Yea or Nay: Quality Assurance Check of RPs

I understand that RPG is a very open site — I've been here long enough to know that. I don't expect all the GMs to have perfect grammar, craft massive worlds and enforce strict character guidelines.

However, what do you all think of the possibility of a sort of preliminary quality (or even quantity) assurance made after an RP is created, but before it appears? Unlimited freedom doesn't always mean unlimited entertainment. Shortly after I joined and got into a few RPs, I got bored with nearly everything available — it was uninspired, too generic, or even too restricting in the face of making characters.

It would be a service provided by unbiased mods, of course. They would check for things like actually having a plot/story, even if it isn't linear (maybe it could be too short, like three lines long with nothing particularly definitive, it might not tell the players everything they need in order to play, or it's just incoherent); serious grammatical errors (where they're straight up glaring — a few can easily slip by. See incoherent.); things that just seem stupid (such as the myriad high school RPs that are already running, and the many more being made exactly the same). If the RP has a character sheet template, the template should be complete — relevant information involving the character (and possibly how they relate to the world they're in) shouldn't be left out. Maybe see how many active RPs are being run by the GM — it's a telltale sign that they aren't really interested in actually managing the RP and keeping it going, and it appears to be a common complaint.

This doesn't count face claims — as much as I personally despise them, an RP can't be judged on premade characters, and this brings up the need for unbiased mods.

If an RP is rejected, the mod responsible would provide the reasons why and allow the denied GM to edit their RP further for an additional chance.

So, I ask again, what do the players here think of an active system of quality assurance in the creation of RPs?



P.S.: Yes, I know I can send this to Feedback & Support, but it still seems an appropriate and relevant topic for RPG Design.

I say "nay." Much like in a free market economy, the quality of a roleplay is determined by the consumer--or in this case, the roleplayer. If we think an RP is good, then we make a character for it and away we go. If it's bad, we avoid it and it dies out. If it's against the rules, we summon the moderators and they get to clean up the mess. In this manner, we already perform "quality control." We don't need that kind of censorship.

I don't mean to outright censor the posting of new RPs, though I probably see where you got the idea; denial often entails completely refusing something. I tried to clarify that I know RPG is an open, laissez-faire-like site, and that rejection wouldn't be a permanent deal.

Very few products and services can do well without feedback, especially if it's from an unbiased party with the purpose of not changing the RP, but giving it guidelines for tidying up what's already there so it can hit the ground running instead of navigating through debris trying to fix things it missed. Plot holes, otherwise missing information that the players may need, etc.

Products and services go through testing stages; works of writing go through drafts; they get better before release so the public knows full well what they're getting into and can enjoy it in its entirety, without hiccups due to creator oversight. This is what I was trying to convey, and I'm sorry for any misunderstandings I may have caused surrounding the "rejection" part.

I would vote 'Nay' as well. There are already means of giving feedback and editing posts, which would do just what you propose in testing and clearing up debris. Besides, sometimes the OP only has a basic idea which comes out garbled, and as soon as someone joins who's vision is clearer (not smarter or better, just less cluttered), the thread starts stabilizing... If that OP just doesn't have the vision or the vocabulary to express what he really wants, but through synergy with others is able to refine it, then the process you offer would stop that from happening.

You come at it like these RP's are goods or services rendered... I submit to you they are much more like living things, requiring a more organic process. They must be allowed to grow and/or die naturally, because in the death of one old idea could be the fertile breeding grounds for dozens of new ideas.

Finally, lets not ignore the human element.

First, you'd be asking a lot of people to do a lot of reading and responding. Not to mention all the back and forth PMs and emails because the OP disagrees with the mod's judgement. Then the flame wars and people leaving the site in a huff because the 'elitist mods' wouldn't allow their revolutionary ideas to be posted.

Second, those mods themselves might very well start getting a bit elitist. When you give a person power, it's best to tightly define the parameters of that power. Elevating someone to a position, with only the mandate to 'use this power as you see fit' is courting disaster. What if I'm one of said mods, and I happen to just be having a very bad day... my dog ran away, my car broke down, my girl left me.. you know... the events of every country song ever. Now I sit down at my computer for a little escapism from all that crap, and instead of relaxation, I find ten new posts to read, and I really need to do them now because if I wait,I'll have twenty tomorrow... So, grumbling, I go to work (on my day off no less!!!). First one, wow that sucked. Maybe I'm being to harsh, I'll get back to this one later. Second one sucked worse, and now I'm not only pissed, but also depressed because this guy's lack of spelling and grammar are indicative of public school's failure as an institution, and OMG I CAN"T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!

