Escape Artists
The Lounge at the End of the Universe => Gallimaufry => Topic started by: Corydon on June 02, 2008, 03:18:11 PM
-
For the thousandth time (and thanks for the QotW, Steve!), the "if it weren't for ____ this wouldn't be SF" complaint totally baffles me. Are SF stories not allowed to borrow storytelling techniques or tropes or storylines or archetypes from any other literary form? If so, our genre is dead in the water, and we'd better jump ship before it sinks.
Count me as another member of the "adaptable SF" fan club. To me, the adaptability of the genre is a strength; and I'll take a limited perspective in a story over infodumps and interminable exposition any day. And I enjoyed the story; a nice light piece to liven up my commute this morning.
-
For the thousandth time (and thanks for the QotW, Steve!), the "if it weren't for ____ this wouldn't be SF" complaint totally baffles me. Are SF stories not allowed to borrow storytelling techniques or tropes or storylines or archetypes from any other literary form? If so, our genre is dead in the water, and we'd better jump ship before it sinks.
Count me as another member of the "adaptable SF" fan club. To me, the adaptability of the genre is a strength; and I'll take a limited perspective in a story over infodumps and interminable exposition any day. And I enjoyed the story; a nice light piece to liven up my commute this morning.
Well, first, let me say that I don't care about "is it SF" debates. Not that I don't have opinions about it - I do, and I sometimes post about whether I think a specific story is SF or not - I just don't think that's a particularly important fact about a story. Certainly, even if I don't classify a story in the genre, that doesn't mean I'm upset at hearing it on EP (same goes for horror/fantasy on their respective 'casts).
That says, I don't buy this "the genre is just being versatile" argument. All genres mix. It's the nature of storeis that they don't keep to one. But, in the most case, a story will leave one impression or another. Moby Dick without the whale and boats may be a story about land, but it's also not Moby Dick. This story, as I said above, is a sitcom with an SF veneer, not an SF story with a sitcom plot. You may disagree, that's fine, but I don't think my opinion is in any way invalid. Does it deserve to be on EP? Yes, by the simple criteria that Steve decided it is, which is the only criteria that counts.
But, independently of the podcast, is the story SF? In some ways yes, but not in interesting ways. This story is a fun little piece of fluff that is set in a space station. It's not an example of how SF can stretch it's limits, since there's nothing about its storytelling that's not extremely safe and formulaic. Sitcom humor can fit in anywhere - that's the special property of sitcom humor. It's not a sign of SF's growing, any more than a couple of weeks in your lawn are a sign of your garden's diversity.
-
I think this story is definitely Sci Fi and is actually in a Star Trek: Deep Space Nine vein or even inspired by ST:DS9. It's a easy technique to use to write stories. You just write some fan fiction, then change all the characters' names and a couple of details about the world they live in. I'm sure Odo would've sorted out this case quite quickly, but then there wouldn't have been much of a story. I seem to remember at least one dispute over the occupancy of a shop on the Promenade on ST:DS9, but I'm not sure which episode it may have been in.
-
This story, as I said above, is a sitcom with an SF veneer, not an SF story with a sitcom plot.
For the sake of arguement, explain for me how a contemporary sitcom could tell this story without:
- An alien race incapable of lying
Another alien race incapable of understanding spiritual metaphor
A space station with constant government upheavals, leaving government incapable of settling property disputes
Because that's what "a sitcom with an SF veneer" would imply to me.
More to the point, "sitcom" is a form, not a genre. Because Red Dwarf was a situation comedy, do we write it off as not being validly SFnal?
You're welcome not to like a story for these reasons, but for me to accept that it's "not [SF] in interesting ways" is going to take more evidence than I've seen so far.
-
This story, as I said above, is a sitcom with an SF veneer, not an SF story with a sitcom plot.
For the sake of arguement, explain for me how a contemporary sitcom could tell this story without:
- An alien race incapable of lying
Another alien race incapable of understanding spiritual metaphor
A space station with constant government upheavals, leaving government incapable of settling property disputes
Because that's what "a sitcom with an SF veneer" would imply to me.
