AARland Gazette Discussion and Feedback Thread!

[Valdemar]

I am mulling around some thoughts that I might put down on paper (and then post here) a little later, but I find it curious that the majority of posts are dicussing and/or rationalizing symptoms are few (none?) are particularly addressing the cause.

That depends.. if you can agree to one common individual cause.. then pls enlighten us...

while I agree that we have discussed Symptoms and in some instances causes for those symptoms then it has been as means to an end to discover the cause... perhaps Smirfy are right we are arogant elitist bastards.. but showing it by singling out one symptom will not help the cure along, more likely scare away the patient....

If you think that there is one and true cause to this, then pray tell dear doctor what that may be?

I too have an opinion, and presently I do not find that this thread (the recent part) have even begun adressing symptoms.. I do not find writing styles significant an issue as a cause of a forum rift... it is merely a technical voyage in which a writer or critique may partake.. as is PE's excellent piece, while spot on the money it does not offer any significant insight to the issue of seperate fora, the lack of community, and the dead entry hall that is the main forum... for that dear colleaques is what I see as symptoms...

IF those are the same symptoms you see, then I offer you the chance to use them, fight them, and if nothing else bring insight to their cause and bring temporary relief to the ailing patient.


The current discussion have brought but one point to the light, the issue of the gazzette can be medication, but it is certainly not the cure and thus we need to define both the limits of the Gazette and whether the issues of this forum should be mixed with the issues of the gazette?

I'm sorry if my recent posting have sounded harsh.. and thats the cause of my editing... I had no intention of singling anyone out, but this is one of two.. it is either a discussion of the Gazzette or a discussion of these fora...

V

 

[Valdemar]

The AAR forum is here, stop me if I am wrong, to allow us to tell, and allow us to read, After Action Reports. Thats all. We form the Baar's to allow us a bit more conversation, and this center page to link the four forum's into one. Thats it, in my oppinion. And when we start seeing it as something more, we start putting problems where they dont exist.

Nothing more nothing less, as I stated before,

BUT

That is the case of the INDIVIDUAL fora, what about the cross community as such?

V

 

[coz1]

I would suggest that discussion of the gazette is precisely discussion of the fora as that has been one of the many topics suggested there. It would be a rather dry paper if we only talked about writing, AAR styles, etc. Besides, The SolAARium suffices for that just fine. So why even have the gazette? To do the very thing we are doing right here. We write about ideas, subjects, themes, etc. about all of the various issues that might occur in and around AARland. This thread is for further discussion on that. And you are spot on V, with your listing of the symptoms.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

coz1, I think you are wrong about the current topic. It always was "AARland". The problem is we have a concept and nothing else to link it to the current forum. Simply putting the = sign between AARland and all our activities here is quite ambitious and, unfortunately, a project worth failing. Ok, let's recommend to the new people: "Go and read an AAR". They will, most probably (and unfortunately) flock towards one of PE's pieces, ignoring LD's novel-like reports.

Unfortunately?

Ultimately, readers will read the sort of AARs they like to read, not those that you (and I, for that matter) consider to be of most literary merit. After all, literary merit is by itself poor guidance in finding something you will like to read. It is arguably for the same reason that more people read Doonesbury in the daily paper on the way to work than The Brothers Karamazov. Basing your arguments about "what ought to be" on "what the readers ought to read" rather than what they like to read is a losing proposition and underestimating the readers - unless you ban publication of what they like to read, of course.

As for the rest of your post, rest assured that with such a high standard for entry into AARland and such a nigh-hysterical protectionism, I will gladly assume the role of visiting professor that you have bequeated onto me rather than resident member: It cannot be otherwise. I write silly stories of dubious literary merit that I think are fun as stress relief from work, as a way of keeping writing skills and English mastery intact that I might otherwise lose, and to please others - the readers (and based on feedback, they seem to like it).

