidelines), it should be hashed out with the group and the poster in question in the talk thread rather than just decided upon by one or three persons. We've been able to come to such a consensus in the past, and I'd rather we argue violently in the talk thread than just have everything decided for us without our input.

One final thing I've got to say -- I don't like ultimatums, nobody does, and they're a poor way to get ones message across when dealing with others on an equal basis. It's a form of message board extortion which doesn't work so well in a group like ours. In fact, it took a great deal of willpower to not simply lash blindly out at that. The truth is, though, I do agree with the guidelines in principle (though with the caveat that I need more clarification and discussion on how they actually work), and as everyone knows I've always advocated the unofficial ones we've had.

This post may sound harsh, but it's as harsh and honest as the original post in this thread, so don't take it personally.