Then perhaps most of out disagreement is semantic, since I did not mean you could just simply transplant it without making alterations. What I meant was that the alterations would not change the thrust of the plot. All you need is to establish that A - the stupid cousin cannot lie (establish that he blushes very strongly whenever he lies, and that the antagonists know that). B - the antagonists are really superstitious (this one seems pretty trivial to transpose - make them belong to some religious community which is known to take all mentions of ghosts literally). C - The whole story takes place in a small town with corrupt local officials (the constantly changing governments was a nice touch, but it is not needed in order to have a new official take the job that comes pre-bribed. Sitcoms are notorious for introducing new characters to fill in random roles like this, even if it makes no sense. The fact that the story justified it doesn't make the justification important).
Will it work as well? Probably not. The SF setting made all of the above seem a lot less artificial than they would if we set the story in rural Arkansas or something. But that's what I meant by veneer - using SF elements makes the story work better than it would otherwise, but it's not integral to the story in any way.
More to the point, "sitcom" is a form, not a genre.
It can be both. And the sitcom genre is somewhat orthogonal to the sitcom form; most TV sitcoms are both, but they have different qualities. This story uses sitcom tropes and a sitcom plot, so I consider it a sitcom genre.
Because Red Dwarf was a situation comedy, do we write it off as not being validly SFnal?
No. You are making an unwarranted generalization. I'm not in any way denying it's possible to create a sitcom/SF hybrid that is inherently SF. Red Dwarf is an excellent example. All I'm saying is that this particular story is only SF in the most superficial of senses.
You're welcome not to like a story for these reasons, but for me to accept that it's "not [SF] in interesting ways" is going to take more evidence than I've seen so far.
I do like the story.
-
I'm not in any way denying it's possible to create a sitcom/SF hybrid that is inherently SF. Red Dwarf is an excellent example. All I'm saying is that this particular story is only SF in the most superficial of senses.
But I don't understand what makes Kallakak's Cousins quantitatively different. Most of Red Dwarf's plots could (and in some cases have) also, with modification, be told in a non-SFnal setting.
-
Most of Red Dwarf's plots could (and in some cases have) also, with modification, be told in a non-SFnal setting.
Agreed. Especially in the first few seasons, when the emphasis was more on the relationship between the two main characters.
Thanks to StePH for introducing me to the term "limited third-person perspective". I've never written anything substantial but I find this stuff fascinating.
-
I'm not in any way denying it's possible to create a sitcom/SF hybrid that is inherently SF. Red Dwarf is an excellent example. All I'm saying is that this particular story is only SF in the most superficial of senses.
But I don't understand what makes Kallakak's Cousins quantitatively different. Most of Red Dwarf's plots could (and in some cases have) also, with modification, be told in a non-SFnal setting.
Yes, individual stories, certainly. But there were also stories that could not. If you gave me a single Red Dwarf episode out of context I may well think the same of it as I did of this story. Taking the series as a whole, though, it's clear that there's a difference.
I'm certainly not debating that the setting in which Kallakak's Cousins was told is a SF setting. I'm just saying that as far as I can see, the setting is mostly incidental to the story. Obviously, if the setting and characters were developed further that could change, but I wasn't talking on what could be done, only on what was.
Quite simply, my reaction to the story - as soon as I heard it - was that I imagined the author coming up with a non-SF story, figuring "this is not good enough", and adding some minor tweaks to make it SF. That's probably entirely different than how the story was written, but I'm not commenting on the author's intentions/writing process, I'm commenting on my reaction. You had a different reaction, that's fine. But you (and Croydon) reacted to my comment not as if I had a different opinion about it, but as if I was making some sort of grand comment about SF. I never said anything about what SF is allowed to do. All I ever said was that this story felt to me like the SF elements didn't play an important role in it.
Anyway, I am happy to disagree on the premise of whether this story is "SF enough" or not. What I reacted to in my response to Croydon, though, is that he seems to be taking it a step further and saying "even if you think the SF elements don't play an important role in this story, that's just a sign of how versatile SF is". That, in my opinion, is a wrong view, regardless of our opinions of this particular story.
