|
|
Post by Severla on Mar 24, 2019 5:18:05 GMT
I think the landscape has changed so vastly due to World opening the sharing of Edits and expanding e-fed participation among people, that potentially trying to put it all into one bucket may simply not be the best way of doing it anymore.
While community style titles are still an okay thing (such as Roddy's Internet one) to have an option of floating around, I think the idea of the 'Fire Pro Wrestling Alliance' could potentially stand to shift it's view away from 'community e-fed' and instead just be ran as a 'wrestling alliance' akin to say, New Japan and ROH. These two companies dont have some super title between them, they just put on paired shows and show off their stuff together, more akin to how the community tournaments have been going.
Just swap the FPWA Supershows into being just that, supershows. Show off some intermingled Edits from varied community members. Dont worry about attaching an entire new level of belts to them (which honestly would also take some of the planning strain off of FullMetal and whoever else may be putting it together), just show off work. If a title needs to be attached, let it be as if an ROH title is booked on a New Japan show and have one E-fed simply allow an open challenge from another.
It doesnt have to be WWE with it's 4 branches and 62 titles between them all. That just stifles everyone not actively competing for a belt.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingradical on Mar 24, 2019 5:21:37 GMT
Then you cant try to tell people what they can and can't book. You can't say nothings official then try to play dictator. You don't own Fire Pro and you guys unilaterally trying to declare yourself king is why this discussion needs ti be had because this community isn't bug enough for you to keep doing thus "my way or fuck off" thing
|
|
|
|
Post by Firehawk on Mar 24, 2019 5:29:10 GMT
I think the landscape has changed so vastly due to World opening the sharing of Edits and expanding e-fed participation among people, that potentially trying to put it all into one bucket may simply not be the best way of doing it anymore. While community style titles are still an okay thing (such as Roddy's Internet one) to have an option of floating around, I think the idea of the 'Fire Pro Wrestling Alliance' could potentially stand to shift it's view away from 'community e-fed' and instead just be ran as a 'wrestling alliance' akin to say, New Japan and ROH. These two companies dont have some super title between them, they just put on paired shows and show off their stuff together, more akin to how the community tournaments have been going. Just swap the FPWA Supershows into being just that, supershows. Show off some intermingled Edits from varied community members. Dont worry about attaching an entire new level of belts to them (which honestly would also take some of the planning strain off of FullMetal and whoever else may be putting it together), just show off work. If a title needs to be attached, let it be as if an ROH title is booked on a New Japan show and have one E-fed simply allow an open challenge from another. It doesnt have to be WWE with it's 4 branches and 62 titles between them all. That just stifles everyone not actively competing for a belt. This really does represent what I think is the best way to move forward. I'm not going to outright declare that the way things are right now has to die out immediately, but I think one thing that's become pretty clear over the past year is that things have changed. There's a lot of pressure on FM, what with essentially running the entire project solo, and this idea would very much be a way to stop putting that sort of pressure on just one or two people. I like this proposal but I would definitely like to see what other people think of the idea. It's definitely a discussion that should be held. |
|
|
|
Post by soak314 on Mar 24, 2019 6:11:07 GMT
If you want a collaborative community thing, you're gonna have to make it NOT revolve around community belts.
A belt is put into place as an easy way to manufacture stakes and interest. But a belt will also incentivize:
a.) making edits that can win more than they can lose to potentially gun for it, and
b.) making it so the edit that currently holds the belt has some kind of advantage coming into any defenses, so the title actually means something when they lose it. If you mix dangling the belt as a prize with how people are generally disdainful of edits with a high winrate makes for an interesting social concoction. You get a lot of edits not designed to work with each other wanting to fight for the prize in an environment where they are * strongly encouraged to not want to win*, to put that aside and value putting on a good match . It necessitates heavy moderation to work, as seen in the past.