I read other people's AARs only seldom as I prefer to read novels, when not working or playing computer games, and I prefer giving good advice to the needy in the general game forum for these various Paradox games to posting "attaboys". I participate in collaborative projects that do not take up too much of my time when invited and when my workload allows, as MrT can attest to; The Fellowship of the Kings and the Venice B-team all suffered various degress of groans from my participation. (Personally, I consider my writing in TFotK to be my best to date - but that is a different issue)

I do not dedicate a significant amount of my time to the abstract ideal of being a member of AARland (an entity of which existence I only became aware recently, after returning from a four month hiatus from the AAR forum) - and why should I? (Please do not flame an answer - ignore it or give a considered answer; it is a pretty good question. Try framing an answer: A writer should be a member of AARland because _______)

So congratulations on AARland. It may be a grand project, once you know what it actually means, and I wish you good luck with transforming it into whatever you desire. If it ends up with worthy projects that bring the members joy, the world will be a slightly better place to be. If it ends up with a "members only" policy to encourage unity in the face of an uncaring world, well, that too is your choice - just so long as you do not attempt to use earned membership of it as a justification for why some member AARs should be read instead of non-member AARs by non-members as that would be arrogant paternalism.

Gentlemen, include me out.

As for me? I will continue, when time permits, to write silly stories that many people like to read - in the After Action Report forums.

 

[unmerged(6777)]

And that is pretty much the heart of the matter.

The AAR forum is not something that is a clay that you mould. It is more a collection of stones the you see on the beach and recognise as having a pleasing pattern. Trying to sort, categorise, rearange, and fit that random assortment of stones ruins the effect that initially attracted you to them.

I am in agreement with Peter on this. AARland should not have a "membership" criteria. AARland is not about teaching people to change what interests them.

It is about accepting whatever they have to offer, whatever they feel inclined to do, and leaving it at that - without, I would stress, placing a value judgement on their contributions or lack thereof (in either a literary sense or a community sense).

In the "good old days" that was the case. It no longer is...and that, more than anything else, is why I am content to do what I am doing and not do what I am not doing.

 

[Voshkod]

Mr. Ebbesen is correct; the people will read what they want to read, such as his work (which I also enjoy). There is a limited customer (or reader) base for AARs, and they will read what they enjoy. You can't "improve" (and I use that term most guardedly) that base, because it is self-selecting.

If you want eyeballs and comments, you need to write in a style the customer wants to read.

What I suspect will come from this, if it continues on this route, is a smaller community of "literary" (and again, I use that term very guardedly) writers, who to some extent are writing for their personal enjoyment and for the pleasure of the other literary writers (and the readers that enjoy that sort of work), as opposed to the broader community of AARs generally.

Perhaps a solution is to create a new forum for these "literary" AARs, where gameplay is secondary or even tertiary to the AAR content. People will be forwarned and those that want gameplay can go to the general AAR forums.

V.

 

[Alexandru H.]

Peter, you understood me wrong.

a) I love your stories, just like most of us. Yet, you are like that tree that lets nothing grow near it. You are a school, yet you cannot take disciples. This is not wrong, this is just a truth. I never intended to say that you are useless, when your AARs manage to bring so many people together for a laugh or for a meaningful introspection. It's just that the current topic was intended for people who want to help the forum in a direct manner.

b) Unfortunately has a double meaning and, unfortunately, you caught the wrong one. In an ideal world, every AAR should be read and, sometimes, commented upon. This is not happening, yet we like to dream about it. LD feels a little down because his readers don't behave the way yours do ("flocking") and my expression simply suggested that it would be nice if they would. It wasn't about your AAR, it was about LD's. I know I left a window open for interpretation and I'm sorry for that.

c) Contrary to your beliefs, I rather like novels and some of the works from this forum that sustain that format. Maybe I'm wrong and they are not appropriate, but I happen to think that the term "AAR" lost most of its meaning when it ended the "log era". I repeat myself, this is not a discussion about AARs, about literary merits, about what an After-Action-Report means... this is about our "little" AARland... in which you chose your own level of comitment...nothing wrong about that

I happen to agree with something you said:

So congratulations on AARland. It may be a grand project, once you know what it actually means

We don't, that's right... But that is another reason why you shouldn't act so offended, in this stage is quite impossible to say something without angering another member. I have the necessary idealistic (and maybe idiotic) hope that the AARland will become a reality. It won't be a member-only club (hopefully) but it will own several people trully interested in perpetuating it. I consider myself the lucky one: never finishing an AAR gives me the necessary independence to promote other people's creations, and I mean everyone's creations.