To recap: to me, this story is no more SF than any other story that just tags "but they're in space!" (http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail126.html) to the end of an otherwise non-SF script. If you disagree with that, fine. But don't try to tell me that adding some SF elements to a non-SF story is a sign of how robust the genre is or anything like that.
-
To recap: to me, this story is no more SF than any other story that just tags "but they're in space!" (http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail126.html) to the end of an otherwise non-SF script. If you disagree with that, fine. But don't try to tell me that adding some SF elements to a non-SF story is a sign of how robust the genre is or anything like that.
Eytan, can you please, please, please make more points with Homestarrunner analogies? I'll never ask anything of you again. There was suddenly something right about the universe today. :D
As for Steve's Larry, Daryl and Daryl reference, I may have made that connection if Desla and Slaugh had never spoken. I was more reminded of Balky... times three.
-
I get really, really tired of these arguments. Not only do we have to discuss if a given EP story is "actually" SF, now we're getting discussions in Podcastle threads (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=1636.0) about if a story is "actually" fantasy.
Let's not define things too narrowly, folks!
-
Hey, drop by Pseudopod sometime. We get "Is this horror?" at least once a month, it seems.
I am tired of it, too. Mostly.
-
You know, I'm not sure this is even a real forum thread.
-
I can think of nothing to say here except ...
"I'll take 'Who Gives a Shit' for $2000, Alex."
-
Every single time someone asks if X is SF or not, I think, "Sure, it's SF. Why not?" Every. Single. Time.
I must be so all-inclusive and tolerant. I give myself a warm fuzzy feeling.
-
You know, I'm not sure this is even a real forum thread.
Yeah, let's also have a forum thread for "That story was a rip off of (insert author/book title/ movie title)". I get sick of reading that complaint also.
-
You know, I'm not sure this is even a real forum thread.
Yeah, let's also have a forum thread for "That story was a rip off of (insert author/book title/ movie title)". I get sick of reading that complaint also.
I propose that anybody complaining either
A) story X is not sci-fi/fantasy, or
B) story X is a blatant rip off of (insert author/book title/ movie title)
is immediately and irrevocably banned from the forums.
;D Who's with me?
-
You know, I'm not sure this is even a real forum thread.
Yeah, let's also have a forum thread for "That story was a rip off of (insert author/book title/ movie title)". I get sick of reading that complaint also.
I propose that anybody complaining either
A) story X is not sci-fi/fantasy, or
B) story X is a blatant rip off of (insert author/book title/ movie title)
is immediately and irrevocably banned from the forums.
;D Who's with me?
*grabs torch, pitchfork, duck and a handful of very small rocks and yells*Burn her! She's a witch!
-
I'm really happy to let the discussion end - the only reason I was continuing it is because I'm really bad at letting things go, not because I was interested in it - but isn't the whole point of splitting a thread to allow the people who happen to be interested in a topic somewhere to continue it while others can happily ignore it? It seems that instead, it's just a call for people not involved in the discussion to pounce on it and try to shut other people up. That's rude and unfortunate.
-
Ouch. Duly chastised. :-[
-
I'm really happy to let the discussion end - the only reason I was continuing it is because I'm really bad at letting things go, not because I was interested in it - but isn't the whole point of splitting a thread to allow the people who happen to be interested in a topic somewhere to continue it while others can happily ignore it? It seems that instead, it's just a call for people not involved in the discussion to pounce on it and try to shut other people up. That's rude and unfortunate.
I may disagree with your definition of SF, but I'll defend to the death your right to stay in the forum and expound upon it.
Besides, you obviously aren't the only one who has a hard time "letting things go". After all, if you aren't enjoying a discussion... you can skip that thread, folks!
Unless eytanz floats, of course... if he floats, then that means he's made of wood, and you know what THAT means... ;)
-
It means he weighs less than a duck?
-
I'm glad you're all having fun with this.
As far as if this is a thread or not. A thread is what I mean when I point at it.