I don't think it was a particularly sustainable (or interesting) framework, as seen in the present. If you want to tackle Big Community Things, you have to look at how the community as it is currently operates. The current firepro community is:
a.) divvied up neatly into little bubbles consisting of people/feds/groups who get along in terms of personality and logic design b.) much larger and accessible vs the old community in terms of edit sharing c.) MUCH more ready, willing, and able to share match footage because of the internet These traits should be taken advantage of as it's an immediate and easy way for whoever is running to both spread the workload and drum up interest from the various firepro circles within the community at large. So what you do is: I. Do a Supershow, as Sev suggested. Do it like once a month, once a fortnight. Make it fairly infrequent but regular to keep interest up, but to keep it from being too unwieldy to run
II. Populate the card with matches defined by members of the community, involving edits they know will put on an interesting match, representing that particular person/circle of people's style of simming. i.e. Firehawk could have one match on the card, it could be for a title (not a community one! but for one within his fed). Dawn could have a match on the card, it could be an exhibition between two of his edits. Senator could agree to have an edit debut vs one of Hana's established ones, as discussed by either party beforehand. III. Decide on what goes where on the card depending on context, match length, etc. and then have people decide if they want the sims live or pre-recorded. Protip: a fully pre-recorded show will take a massive amount of load off the organizer, and let whoever's involved decide on whatever level of moddery, result rigging, or fancy production will come into the video they send into the show. IV. Gather up your match footage, decide on a nice, active timeslot to stream it, and boom you have a show.
I like this because you have a set audience: people who have submitted matches invested in seeing other people reacting to those matches. You will incite community interaction because it is much more interesting to collaborate on a match than it is to just chuck two of your own edits up as a submission. And you also won't need to make a community belt to fight over because *everyone already has loads of belts flying around their own little feds and edit circles*. They can decide for themselves what kind of stakes or gimmick their match submissions will have.
The organizer/s also won't have to book per se, because it'll be the community at large doing it for him.
This format also promotes putting on a good match over fixating over a belt and who has it. Because you CAN have your personal e-fed belt defenses thrown in there generating faux-stakes for people with no context, but it won't bloody matter when the guy who went before you put on a crazy exhibition and stole the show.
But most importantly: this format provides an avenue to exhibit all the different styles of simming that make up the community in the best possible light, as determined by the community at large who will submit the matchups they themselves consider to be good.
Also you may have noticed that this format is basically brick's Two Nights In Tokyo shows, which I've basically just reiterated because it was a Good Format and I personally was a bit dumbstruck at how it didn't catch on.
|
|
WMDBFX
Steel Johnson
Posts: 207
|
Post by WMDBFX on Mar 24, 2019 6:18:28 GMT
This is what needed.. everyone discussing, reasonably discusding and come to a good solution. Whether it is for or agsinst community titles. We want the decision be by and for the community. We are in this situation where people not stepping up when asked for input but later be negative towards the person that actually does.
For me the alliance and it's titles are more like NWA and NJPW's IWGP. A " Governing " body that " governed " over all the ( e ) feds. The titles ( with champions ) could be a travelling title with every fed has the chance to challenge for it or it could be grounded to a specific fed / brand like what I did and am doing with the ANARCHY title.
|
|
|
|
Post by LankyLefty17 on Mar 24, 2019 6:40:52 GMT
For me Soak nailed my feelings on the subject. This would be my vote on how to proceed.
|
|
Ripley
Steel Johnson
Posts: 198
|
Post by Ripley on Mar 24, 2019 6:49:25 GMT
If you want a collaborative community thing, you're gonna have to make it NOT revolve around community belts.
A belt is put into place as an easy way to manufacture stakes and interest. But a belt will also incentivize:
a.) making edits that can win more than they can lose to potentially gun for it, and
b.) making it so the edit that currently holds the belt has some kind of advantage coming into any defenses, so the title actually means something when they lose it. If you mix dangling the belt as a prize with how people are generally disdainful of edits with a high winrate makes for an interesting social concoction. You get a lot of edits not designed to work with each other wanting to fight for the prize in an environment where they are * strongly encouraged to not want to win*, to put that aside and value putting on a good match . It necessitates heavy moderation to work, as seen in the past.
