Full Version: Hey, wow, I have this timesaving idea
Yeah - I explained that way above, in the post quoted here
| QUOTE |
| That's why the latest incarnation of the site has categories, so you can simply hit the Adventures category and get a list of all the adventures. I had someone volunteer to enter all the previous articles into the database, and he had to bail on it, though, so only the new stuff is categorized. I think you'd be surprised at the amount of traffic we still get for back issues and older articles. |
Edited to add: However, if you want to get stuff published via the TSS site in a quick way, the best way is: edit it really well. Then have someone else go over it for you. Making the time to edit is our big killer, so the more "ready to publish" something is when we get it, the more of a chance it will hit the site sooner.
Alright then. No need for me to build the second site. Those of you who sent me stuff, go ahead and foward it to Adam.
*points and laughs at Adam*
*points and laughs at Adam*
And I was about to offer frontend coding as long as you did all the proper formatting and such... (My new actually hosted server should be up sometime soon. Yay!)
Ah, well. I'll come up with something to put on my domain other than images and random stuff.
Ah, well. I'll come up with something to put on my domain other than images and random stuff.
Somebody remind me to read this thread at some point. I've got a few things to submit, and would love to read the rest. I just keep forgetting.
| QUOTE (Ecclesiastes) |
| Alright then. No need for me to build the second site. Those of you who sent me stuff, go ahead and foward it to Adam. *points and laughs at Adam* |
I'll forward them to you for editing, and you can forward them back to me.
Quick! Set up a filter than just sends them right back at him!
| QUOTE (Adam) | ||
I'll forward them to you for editing, and you can forward them back to me. |
I try to break free and they pull me back in!
Actually, if you are serious, I can do that for ya cause I know your time limited.
Totally serious. Having someone go through some submissions to check them for simple things - incorrect character stats, incorrect interpretations of rules, and other "big" errors would be a great help.
One of the related problems is when we take the time to read a submission in depth and make comments/annotations to it, then send that back to the author with a "We thought you had an interesting concept and some good ideas, and in turn we have some ideas on how to make it even better, what do you think?" ... then, if we don't get a reply from the author at all, we've just wasted our time - time that could have been spent on a different article from a different author.
After some authors repeatedly said "I'll make the changes!" and then never did [and continued to send in submissions that completely didn't match our stylesheet, take in account any of our previous suggestions, or even look like a Shadowrun article at all] we simply moved to sending short form-letter rejections, but we can't do that to any article that isn't quite up to snuff, so we have to gamble our time on articles that may not turn into anything.
Usually if we want substantial changes we ask the original author to make them him- or herself [or we say "If you don't want to make these changes, but don't mind us making them, we'll still publish the article"], but it seems to be about a 50/50 chance that they never return any followup emails.
And, to be totally fair, sometimes we are /quite/ late getting feedback back to authors - trying to get better at this, especially with the new publishing schedule.
One of the related problems is when we take the time to read a submission in depth and make comments/annotations to it, then send that back to the author with a "We thought you had an interesting concept and some good ideas, and in turn we have some ideas on how to make it even better, what do you think?" ... then, if we don't get a reply from the author at all, we've just wasted our time - time that could have been spent on a different article from a different author.
After some authors repeatedly said "I'll make the changes!" and then never did [and continued to send in submissions that completely didn't match our stylesheet, take in account any of our previous suggestions, or even look like a Shadowrun article at all] we simply moved to sending short form-letter rejections, but we can't do that to any article that isn't quite up to snuff, so we have to gamble our time on articles that may not turn into anything.
Usually if we want substantial changes we ask the original author to make them him- or herself [or we say "If you don't want to make these changes, but don't mind us making them, we'll still publish the article"], but it seems to be about a 50/50 chance that they never return any followup emails.
And, to be totally fair, sometimes we are /quite/ late getting feedback back to authors - trying to get better at this, especially with the new publishing schedule.
The basic idea would be saving my time on the part of the job (:being a GM) that I like doing (:making plots). I'd rather you saved my time on a part of the job that I don't like doing (like making NPCs).
/Anders
/Anders
| QUOTE (Botch) | ||
Websense works by downloading an international database of permitted and filtered sites and pages and uploading user settings. I maintain one of these and keep uploading DSF references as permitted (eg. not an on-line game), somebody/ies else keep uploading DSF references as filtered. So for all you Websense users, DSF here today, gone tomorrow, ad naseum. |
Botch, can you set up a bot that keeps checking the DSF references and uploads them as permitted whenever it encounters them as filtered?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.