-
I may disagree with your definition of SF, but I'll defend to the death your right to stay in the forum and expound upon it.
Besides, you obviously aren't the only one who has a hard time "letting things go". After all, if you aren't enjoying a discussion... you can skip that thread, folks!
Unless eytanz floats, of course... if he floats, then that means he's made of wood, and you know what THAT means... ;)
It means he weighs less than a duck?
*chuckles*
Thanks for that, just had a good laugh, which was very welcome on a really annoying day at work.
You have no idea how fitting this was, but in a slightly different way. I think I saw Eytan 'paddle' to work this morning, given the fact it has been raining cats and ducks around here for days.
Sorry, Eytan, but I couldn't help it. Seems like you can't get away from the ducks.
(... just to clarify, we have a huge duck population on campus, which leads to the ducks often being prioritized over the students and staff, which makes them really spoilt and cheeky and annoyingly persistent sometimes. :D)
-
(... just to clarify, we have a huge duck population on campus, which leads to the ducks often being prioritized over the students and staff, which makes them really spoilt and cheeky and annoyingly persistent sometimes. :D)
It's quite clear why you think I resemble them, obviously :)
-
(... just to clarify, we have a huge duck population on campus, which leads to the ducks often being prioritized over the students and staff, which makes them really spoilt and cheeky and annoyingly persistent sometimes. :D)
It's quite clear why you think I resemble them, obviously :)
That and because they're, what was it again, "tasty, fluffy and cute". Your words by the way, not mine.
-
(... just to clarify, we have a huge duck population on campus, which leads to the ducks often being prioritized over the students and staff, which makes them really spoilt and cheeky and annoyingly persistent sometimes. :D)
It's quite clear why you think I resemble them, obviously :)
That and because they're, what was it again, "tasty, fluffy and cute". Your words by the way, not mine.
My words for why I like ducks. I never said I resemble them.
-
That and because they're, what was it again, "tasty, fluffy and cute". Your words by the way, not mine.
My words for why I like ducks. I never said I resemble them.
That's because you mentioned these words before you knew what the game was about. Maybe that would be a fun thing to do in an extra thread, or maybe not. Ok, enough of personal stuff. Moving on.
-
I get really, really tired of these arguments. Not only do we have to discuss if a given EP story is "actually" SF, now we're getting discussions in Podcastle threads (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=1636.0) about if a story is "actually" fantasy.
Let's not define things too narrowly, folks!
Well while I agree that this story is sci-fi, you do have to be a little picky about defintions. If for no other reason than for the benefit of authors like me who are submitting stories. ;-)
-
I get really, really tired of these arguments. Not only do we have to discuss if a given EP story is "actually" SF, now we're getting discussions in Podcastle threads (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=1636.0) about if a story is "actually" fantasy.
Let's not define things too narrowly, folks!
Overly-narrow definition = Bad.
But I think those threads do serve a purpose. People have come here expecting content that has to do with SF. If it strays too far from the product as advertised (so to speak) and too many people feel it does, then they'll go elsewhere.
There is a sort of cloud in Lit-Space (my invention) with "Unquestionably SF" at the core, and related genres here and there around the boundary regions. Those threads are merely an effort by the mob (us) to adjust the location of the boundary - "In" / "Out" / "Only sorta', but entertaining enough to be given a pass".
Oops - I messed up my metaphor. I didn't mean that marginal examples are moved in and out of the SF cloud in Lit-Space; rather that the SF boundary is moved out or in to where the examples are already.
Uh... where was I going with this?
Something about belonging to a community (no matter how artificial), and hoping that one's own opinions about that community's values are shared by others members. If people weren't concerned about whether or not...
Uh, let's try again. Later. My shift is almost over.
-
I get really, really tired of these arguments. Not only do we have to discuss if a given EP story is "actually" SF, now we're getting discussions in Podcastle threads (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=1636.0) about if a story is "actually" fantasy.
Let's not define things too narrowly, folks!
