Site development dead?

It's already too much if you ask me.
If I take the time to write a thread I don't want to wait an entire week only to see it listed on the site (story map). That's why I liked how Friedman let the writers the freedom to keep on writing on (yet) unapproved threads, and to leave those visible.
And right now there are a lot of users that took their time to write and didn't see it approved in months.

And to answer your second doubt, I think that if we put some "super editors" on the stagnant threads I guess we can assume they will already be doing a good job so there's no need to think how the story owner can delete their approved threads.
To be honest, if any editor is doing a bad job it's really easy for the user to "denounce" it on the forums.

 

Mr. B: (shakes head).

 

There should be at least a "I'm on vacation for another __ days"-function, where the contributing user gets a message about.

There should be of course also a way to avoid threads not be checked in an acceptable time.
Kind of "super editor" sounds good for that. They shouldn't be able to approve threads for editors with planned absence.

 

I wonder if the problem is more in editors who are absent rather than slow? In the case where the editor has been gone for 90 days or so, it does seem reasonable to salvage the story. In this day and age of source control, I'd favor duplicating the story and handing it to the new contributor or another editor, keeping an archived copy of the abandoned story to be revived. (But that poses the interesting question of whether the thread authors suddenly see their threads double in number).

It seems to me that if the problem is being unhappily surprised by a lack of editor attention, that the "submit new thread" page (or link) could indicate how recently the editor was active. An inactive story could also be marked closed to avoid disappointing contributors.

If the problem is more that new contributors are feeling neglected overall, or lost in the site, we should make better use of (and direct them to) the forums.

Forcing <1 week turn-around seems a bad deal for editors, and it's unclear to me that it encourages consistent contributions. Where I've seen the best collaboration and interaction between contributors is when several contributors are working off each other on a story -- when a story is "hot" rather than when it is "open".

Hopefully Chyoa 2.0, where you'll be able delegate a co-editor or editors like with Chyoo (correct?), and/or designate trusted writers, will be a sufficient answer to the problem of slow response to contributions.

 

It's been well over ninety days and I've never gotten a single contribution on any of my stories, which makes it a futile exercise for me to visit the site every three months. I wouldn't want people to be able to take over editorship of my story by playing a waiting game simply because they showed no interest in it early on. That seems like just as much an exploit as abusing the old ratings system to become auto-approved. A duplicate seems like the worst idea. My story is mine, regardless of whether it "succeeded" or not. Simply preventing people from being able to add to an old story because the editor isn't around seems like the best bet--I've certainly seen my concepts being reused enough to conclude that other writers are content to simply start up a story using the same mechanics and ideas rather than open up any old story that hasn't seen new approved threads in a while. I'm not convinced we need to recycle older stories.

 

To be fair, your deepest thread in a story is only four threads deep. When I consider writing for another author's story, I usually look for it to be a bit deeper, a bit more fleshed out. That way, I have a firm grasp of the author's intent, the story and character's backgrounds, and where the story is headed. I generally don't start stories on my own; it's just not my forte. I do prefer some depth to the material, though, so I can add in a manner that supports the original author's intentions.

As for taking stories over: I've taken on a total of three, and retain control of two of them. The third one was returned to the original author when she made her way here from Chyoo. I requested editor status on those stories after my threads had been sitting idle for a month, in case the original author was on vacation.

When it comes to taking on an editorial position like that, I think the most important part is the editor understanding his or her role is to continue the original author's vision, something I aim to achieve by reviewing new threads for similar writing quality to what the original author accepted, and ensuring no strange plot-twists or story hijackings occur. I believe good editors who uphold the original intent of the story are a good thing, as many of us share the same interests. It helps keep down on the glut of similar stories all ripping each other off, then dying off as no one adds to them, and keeps good, quality stories moving. If I ever start a story, then fall of the face of the planet, I personally would prefer it go to someone who cares about it as I do, who would continue to see to the story's continuation. What I put on this site is public domain, something that hopefully provides a spark of inspiration to another author, and I wouldn't want my absence to hinder that spark.

What may be a better option here isn't so much in allowing editor control, but giving returning authors the capacity to remove any threads/trees they don't desire to be in their stories without question. A proper list of guidelines for potential editors to aid them in maintaining the spirit of the author's intentions wouldn't hurt.

As for people like Semeny, who wouldn't want others to take on their works, a simple back-end marker that flags the story as "Never available for editing" could be used to provide authors a way of ensuring their works are never handed to an editor without their consent. Obviously, it doesn't help with stories that haven't been worked on in years that were ported to Chyoa, but at least new or currently active authors could mark their desires so the admin staff would know whether or not their stories are available for adoption going forward.

At the end of the day, though, I doubt there's a perfect fix to this problem. What may be needed is a method on the website to allow potential contributors to easily contact the owner of a story, facilitating communication that would hopefully break the ice, making new contributors feel welcome to write on those stories by putting them in contact with the owner. I lurked for more than a year on Chyoa before ever contributing to a story, simply because it can be nerve-wracking to consider adding to someone's work, not really knowing if you're up to their standards or not. Once Friedman has Chyoa 2.0 up, with the integrated login on the site and forums, it could be as simple as a link that automatically opens a PM to the owner.

Speaking of standards, I think the other thing that causes these offshoot threads is actually the standard of writing that goes into those initial threads. Semeny, your threads are fantastically written: well-thought out, superb writing, and excellent character development. When I read something like that, if it's something I'd consider contributing to, I'm going to attempt to write threads to those standards, while staying close to the author's original vision. Not all of Chyoa's writers have the same grasp of the English language, however, and that can be as much a turnoff to contributing to an existing story as an inactive owner. That could be as much a barrier to people contributing to your stories as the lack of initial depth guiding them into the story, which is currently the best way to introduce them to your concepts, until there's a better way to put authors into contact with potential contributors.

 

Any word on the new site update?

 

We're getting closer to the release date. First screenshots next week.

 

Is everything OK Friedman?

 

Yep, everything's OK. Thanks for asking Have you seen Sneak Peek at Chyoa 2? I've continued this thread over there.