 

[The_Hawk]

As a caveat to my earlier post, let me clarify that which was not clear -- that my questions revolved around the idea that increased participation was accepted, prima facie, as a worthy and valid goal. As T suggests, it may not be so, and indeed we may be setting ourselves up for disappointment by extolling its virtues and then being surprised when the community does not fall in line with those expectations.

My hypotheticals presuppose that we wish to encourage people to participate more, as that was the question coz1 asked. A laissez faire system, on the other hand, has much to commend it. But if we adopt such a position, those ideas which do not have the support of enough people to sustain them will fall by the wayside -- a sort of vindication of memetics. I do believe that this would be unfortunate (particularly as some of those projects which seem to be failing are ones in which I am, myself, invested) and that we would likely lose authors to whom the new ways do not appeal, but perhaps this is in any case wholly unavoidable.

So perhaps the question needs to be: Should we be leading the horse to water and hoping that he drinks, or should we release the reins and see where the horse goes?

 

[coz1]

T and Peter have aptly described the best way to not become the kind of place we have attempted to describe, that is by forcing it to be such. T, you are of course correct when you suggest that it is what it is, and will be what it will be.

Our desire is not so much to force anyone to change as much at is it to enlighten them to the possibilities. We could easily drop this entire train of thought, leaving it as it is now. This forum would continue, or at least each AAR forum would. I imagine the librAARys would continue to be maintained with some regularity for a while until someone gets tired of doing it, and there may be some occasional banter in the bAARs. But as we have already seen, the SolAARium will die (or has already), special projects will become a thing of the past. You, as mods, may find yourselves overworked more than you already do as you will not see people coming forward to volunteer as they have in the past. In short, the main forum area will become as dry as a bone, leaving each game to their own devices. Perhaps LD was correct, maybe we all would be better off if we just separated them again.

 

[Alexandru H.]

coz1 hit the proverbial nail. Let's forget a little about AARs, those are personal choices and we cannot impose on anyone how to write them. Every forum had always an abundance of AARs, some very good, some mediocre, but all of them finding good homes in our hearts. I could care less if they are LD's or Amric's if they tell me a good story, make me think, laugh or just stare.

This topic is about the organizational framework of the forum. It's about cohesion, it's about taking charge. The paradox is that while we have a large number of AAR writers or readers, few venture out of their leisure places and try new experiences, help out in any way possible. coz1 tried to inquire why these individuals are so hard to obtain and I simply proposed a solution, based on a (false or not) assumption that they exist.

I don't recall when this topic was replaced by something else, but that was the main problem we wanted to sort...

 

[Smirfy]

God I suppose I’ll have to be semi literate for a minute…..Fuck you! This is of course is more I’m fucked because we are not quite the polished article as far as the written word goes. Anyway now I’m here, I’ll put my cards on the table, my agenda so to speak.

I enjoy it in AAR forum you have the platform of Free speech, free thought and more importantly free expression that is not found anywhere else in the forums, think about that for one second………….Thank you.

 

[Estonianzulu]

Perhaps LD was correct, maybe we all would be better off if we just separated them again.

I dont see a single reason for this. Not one. Maybe I am just blind to facts or something but I dont get it. If you took and put the forums back where they were I would stop reading certain AAR's. I dont want to move from one to another to read the AAR's (Especially since the forum seems to be not letting me on often). I would end up being only a Vikky AAR reader, rather than a wide range reader.

The combination of the forums allows us to comunicate. Think about it. Ive on more than one occasion recomended AAR's from different forums to other ones. (for example, an HoI in the Vicky bAAR.) Getting rid of the one thing that holds all the AAR's together would take that away.

The problem here is finding the ones that can respond to any new challenge the forum has to face, it's about involvement and deep caring. It's not just about AARs, it's not about moderating, it's about lending a hand whenever it's necessary, it's about "citizenship", if you want. We all live in the same space, yet just a handful can recite the constitution by heart.

I am willing to say that if you went up to most membAARs, they would lend a hand in this forum if needed. But, last time I checked, no one was asking for help.