Well while I agree that this story is sci-fi, you do have to be a little picky about defintions. If for no other reason than for the benefit of authors like me who are submitting stories. ;-)
Okay, there is THAT... but I like to think that all of the editors have enough leeway to say, "Yeah, let's try this" for stories that blur the boundaries. And I imagine there have been a few tales that have been either referred or passed from one Pod to another. (I seem to remember an intro mentioning that, but listening to the back catalog AND all three current feeds makes my remembry unrelibel.)
-
I think the reason this topic keeps coming up is that those of us who feel that it's valid to criticize the level of SFness in a story on an SF podcast don't feel we making ourselves clear. To be honest I'm a little offended that when anyone criticizes a story in this way the response is "I'm sick of this. Go away." Are there any other aspects of a story that are off limits?
I read science fiction because for the most part because I want to see things I've never seen before. I want a sense of wonder that I don't get from mainstream fiction. If a story fails to give me a sense of wonder, I'm not going to say that it fails at science fiction (though I used to) but I will say that it fails to meet my expectations as an SF story.
This story to me is a meal of spaghetti with a jar of store-bought sauce. Is it good? I guess. Is it Italian? I suppose. But I would rather have something unique made from scratch.
-
I think the reason this topic keeps coming up is that those of us who feel that it's valid to criticize the level of SFness in a story on an SF podcast don't feel we making ourselves clear. To be honest I'm a little offended that when anyone criticizes a story in this way the response is "I'm sick of this. Go away." Are there any other aspects of a story that are off limits?
I read science fiction because for the most part because I want to see things I've never seen before. I want a sense of wonder that I don't get from mainstream fiction. If a story fails to give me a sense of wonder, I'm not going to say that it fails at science fiction (though I used to) but I will say that it fails to meet my expectations as an SF story.
This story to me is a meal of spaghetti with a jar of store-bought sauce. Is it good? I guess. Is it Italian? I suppose. But I would rather have something unique made from scratch.
The problem is that we get arguments that chase away people who want to comment on the plot and characters. One of the people saying this story wasn't SF finally admitted that he wants stories that stretch the boundaries of SF and if they don't he says it's not SF at all. Not every story can enhance all of SF.
Saying the story was too SF-lite for you is a legitimate comment. But when we have an argument over if a story with aliens taking place on a space station is SF or not, I'm splitting it off. It's a stupid argument. Feel free to have it, but I'm not allowing the episode thread to be clogged up with it.
Steve is trying to get us good SF stories. The important word here is good. He gets Hard-SF, but not good Hard-SF. The story needs to come first. If you want harder SF, help out. Send emails to authors you like and tell them about this wonderful little podcast. Tell them about the exposure to new readers. Tell them that Mike Resnick got a movie deal from EP.
Let me step down from my soap box now.
-
Steve is trying to get us good SF stories. The important word here is good. He gets Hard-SF, but not good Hard-SF. The story needs to come first. If you want harder SF, help out. Send emails to authors you like and tell them about this wonderful little podcast. Tell them about the exposure to new readers. Tell them that Mike Resnick got a movie deal from EP.
Uh...wha? Is that last remark true, or is that an example of "slight amplification of facts designed to persuade fate to bring about a particular reality"? (AKA, big fat lie.)
-
Steve is trying to get us good SF stories. The important word here is good. He gets Hard-SF, but not good Hard-SF. The story needs to come first. If you want harder SF, help out. Send emails to authors you like and tell them about this wonderful little podcast. Tell them about the exposure to new readers. Tell them that Mike Resnick got a movie deal from EP.
Uh...wha? Is that last remark true, or is that an example of "slight amplification of facts designed to persuade fate to bring about a particular reality"? (AKA, big fat lie.)
Steve said (I think in the metacast #3) that Mike Resnick became a big supported of EP after he optioned his script to someone that heard about it because of EP. I don't know if it was a friend of a friend of a friend thing or if the person who optioned it is an EP listener, but Resnick is thrilled. You can try PMing him and asking him to come here and give the details. He does like to show up in the forums once in a while.