I don't think it was a particularly sustainable (or interesting) framework, as seen in the present. If you want to tackle Big Community Things, you have to look at how the community as it is currently operates. The current firepro community is:
a.) divvied up neatly into little bubbles consisting of people/feds/groups who get along in terms of personality and logic design b.) much larger and accessible vs the old community in terms of edit sharing c.) MUCH more ready, willing, and able to share match footage because of the internet These traits should be taken advantage of as it's an immediate and easy way for whoever is running to both spread the workload and drum up interest from the various firepro circles within the community at large. So what you do is: I. Do a Supershow, as Sev suggested. Do it like once a month, once a fortnight. Make it fairly infrequent but regular to keep interest up, but to keep it from being too unwieldy to run
II. Populate the card with matches defined by members of the community, involving edits they know will put on an interesting match, representing that particular person/circle of people's style of simming. i.e. Firehawk could have one match on the card, it could be for a title (not a community one! but for one within his fed). Dawn could have a match on the card, it could be an exhibition between two of his edits. Senator could agree to have an edit debut vs one of Hana's established ones, as discussed by either party beforehand. III. Decide on what goes where on the card depending on context, match length, etc. and then have people decide if they want the sims live or pre-recorded. Protip: a fully pre-recorded show will take a massive amount of load off the organizer, and let whoever's involved decide on whatever level of moddery, result rigging, or fancy production will come into the video they send into the show. IV. Gather up your match footage, decide on a nice, active timeslot to stream it, and boom you have a show.
I like this because you have a set audience: people who have submitted matches invested in seeing other people reacting to those matches. You will incite community interaction because it is much more interesting to collaborate on a match than it is to just chuck two of your own edits up as a submission. And you also won't need to make a community belt to fight over because *everyone already has loads of belts flying around their own little feds and edit circles*. They can decide for themselves what kind of stakes or gimmick their match submissions will have.
The organizer/s also won't have to book per se, because it'll be the community at large doing it for him.
This format also promotes putting on a good match over fixating over a belt and who has it. Because you CAN have your personal e-fed belt defenses thrown in there generating faux-stakes for people with no context, but it won't bloody matter when the guy who went before you put on a crazy exhibition and stole the show.
But most importantly: this format provides an avenue to exhibit all the different styles of simming that make up the community in the best possible light, as determined by the community at large who will submit the matchups they themselves consider to be good.
Also you may have noticed that this format is basically brick's Two Nights In Tokyo shows, which I've basically just reiterated because it was a Good Format and I personally was a bit dumbstruck at how it didn't catch on.
I was going to come into this thread all blustery and belligerent and Soak basically said what I would say, so... Half the reason that I personally stayed away from the March Madness tournament and just community tournaments in general is seeing my edits get ousted in the first round easily. Half the reason I don't collaborate with many people is most of my edits get fucking trounced when people start only worrying about winning. And honestly it very much feels like, to me, often tournaments bring out the fucking wooooooooorst habits in people, both in terms of making edits and in terms of chat participation. My only concern with the TNiT format is that it's not really going to actually... diversify things much. It's just going to be the same handful of people collaborating with the same handful of people presenting to the same handful of people and going "Well, that was fun. I look forward to person X collaborating with person Y and person A collaborating with person B again next month." One thing I like, in theory, about tournaments, is seeing how person A's edits collaborate with person X's. Sometimes they don't. At all. Often we get some busted-ass edits and we get some real fucking duds. Again: there's a reason I kinda just... stopped bothering with tournaments. But I don't particularly think just taking a few groups of like-minded people, having them collaborate with one another, and then... putting all their matches together is really the right solution either. It's a great first step, but it doesn't really do anything. I'm repeating myself but I'd just be worried that, again, you'd just see the same handful of people collaborating with the same handful of people doing the same kind of matches and no one really... gets anything from that. It'd be great to see people seeing the value in someone else's style, maybe adapting some shit, and seeing genuine collaboration from two edit makers who at first seem like they wouldn't be able to really have edits put on a fun, interesting match. I also think just, in general, there's a whole fuckton of lording over people about what is "right." I get it, it's mostly in jest, but that shit gets tiresome. And I know for sure it has put me off wanting to participate in things. And I'm kind of halfway