Now Estonianzulu, if we only have readers and writers then who will run the special intiatives such as the bAARs, the librAARies, guess-the-author, the gazette, etc.? We have seen who in the past year - no one.

What about you? Or Stroph1? Or Hajji, or Kurek? No one made you do that. And when you joined you didn't join to make a libraary did you? No, you joined to read and write AAR's, like everyone. Maybe its the John Locke in me, but I think that if left to itself, the Forum will evolve and make these things.

Now, is that the kind of forum you want? Perhaps it is.

And to this, I will not respond.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Peter, you understood me wrong.

a) I love your stories, just like most of us. Yet, you are like that tree that lets nothing grow near it. You are a school, yet you cannot take disciples.

Exception, of course, the WCfD students, who got assignments.

b) Unfortunately has a double meaning and, unfortunately, you caught the wrong one. In an ideal world, every AAR should be read and, sometimes, commented upon. This is not happening, yet we like to dream about it. LD feels a little down because his readers don't behave the way yours do ("flocking") and my expression simply suggested that it would be nice if they would. It wasn't about your AAR, it was about LD's. I know I left a window open for interpretation and I'm sorry for that.

Ah, well, I am rather touchy on this issue, as I have had to hear for several years now in various guises that it is somehow wrong that my AARs are so well read and commented on when other, more worthy ones (i.e. Non-WC ones), are not. A fair amount of bitching has been directed in my direction on this account with each Paradox release since EU2 (HOI, Victoria - and I did not even finish that beta AAR!), and now also, even if only in LD's bitterness, CK) - and it is getting very, very, old - just like the views/replies issue. I really hoped that CK would prove the exception, but alas that was not in the cards.

c) Contrary to your beliefs, I rather like novels and some of the works from this forum that sustain that format.

As good example of misunderstanding each other as any I can think of, I really do not have the faintest idea, which part of what I wrote led you to conclude that I believed you did not like novels or novel-format AARs. Alternatively, you are saying that I do not enjoy novel-AARs (unlike you), which is in wrong, as clearly indicated in my critique of the Hautevilles. [I just do not read all that many AARs, which is a different issue]

--------​

And now we return to the "Gazette Discussion And Feedback Thread", which I believe was the original topic.

 

[coz1]

Estonianzulu - sorry, that was more of a rhetorical question. And you are right in terms that some of us have volunteered. But we can always use help and should not have to go around asking for it all the time. What happened to other volunteers? And as for the combining/splitting forums - what's the point of trying for community if no one cares about that in the first place? I mean, the fact that we have spent two or three pages trying to describe what we meant when we used the term means there is some sort of disconnect there among the entire AAR fora. Right now we have a few dedicated people who are trying to do a ton of things at once in helping foster that community spirit. It would be far, far better, for the fora as a whole (AARland or whatever the heck you want to call it) to chip in and do whatever they were able to assist in making this feel like a community again.

Look, I recognize many of you do not seem to see the problem. And that's just it - right now, there isn't one (so it would make sense that you did not see it ). What I suggested to Alexandru in the AARticle and what I am saying here is, it could very well become one. I would simply rather be prepared for it in order to possibly avoid it if possible.

 

[AKjeldsen]

Ladies and gentlemen,

I now give you: "The Average MembAAR" or, "The View from the Trenches".

Since I'm pretty new here, I've been reluctant to get involved in this discussion so far, but I do feel that things are getting a little too far out for my taste - so here are my unconstructive comments.

First, a confession.

I do not contribute to cross-forum interaction.

I mostly spend my time on the CK fora, only occasionally on the EU2 fora, and practically never on the rest of them. Part of the reason for this is lack of interest. CK and, more rarely, EU2 are the Paradox games I prefer to play, and therefore also to read AARs about.

But the greater problem is time. I have an education to take care of, three part-time jobs, family, friends, etc. This basically means that on average, I'm able to play one or two games at a time, plus do one of the following:

1. Write an AAR
2. Read and post intelligent comments on a certain number of AARs
3. Involve myself in various projects that may

Currently, I have chosen to pursue option nr. 1, and not, if I may be so immodest, without a certain measure of success. This, however, seems to create a new problem, since according to this following quote, and moreso the statement that it refers to, makes me a 'not very good' member of this community.