-
Steve is trying to get us good SF stories. The important word here is good. He gets Hard-SF, but not good Hard-SF. The story needs to come first. If you want harder SF, help out. Send emails to authors you like and tell them about this wonderful little podcast. Tell them about the exposure to new readers. Tell them that Mike Resnick got a movie deal from EP.
Uh...wha? Is that last remark true, or is that an example of "slight amplification of facts designed to persuade fate to bring about a particular reality"? (AKA, big fat lie.)
Steve said (I think in the metacast #3) that Mike Resnick became a big supported of EP after he optioned his script to someone that heard about it because of EP. I don't know if it was a friend of a friend of a friend thing or if the person who optioned it is an EP listener, but Resnick is thrilled. You can try PMing him and asking him to come here and give the details. He does like to show up in the forums once in a while.
Oh, yeah... now that you say that, I do think I remember hearing it.
I should have known better than to question a deity. ::)
-
Steve is trying to get us good SF stories. The important word here is good. He gets Hard-SF, but not good Hard-SF. The story needs to come first. If you want harder SF, help out. Send emails to authors you like and tell them about this wonderful little podcast. Tell them about the exposure to new readers. Tell them that Mike Resnick got a movie deal from EP.
Uh...wha? Is that last remark true, or is that an example of "slight amplification of facts designed to persuade fate to bring about a particular reality"? (AKA, big fat lie.)
Steve said (I think in the metacast #3) that Mike Resnick became a big supported of EP after he optioned his script to someone that heard about it because of EP. I don't know if it was a friend of a friend of a friend thing or if the person who optioned it is an EP listener, but Resnick is thrilled. You can try PMing him and asking him to come here and give the details. He does like to show up in the forums once in a while.
Oh, yeah... now that you say that, I do think I remember hearing it.
I should have known better than to question a deity. ::)
Others have made that mistake. They are no longer with us. ::)
-
I think the reason this topic keeps coming up is that those of us who feel that it's valid to criticize the level of SFness in a story on an SF podcast don't feel we making ourselves clear. To be honest I'm a little offended that when anyone criticizes a story in this way the response is "I'm sick of this. Go away." Are there any other aspects of a story that are off limits?
I read science fiction because for the most part because I want to see things I've never seen before. I want a sense of wonder that I don't get from mainstream fiction. If a story fails to give me a sense of wonder, I'm not going to say that it fails at science fiction (though I used to) but I will say that it fails to meet my expectations as an SF story.
This story to me is a meal of spaghetti with a jar of store-bought sauce. Is it good? I guess. Is it Italian? I suppose. But I would rather have something unique made from scratch.
The problem is that we get arguments that chase away people who want to comment on the plot and characters. One of the people saying this story wasn't SF finally admitted that he wants stories that stretch the boundaries of SF and if they don't he says it's not SF at all. Not every story can enhance all of SF.
Saying the story was too SF-lite for you is a legitimate comment. But when we have an argument over if a story with aliens taking place on a space station is SF or not, I'm splitting it off. It's a stupid argument. Feel free to have it, but I'm not allowing the episode thread to be clogged up with it.
Steve is trying to get us good SF stories. The important word here is good. He gets Hard-SF, but not good Hard-SF. The story needs to come first. If you want harder SF, help out. Send emails to authors you like and tell them about this wonderful little podcast. Tell them about the exposure to new readers. Tell them that Mike Resnick got a movie deal from EP.
Let me step down from my soap box now.
Ok, I'll take that soapbox from you...
I used to be a figure in these battles, and even with me standing down they seem to continue. I stood down from these forums for about 4 months after the one that turned nasty. There are several fellow forumers whose inputs I valued who have left directly after the "Is It SF" discussions.
I like the EP forums, you'll keep seeing me around in these parts, and I value what everyone says on this. This issue is however highly charged in these parts. I think we'd do better de-charging it than seeing it come up in the form it has again and again and again. Slapping it down as happens here is not conducive to the forums community.
