"What's in a name?
That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet."
I have been reluctant to contribute to this debate until I'd clarified my thoughts in order to avoid offending anyone. if my comments still do that, I apologise in advance.
Firstly, I am very grateful for the work of the DC Group (who have never, ever claimed that their work is canon) and all other major contributors to our love of the game, they make the world of my imagination richer and for that, I can't thank them enough.
Secondly, whatever we call that work is largely a matter of semantics, legally, it can't be called canon, however if Kato wants to call it that, I have no problem, it's only a name.
Thirdly, I'd like to bring up the point that I think Webstral mentioned in another thread about feedback on submissions. I'd suggest that posters say if their work is a finished product put up for the interest and use of others, or a draft that invites criticism and feedback. If it's a finished product, people repliying to the post should just take it or leave it rather than debate its merits since it isn't going to be changed: if you like it, say thanks, if you don't, say nothing or post a finished piece of work that reflects your point of view.
If a piece requests feedback, healthy debate is to be expected, and the author may get something they didn't want, that's the danger of asking for feedback. It's also the benefit, because you may get feedback that helps you improve your work, either way, you take the risk by inviting feedback.
Please note, I'm assuming that feedback will remain the relatively civilised and informed responses we've had so far, flaming and thuggery are never to be tolerated even if feedback is invited.
As for nomenculture, if you want to use Canon 1.5 it makes no real difference to me, however if we are sticking with the religious overtones, the "Apocrypha" has much more flavour.
Or what about the DC Univerese? Or does that have another meaning?
Again, if I have offended, I apologise wholeheartedly.
|