I do happen to agree with what Alexandru has had to say, for the most part, however I do believe someone who only writes their own work is a membAAR, but perhaps not a very good one.

(Although I have picked this quote out to illustrate my point, this is of course a general comment.)

Now, if the point of this whole excercise is to engender a greater sense of community spirit across the AAR fora, I believe that this approach hinders much more than it helps. In order to create any sort of community spirit, you have to be aware of what the core and the purpose of the community is. In this case, it is to exchange experiences and written materials based on a Paradox game. Basically, without writers, there is no AARland. And yet, it now seems that influential members of the AAR community feels that people who want to focus on producing the essential ingredient of the community are less valuable than the people who are, so to say, in a supporting role.

It seems to me that this may not be the best approach towards creating a new community. In fact, if I was less thick-skinned than I am, I might have taken such a comment personally enough to quit the whole thing and go back to just playing the games. Which would mean that the community would have lost a member, rather than making him more engaged.

But fortunately, I am very thick-skinned. So instead, I'm going to add my voice to those who have gone before me, and suggest that you sit down and find out exactly what the whole purpose of this AARland is going to be, instead of spending energy on trying to convince people through comments like the one I quoted above and several others.

 

[Alexandru H.]

The conclusion I must reach, then, is that if veterans do not become involved in projects (and here, when I use the word "project", the gamut runs from things like Guess-the-Author to mere commenting on other people's AARs), it is because they do not feel they will get anything out of the time spent there. It has often been surmised, and I think supported empirically, that as a community we are generally older and more mature than your average online forum; most of us have active "real" lives and could be spending the time spent here doing any number of other things. So why do we choose to spend what we spend here, here? And what can we do to make people spend more?

I really have nothing more to say besides what The_Hawk suggested. It's just that some of us reached the third level of involvement in this forum (after reading and writing AARs) and we want a forum that matches it...

 

[unmerged(6777)]

*shakes head sadly*

Does anyone here remember when and why the bAAR started? Or the LibrAARy? Or the SolAARium? Or projects such as the Kings or Venice? Does anyone remember what fueled them?

 

[Valdemar]

God I suppose I’ll have to be semi literate for a minute…..Fuck you! This is of course is more I’m fucked because we are not quite the polished article as far as the written word goes. Anyway now I’m here, I’ll put my cards on the table, my agenda so to speak.

I enjoy it in AAR forum you have the platform of Free speech, free thought and more importantly free expression that is not found anywhere else in the forums, think about that for one second………….Thank you.

Smirf I was not intending to Censor you.. I merely had second thoughts once you had responded, so I tried making things better...

PM your way..

V

 

[coz1]

AKjeldsen - I should have made myself more clear. One who only writes their own work and never bothers to look around and see what others are doing, is not a very good membAAR. It is a long-standing tradition that we reciprocate around here. Otherwise all we have is a long row writAARs screaming for people to read their work. I am pleased you have decided to both start writing an AAR and join in here as all constructive opinions are valuable.

And yes, MrT - each started at various times because people wanted those things and were willing to put forth effort towards them. If you are suggesting that they no longer do, sadly I would be in agreement with you at this point.

 

[Alexandru H.]

AKjeldsen made some good points and I want to give a simple response.

Time will always be a problem. I'm finding myself trying to finish my paper, in order to finish college, yet I always try to participate in some way in this fora. It may not be the best thing for my future, but I happen to like it here.

I happen not to agree with coz1. I think that a simple writer cannot be a membAAR since we cannot say what a membAAR is. Could be anyone who registers, could be anyone who reads an AAR, could be only three-year veterans... My idea was to create a sort of recognition, just like the citizenship papers, who would make you full membAAR. It would require just a simple request, but it would also mean a meaningful pledge of loyalty. At this moment, the basic writer has no real touch with the forum, only with its threads. Most new people know nothing about the history of the forums and rely on pieces of info that are sometimes inserted in a comment.

Again, this is not about writing AARs. This is not about importance. We just want some slaves to work in some fields that are rarely visited by people and even force them to teach the same people about what they do there. The problem is that the slaves can be employed only with their acceptance...and it's almost impossible to find good workers these days...