Quote:Just because nobody says anything doesn't necessarily mean everyone agrees with you. It doesn't mean that they don't agree with you, either. (I learned that one the hard way a few years ago, while serving on the Board of Directors of a non-profit organization.)
Rule #2 was something I put out there explicitly on Page 3 of the "plotbunny for sale" thread, and had not seen any argument on.
Unless you specifically ask, you can't know whether your opinions are shared by others.
Quote:Probably out of our week-long bunfight, and I went along with you on it... but I'm not sure that I should have. 'Wavium can't be a trump defence, not if your Rule 13 holds.
Rule #5 came partially out of a discussion on weaponizing space, and, specifically, on how if it were easy to do so, the place would look rather different than we'd like. I honestly don't remember where it was.
Also, it ruins the setting. If it becomes common knowledge that 'wavium-reinforced hulls can't be pierced by anything short of a nuke, then the Boskonians will use nothing but 'wavium-reinforced hulls (edit) and nukes (/edit), and interplanetary travel becomes extremely dangerous. That's the exact opposite of what we're trying to evoke here.
Quote:"Held together with duct tape" does not necessarily imply "quirked".
As for rule #12, it had been my understanding that "the world we live in his held together with duct tape" *was* one of the basic design parameters.
Quote:I remember that you and I had a week-long bunfight where you insisted that I had to write slapstick, and that my supporting characters had to have "openly obvious, major disadvantages". You even criticized a character that still hasn't appeared in the story because you didn't see any openly obvious disadvantages or slapstick behaviour in said as-yet-undepicted character.
I am also not insisting that they be openly obvious, major disadvantages. I certainly do not insist that it be slapstick.
Quote:We do have balance criteria: "author's discretion". If we can't trust each other to not screw over the setting or each others' characters, we may as well wind this experiment up right now.
If you don't have some sort of balance criteria, then the world will quickly fall apart under the weight of new entrants pushing at the edges.
Quote:We haven't agreed to that. Agreeing to that will cause major breakage to the setting, in my opinion - I mentioned one example in my discussion of your Rule 5, above.
Another (precept of this universe) is that, in essence, Handwavium Just Wins.
Quote:What's wrong with being one of the writers, with the same priveledges and responsibilities that all of the writers have? Why should anyone have, or expect to have, a larger role than that?
I will also say that if you do *not* see a need for balance, then my own role is substantially diminished.
To mangle your own words, if we allow someone to have more control over the setting than everyone else has, then my understanding of human nature strongly suggests that that person will come to dominate it over time.
-Rob Kelk
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."
- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012