decent-ish at making edits. I can only imagine what that's like for someone brand new. Luckily there's someone like Sen who is very willing to take on anybody's edits. And from what I've personally talked to of amsterDAN and Lefty, if you've got an idea, they're willing to listen. Outside of that, and Honoo, if you have a very particular style of edit, I don't particularly think we're inviting as we'd like to think we are. Not trying to be negative, and I very much agree with SOAK in principle, and think something loosely based off his idea is the way to move forward with "official" things, but... eh, I'd just worry it would get very stagnant very fast. Also, straight up, I think that it should be every two months or so. Considering most of the people who would probably be most notably featured already stream on a regular (weekly, in some cases) to semi-regular basis, I don't particularly need to see Firehawk vs. Hana or Maikeru's edits... again. Like, nothing personal, but if we're talking about "like-minded" people presenting matches with other "like-minded" people on a supercard, we... already do that, we'd just be collecting them in a big show. And I can already do that on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. I think you've gotta either space it out if the participation numbers are pretty low and we're just gonna have repeats, or if you're gonna do it, say, monthly, you're rotating. So say I was involved in April's show, I'd take May off, and in comes Hana or Lefty or whomever. Then they rotate out for June and I come back in. I don't know if that's an ideal solution, but I'm just throwing things out there as I just start to question the point of a "supershow" that's just... a collection of matches I can basically see streamed every week anyway. I also think the streaming schedule is pretty fucking crowded as is considering some people go on weekly for multiple different promotions/e-feds so having something like this go on anything other than monthly (which... again, I'd personally lean towards bi-monthly, but hey, I'm not running it, so...) just feels like it would be a lot. On that note it would probably be nice to try to avoid repeats of the same edits from the same people over and over, too. I've no problem with, say, seeing Sen and Lefty's edits, or Hana's and 'Hawk's, but I think this is the perfect opportunity to showcase lesser-known edits, or even work-in-progress edits, even if they're from very prominent and well-known edit-makers. Also regardless of whether it's done live or pre-recorded or a combination of both, I think you need to rotate who is hosting it. I think just as important as showcasing people's editing styles, we need to showcase people's broadcasting styles as well. It also helps them build an audience if they're efedding outside of the "supercard" shows, or gives new people a chance to try out streaming, or to get a bigger audience than they might normally get. That's all. I like it a lot in theory, I just worry that if people aren't actively seeking out to work with edit makers they may not have thought to or just kinda go about playing it safe and collaborate with people they're already working with anyway, it seems kinda, to me, personally, just as pointless (albeit not as drama-filled) as what we have now. I may have said this in another way already, but also I just... eh, a huge thing that really fucking puts me off is just completely shitting on other edits as if there is a right way to do things. Yes, yes, there are some fundamental things that people generally agree on and I have 100% been guilty of calling an edit shit in a chat. But I just worry that even when "like-minded" edits are put together you're still going to get people in chats shitting on edits for one reason or another and that can be discouraging as fuck. It's fine to be critical, but I know I'm not particularly fond of seeing my own edits in anyone's streams for fear of them getting completely shat on. That doesn't feel particularly great. So I can see how that kinda shit would completely turn someone off from wanting to collaborate and work with others. We don't need to endlessly praise everything about everyone's edits and it doesn't need to be a giant wankfest. If you personally are thinking "Huh, I feel like maybe that move should pin..." it's perfectly fine to say something, or suggest a new move if someone's edit goes for an armbar or some such as a finisher but doesn't have much armwork in their moveset. But just like calling someone's edit complete garbage, especially if they're there in the chat? Doesn't feel particularly great, and would very much go against the spirit of "collaboration." I'm ranting now. I'm tired. Soak's idea/TNiT-style I think is the way to go forward with some tweaks here and there, but I just... have my reservations. Hopefully I've made them clear. |
|
|
|
Post by OrochiGeese on Mar 24, 2019 7:00:36 GMT
