Should we make the etiquette links go to the short etiquette page automatically? It seems like it's our working document much more than the filk is.

I suggested that a while back and most folks were against it. Is there someone willing to update the filky version? No filk talent is needed since the updates can go into the "spoken" parts. You just have to make sure that everyone in the short version is covered in the filk version.

If someone can provide me with a list of items that need to be incorporated, I can update the filk text.

t natter

I'm finding myself grateful she never knew my real name. She'd have had a field day.

BWAH!

t /natter

I suggested that a while back and most folks were against it.

I'm really strongly for it, and I never said so because it seemed like it was already decided. But this is really a good instance of why. We need the etiquette to be flexible, and to be changeable quickly when needed.

And there are people who don't like to read filk. Who don't know the tune. Who find it a hundred times more difficult to get important content out of something structured as a song than they would if it were in prose. If we're going to say that we expect people to hold to the rules, the simple version should be the default.

(Also, as someone who has never once made it through the filky version, and not because I think it's bad filk at all, I find the "attention-span challenged" business really personally insulting, but that may just be me.)

(...I find the "attention-span challenged" business really personally insulting, but that may just be me.)

I've never said it, but I had a lot of problem with that line too, because this is me:

And there are people who don't like to read filk. Who don't know the tune. Who find it a hundred times more difficult to get important content out of something structured as a song than they would if it were in prose.

I like the filk, but I'd prefer not to have the "attention-span challenged" line there. I have no opinion as to which is the default link; I can argue either way.

We need the etiquette to be flexible, and to be changeable quickly when needed.

Yes, this.

(...I find the "attention-span challenged" business really personally insulting, but that may just be me.)

As the person who wrote "attention-span challenged," I did it because a)I thought it was funny and b)I didn't want to be percieved as criticizing the filk, or saying "I can do better." I'm sorry to hear it's read as insulting.

But, yes, this is also me:

And there are people who don't like to read filk. Who don't know the tune. Who find it a hundred times more difficult to get important content out of something structured as a song than they would if it were in prose.

After:

ANYA: I'm not condescending. I'm embracing the principle on which this forum was founded. Even though a dictatorship would be substantially easier to run.

Add:

XANDER: You're not helping. What she means to say is that our rules are few and simple, and when there's enforcing to be done, it's done by board members known as Big Stompy Feet. They are wise, they are considerate, they are smart, and they have smiting capability, so if they ask you to do something, play nice and cooperate.

After:

WILLOW: (hissing) No flames, remember?

Add:

ANYA: But what if someone happens to get turned into a demon and repeatedly violates site ettiquette?

WILLOW: Consistent demon-like behavior may earn a warning from the Stompy Feet. If you don't listen to the warning, you'll be suspended for two months. And if you come back unreformed, you'll be banned. It's not pretty, and we don't like to do it, but we figure it's better than getting all black-eyed and scary.

XANDER: Oh, and one more thing? We don't need septic tank cleaners, generic prescriptions, or, and I cannot stress this enough, penis enhancements. So please don't spam us.

Does that cover what's missing?

waves sheepishly.

Dear Uncle-Aunt Stompiefoot,

Please could I change my name? To Fay?

Thank you.

Done!