-
There are two problems here, both intertwined as far as I can see:
- First, new members to the community don't share the history some of us do. People keep bringing up the "is it SF/horror/fantasy" argument because, frankly, it's a very natural one. They sign up to an SF/horror/fantasy podcast, and after a few weeks get a story they don't feel fits. They then have the natural urge to point that out. I don't think they should be shut up just because the old-timers among us have done a bad job of discussing this topic long before they joined the forum.
- Second, the "is it SF" question has multiple aspects, not all of which are equal. The "how should I label this story?" aspect, and the "whether this story belongs in the podcast" aspect are the ones most people think of, and neither is an interesting question. The first is boring because labelling the stories is just a subjective task that is entirely up to each listener and doesn't leave any room for discussion. The second is irrelevant because Steve already said that the criteria for whether stories belong is whether *he* thinks they belong, and that's that - and I agree that that's the best way to run the podcast, for quite a few reasons. But there are other, more interesting questions. For example, "is the story succesful as SF", or "what does the story tell us about SF". In my posts that got split off into this thread, I was trying to address those questions - specifically, saying "no" and "nothing", contrary to what other people were saying. I found this an interesting discussion when it started, and I learnt something from it. I hope other people did too. Then I let my side of it run a bit too long, as I am wont to do, but that has nothing to do with the topic.
As I said above, seperating the topics out of main threads - though not necessarily the choice I would make were I moderator - seems entirely fair. Some people don't want to see these discussions, and it's a valid choice to allow them that. But once a discussion is seperated, and assuming it remains civil and within acceptable boundaries, it should be allowed to continue in peace.
-
The absense or presense of the word successful would change whether or not a post got split off.
"I think this story didn't really work as SF, because the elements weren't…" is a thought-provoking and legitimate comment.
"This isn't SF." isn't.
There's a line between interesting commentary and whining. If you're whining because you want something more like 2001, star wars, trek, or whatever on the podcast, it only makes the threads annoying to read and cuts down on other kinds of posts.
Some of the people here have started using "isn't SF" as the default comment for when they don't like a story. This is another thing that determines how much of it we're willing to allow. When the same thing is said about six stories in a row, patience is very short. If it only came up once every four to eight episodes, I'd even let the argument go for quite a while before splitting it.
All I really care about are the threads. If a story thread is going great, you won't even see me in there. No comment on the story. Doesn't matter what I thought about it. The other end, of course, is when things are harmful and need to be split.
-
The absense or presense of the word successful would change whether or not a post got split off.
Though note that you split my EP160 posts off, where I never said that the story was not SF, but was rather saying that the SF elements were superficial and didn't contribute much.
Not that I'm complaining about your decision, mind you - I was fine with my posts being split off - I'm just saying that the criteria you applied are different than what you are saying now.
I'm willing to plead guilty to the charges of being boring, or over-verbose, or beating a dead horse. I'm not willing to accept my posts being called whining, because they were not and are not.
-
The absense or presense of the word successful would change whether or not a post got split off.
Though note that you split my EP160 posts off, where I never said that the story was not SF, but was rather saying that the SF elements were superficial and didn't contribute much.
Not that I'm complaining about your decision, mind you - I was fine with my posts being split off - I'm just saying that the criteria you applied are different than what you are saying now.
I'm willing to plead guilty to the charges of being boring, or over-verbose, or beating a dead horse. I'm not willing to accept my posts being called whining, because they were not and are not.
The whining comment was a general comment. It was not aimed at you. If one of the perpetrators of this comes in here and tries to play innocent, I'll gladly point fingers
This is a classic sitcom, set in a space station, but that was just a thin veneer of SF paint over a well-worn plot.
This comment was left and it's yours
Without the SF this is just some put-upon guy at a mall trying to keep his dollar store.
This comment was left.
It wasn't anyone comment that got this split off. It was when the thread became only about this argument. It was a big picture type of decision. Once it was into that argument, it was a yes it is, no it isn't fight. The fight isn't the problem. It was the disturbance it caused.
Maybe I haven't been consistent with the details of why I split this one off and there's a simple reason for that. I did it almost four weeks ago and I do have a life. I am not going to go back and revisit every decision. Unforunately I ended up doing that a bit for this one.