The overall community has had to evolve in SO many ways since FPW was announced. It had to evolve in so many ways before that. This is what the overall Fire Pro community does and has done from the beginning. No board or e-fed or group lasts forever in the community. We take the best ideas and spirit and try to apply it and adapt it to the new situation we find ourselves in. I can name 5-10 community e-feds right now that no longer exist that I miss the hell out of but that inspired me. I can name message boards that used to be the undisputed HOME of the community I was a part of. But here we are now. And that's what matters. What the people here want now. I don't even know if I consider myself one of those people as my e-fed participation has plummeted. I'm old school and my free time had dwindled. I don't spend a lot of time in the streams or the discords and that is where SO much of the community e-fed spirit is right now. The boards set things up, the streams knock it down. I'm still doing e-feds like its 2008 because that's what I'm used to, that's what I enjoy, that's how my mind works, and that's how I get my fix. As a result, I'm painfully out of touch. So as a result of that, take this post for what it's worth to you. But remember, I've seen first hand that the only constant in this community is change and I've lived it here since 2002. I've adapted, I've helped create feds, I've helped destroy feds, I've survived almost 20 years of e-fedding and board drama. I still hold the infinity stones given to me by Hoss, Vermin, Tokerblue, BillWood, HipHopKing, and Muka. Here is the text under the "CRITICAL~! Alliance" section: I see nothing there about one specific promotion being the official C!C show nor do I think one should be. I see the "CRITICAL~! Alliance" section as a forum for C!C community collaborative events that does not need or imply or benefit from a hierarchy of any type or one "flagship" C!C promotion. I don't think ANY promotion should have the privilege or the burden of being the C!C flagship promotion. Rather, any project/event in that promotion should be treated as a community run project, each project being equal. And no C!C branded Championships, especially not from a promotion that is not relevant for about 75% of the e-fedders that are currently here right now. There are few people who love and worked as hard for the FPCPP as myself. I broke my original PS2 in 2007 putting together the first FPCPP pack with SonnyBone. I was on the booking team making huge "Geese posts" for years. I saw the "2007-2010" era of FPCPP as one of the golden ages of the entire community. But FPCPP/FPWA shouldn't get automatic top billing as the C!C promotion. No promotion should. FPCPP/FPWA should just be another collaborative project that occurs here. It shouldn't be stripped of its Titles but those Titles shouldn't be the top titles for the entire C!C website. No Titles should. And the FPCPP/FPWA Titles are only as meaningful as people believe any fed's titles are. Right now they aren't as meaningful because many of them belong to edits of handlers who have left the community. But that's fine. It's not a knock on the FPCPP/FPWA, and certainly not a knock on the 2 person show in keeping that place running that FM and BFX has done. They have each done incredible work and deserve far more credit for that work and their passion than they get. The problem is that its the FPCPP/FPWA fed is rooted 12 years in the past, had about 3-4 years of inactivity on the Arena, and doesn't run that many shows now. As a result, it just isn't as relevant to many of the current e-fedders around here to deserve official status. There's no need to have any official "e-fed" of the C!C. This isn't FPC or the Arena making FPCPP its official fed. This is the C!C and collaboration is very high. Let's not let any type of hierarchy or regimented organization get in that way. Perhaps, in time, a new group promotion is created naturally and rises. Good, then it can become "official" if that's what people want. But I really don't see the majority of people here wanting FPWA or any other fed to be official. Even if there were more bookers and show runners for it, it's a fed that people in the here and now just aren't connected to cause it was before their time. It shouldn't be eliminated, it just shouldn't have the same status it used to because in people's mind it just doesn't. People aren't going to the streams to watch FPWA edits. They are going to the streams to watch individual e-feds and collaborative tournaments and projects. And just to talk to each other and watch simming. There's nothing wrong with events or e-feds in the "CRITICAL~! Alliance" having their own Championships of Tournament Cups to shoot for. But the idea of treating them as representing C!C in the same flagship way that other recent boards have had official promotions seems obsolete right now. That's my view and what I'm getting from a lot of the people who are doing the collaborative and stream thing every day: the equivalent of those like me who would go to FPCPP streams and Wondy's Dojo 10 years ago. Back then we structured things into the FPCPP and brought it to the Arena with us. But now, the structure is different. FPW is way more relevant to people to watch and sim now than FPR was for the past 10 years. Honestly, when FPW first came out I saw the writing on the wall for the community changing the way feds are done. Between the excitement of a new game leading to prioritizing watching sims over roleplay, and the rise of easier streaming services like Twitch, it was clear things were changing. Throw in the departure of longtime e-fedders and arrival of some really awesome new ones, and 2017 was as much a flashpoint of change as any year since 2007 when FPR NA came out. What was unexpected though, was what happened last summer with the Arena. Speaking of new awesome members, I think Hana hit the nail on the head with this post in the other thread. It feels like since the inception of the board there has been *something,* in some matter or another to prevent our collective community from being happy. Some, if not most, miss the Arena which I understand. The sudden change of scenery sort of forced people to swim when they weren't ready to and maybe we didn't really allow ourselves to really soak in what happened and mentally allow ourselves to prepare for a future afterward. We practically moved overnight, with some distancing themselves from a friend they thought they