DC group work = Canon Version 1.5

[simonmark6]

"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.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

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.

I wholeheartedly second this suggestion. I think authors of user-created material need to clearly state whether or not they want feedback and/or constructive critisism. If an author states that they don't want feedback, and a reader doesn't like what he sees, the reader should respect the author's intent, keep quiet, and ignore it. The readers don't have to use the material in their T2KU.

On the other hand, if an author invites feedback, readers/responders need to be as civil and constructive as possible.

As Jason reiterated, I also think taking a page out of Traveller and applying the IMT2KU tag to user generated material or anything that diverges from GDW's published source material. I think it helps to remember that we all, at some point or another, and to some degree, diverge from "canon" (i.e. GDW's published materials) any time we play or GM Twilight 2000. Arguing about what is or is not canon is counterproductive.

We are the keepers of the fire. Any time we lose a member, that fire dims a little bit.

Targan, we haven't always agreed on everything (I'd like to think we've been in agreement more often than not) but I've always respected your opinions and valued your insights. And, your campaign stories are legendary. Please don't scale back your participation here. I think that we're all trying to work through this upheaval and come out the other side a stronger, wiser, more tolerant group.