knew. That scar still exists and chances are it won't ever go away. I 1000% agree with all of that and think that that idea is the root of SO many issues here. You said it perfectly. You took ideas I've had in my head for the past 9 months and said it absolutely perfectly. That, along with many other reasons, is why I consider Hana/Pepperoni (lol 🍕) to be one of the new leaders of the community. I was in the Discord the night this place was planned. I coined the C!C name. I saw people scrambling for some kind of direction and people stepping up to try to help usher in that new direction. It wasn't easy. I thank every admin and mod here (as well as those who left) for trying their best in this situation. But the sudden creation of THE new community hub came with the cost of having to figure things out as we went along. The bad taste in our mouth for the sudden reason the C!C was needed kind of haunted this place from the start. But this place has persevered for almost a year now. The people in charge have had to make tough decisions that were unpopular with at least some people. But without some of those decisions, it's possible this place would be gone too. Throw in the polarizing experience that FPW itself has been and things have only gotten more difficult. The community has had to change fundamentally with a long-awaited game that has disappointed many. That has led to a lot of conflict. That is inevitable but unfortunate. There's no ONE right way forward, we have to figure out the best one out of the options we have. And we have to calm the tension down around here as well. We're at peak "2005 comp pack" tension level now. Hopefully we don't get to "2008 FPC vs. ZOMG" tension or, goose help us, "post HO-AXE reveal" LOL. When it comes to Community Branded events, people hoped that with the forum change, it would reflect current edits which are currently involved in the community. Instead, Community Branded events feel as though they're a decade behind and feature characters which no one really can get behind or find a connection with because the people behind those edits are scarcely around anymore. This. 100% this. I feel like Community Branded events need a reboot, otherwise it's just a show where no one knows who to actually root for because the majority of the community doesn't really contain the knowledge or understanding of the characters involved. Which is why FPCPP/FPW shouldn't be THE official promotion of C!C and why I don't think any promotion should. Collaborative events are the subject of that forum and we don't need any hierarchy or official titles. Relationships between projects are great but they should just be treated as C!C endorsed without any one as the top one. (I omitted the part in between those two quotes about Sy having to jump through hoops only cause I think that is more of a booking strategy question that FM also addressed as such. I understand that it could lead to people losing interest but I think FM was just trying to have Sy earn a shot the way that many #1 contenders in the past have, including Geese (who had to go through an entire tournament). But this isn't really a big part of my post.) Also, I just read Soak's big post before I posted mine and I really liked it. He had a great plan. One of our issues is that we have so many projects right now that people don't always have time to participate or watch. Some type of rotation in holding collaborating events is a good idea. Soaks ideas as a "how to" moving forward is great. I also 100% agree with Will that there is way too much unsolicited edit criticism going on. The "this edit sucks" or "this strategy sucks" is really not helping the general mood around here, the streams, discord, etc. You don't have to like or book everyone's edits (you really don't), but I think a little "people are entitled to like what they like" understanding goes a long way. Furthermore, a lot of the time people (especially new ones) will ask for help fine tuning things or even getting constructive criticism or alternate strategy ideas if they feel comfortable and not pressured to like/dislike a certain style. I've made like 10 "don't give unsolicited edit criticism" threads in the past so this isn't a NEW thing in the community but it does seem to have reared its ugly head again. This criticism doesn't apply to "edit strategy threads" (often the best part of this site) where people discuss what they like and how to do it and the costs/benefits of trying certain strategies. I'm talking about the "you can't make a good edit with Panther style" or "that move makes edits smell" kind of stuff. The game is about creativity and customizeability and people like different things. Let's be chill about it 😎 |
|
WMDBFX
Steel Johnson
Posts: 207
|
Post by WMDBFX on Mar 24, 2019 9:13:33 GMT
Echoing what SOAK ( that's KAOS in reverse 😆 ) said. Pro Wrestling has always been about performance and storytelling. Titles and belts are tools for that.
Newer edit makers does have the winning mentality when designing edits. Speaking as a guy with edits with pretty bad win loss %.
|
|
|
|
Post by ninjabrute on Mar 24, 2019 12:48:20 GMT
A couple small ideas thrown from a barely active member of the community:
Base show frequency on level of interest. Please no 6 hour events.
Collaboration among individuals or groups sounds like a great way forward but there could be x number of 'governors' who organize which matches go on a show to try and keep the repetitive feeling Will fears to a minimum. Any given member doesn't need to be on every show but governers could make sure everyone gets fairly represented.
Let's just try a fresh start without titles and reincorporate them if people want to in the future.
Also re: stagnation - nobody's saying it constantly has to be edit maker x vs y. If variety is what you want, step and and be open to working with anyone and everyone. Create a database of your open makers and edits who are willing to work with anyone else and a thread for those people to work together at throwing their shit at the wall and seeing what sticks and what turns out awful. Experiment, fuck around (just not in large damage for the love of god amirite), not everything will be fantastic but let's just have fun trying something new damnit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Love Wilcox on Mar 24, 2019 16:14:28 GMT
I’m not very good at articulating my thoughts via keyboard but I just wanted to say that I think SOAK and Geese really hit the nail on the head with their posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by xemyrlebeau on Mar 24, 2019 18:14:04 GMT
I feel like a structure can be put into place that does a lot of what Soak and Geese are talking about without being an e-fed. We don't need a flagship promotion, but I feel like there's a lot to be said for an NWA or ROH/NJPW alliance styled structure. People are naturally going to coalesce into their own friend groups or groups where edits work well with each other, and a lot of people who want a group like that, or feel left out, are going to be on the sidelines looking in. A lot of people here are willing to help with edits, and make friends, and show off their new friends' edits, but it's somewhat hard as a newcomer to become part of these entrenched groups, especially if you can't record your own matches or upload them. Allowing an overarching structure to exist, to promote e-fed shows and to help new edit-makers find homes in the greater community, might be worth the pain of having some sort of structure with actual power.
In addition to this, having something overarching in this way allows for every e-fed to be a part of the community to whatever degree they want. If an edit-maker just wants to show their own edits off and how they fight against one another, that's fine, and they can bring that to the table. If someone wants to make an e-fed where they teach newcomers the ropes of logic and how it works, that also works fine, and they can showcase the young guns of the community who might not get any shine any other way. Regardless, I feel like allowing that little bit of structure to a community, and letting the people in charge of that structure set up TNIT-styled shows, would let everyone in the community take part in something fun and exciting and not having any real stakes to it would alleviate the drama we see.
RE: Edit criticism, a lot of the issues of edit criticism stem from the fact that people give criticism in a variety of different ways and also that people take criticism in different ways. I don't think being blunt in a stream chat is necessarily the way to get people to take criticism, but I also think that a lot of that stems from edits having bad matches in a tournament setting and the frustration that inevitably sets in. I think there should be - and it's something I'm going to try and start shortly - regular edit criticism threads so that people who are interested in learning more tips and tricks. If you have something like that, anyone who's amenable to learning tips and tricks, or even discussing those tips and tricks (which should be EVERYONE, imo), has a place to do it in a more relaxed setting than a stream chat where your edit just lost horribly to an edit you don't like the design philosophy of.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dawnbr3ak3r on Mar 24, 2019 18:21:02 GMT
If someone wants to make an e-fed where they teach newcomers the ropes of logic and how it works, that also works fine, and they can showcase the young guns of the community who might not get any shine any other way. Quoting that for possible use a later date. |
|
|
|
Post by LankyLefty17 on Mar 24, 2019 18:40:09 GMT
I’ll expand on this idea later when Im near a computer, but Im working out a new wrinkle in my own fed where each of my shows will have going forward a “community showcase” match dedicated to showcasing edits from folks that dont have a fed/stream. While i probably cant commit to running a full community show, I do think there are opportunities to give some new edits exposure.
On that note, its important to call out that most efeds are extremely inclusive. Almost all of us have a sign up thread in this section and are all about trying out new peoples stuff. Ive used almost everyone that signed up in my thread. Will and Sen routinely pull from theres. Josh will use anyone. Dan is always talking about wanting to showcase outside talent. Its a two way street, if you want your edits used, make the effort to reach out to people.
Edit: Also, just to make sure Im not accidently starting a thing, there are other efeds/streams past my examples very open to showcasing new edits. Dawn does it all the time in his streams. Firehawk has a signup thread for his academy fed. Kaotic will work with anyone, CAWF too. Honoo is always looking for new people. I love that we’re talking about how to showcase new talent, its great. Just know there are avenues you can take advantage of today as well...
|
|
WMDBFX
Steel Johnson
Posts: 207
|
Post by WMDBFX on Mar 24, 2019 19:14:00 GMT
We used to have the Rookie Jar, showcasing new talents and Wondy's Dojo that offers technical know how to newer edit makers.
Guess these are what are missing from then and now.
|
|