So, this I then turn around and write scathing, hurtful comments, driven by a subconscious need to make others suffer as I am suffering. "I don't think a fevered dust bunny could have written a less cogent first post.", and "What were you smoking? (I want some)", or "The only thing this post did well was SUCK BALLS". Now, not only have I stressed myself out, but have also fully demoralized another human being, and it's all because of country music.

Okay, I think that one got away from me a little, but the point is, when you're talking about creative endeavors and social interactions, the QA is in the quality of response. Let the masses decide whether it sucks or not, and trust me; They will.

Nay. For a number of reasons.

1.) People are often into things others are not. I won't touch most highschool RP's with a ten foot pole, but they're pretty popular and I can't deny all those people their entertainment because I happen to dislike it. Allowing and disallowing RP's based on what a minority wants is elitism. Plain and simple. Elitism is bad, hmkay? What the majority wants will be made anyway.
2.) People get more excited over new things than finishing old ones. While it may suck that everything dies, it's really not a minority that's fucking everyone else over. Eliminating the ability for people to start up new RP's because “there are too many like it” discourages people from using the site. And a roleplaying site thrives on the users.
3.) I think the only real benefit to having a character sheet is that it functions like some sort of job interview. There's alternatives for that. Having a few RP's that are more relaxed on the grammar might not be your thing, but a lot of people use RP's for escapism and skinning into their character and really don't care about that as long as they're enjoying their selves. And things not making sense or not providing enough info? I've seen random RP's and sandbox RP's run for over years just because the players were excited for it. You can't eliminate those.
4.) There's no such thing as unbiased mods when it comes to checking on RP quality. Every moderator is or once was an RP'r which means they have experiences and expectations from RP's their selves.

And really, I know it sucks when you can't find a proper RP or when you do find one it dies, but you solve that by creating your own RP. Just... Don't expect others to pander to your needs.

TornZero wrote:I don't mean to outright censor the posting of new RPs, though I probably see where you got the idea; denial often entails completely refusing something. I tried to clarify that I know RPG is an open, laissez-faire-like site, and that rejection wouldn't be a permanent deal.

Alright... This post... It's basically a lite-version, but would still have the same problems as entailed above. But eh, let's dig into it deeper.

TornZero wrote:Very few products and services can do well without feedback, especially if it's from an unbiased party with the purpose of not changing the RP, but giving it guidelines for tidying up what's already there so it can hit the ground running instead of navigating through debris trying to fix things it missed. Plot holes, otherwise missing information that the players may need, etc.

The thing is that you assume this to be a bad thing. It's not. The purpose of an RP is to have fun. Filling up plotholes is just silly. Seriously, are mods going to stalk RP's or aren't GM's allowed to leave some info behind in their OP's without PM'ng a mod what they have planned? A lot of storytelling techniques rely on witholding information.

Also as in my reply to the first post, a lot of RP's that are random, simplistic or plain sandbox can still succeed, as long as the players are having fun and stay excited. And here's the funny thing; that is the main thing that will keep an RP running; player excitement. Your RP can look absolutely shitty to some outsider with different ideas and standards, but if people are having fun and the game survives, that doesn't matter. I mean hell, I know more furry, pokémon, animé cross-over and highschool RP's that have ran a long course, than epic fantasy stories. What you might see as bad, again, doesn't mean others will.

TornZero wrote:Products and services go through testing stages; works of writing go through drafts; they get better before release so the public knows full well what they're getting into and can enjoy it in its entirety, without hiccups due to creator oversight.

Except roleplaying, for a lot of people, is a medium to escapism. When I need to get a bike I don't care how pretty it looks; I just need it to work so I can get to places. RP's are built upon the players their excitement (oh and imagination.) Like it or not, most people aren't at the level of being called renowned author, so ideas will be cliché, tropes will be abused and writing styles will be genric. But that doesn't matter, as long as the RP allows you to indulge in escapism, by roleplaying as your character.

TornZero wrote:This is what I was trying to convey, and I'm sorry for any misunderstandings I may have caused surrounding the "rejection" part.

At the end of the day, it's still a form of elitism which should be discouraged. Here's the age-old "Don't like it, don't join it." advice, which you've probably heard before, but yeah... If you want an RP that's different, again; make your own. Or I don't know post an interest check detailing what you look for in an RP and ask if people got one for you.

Yeah I reckon this is a nay.

I do understand wanting to make sure your GM isn't some joker though. That's why it's good to do a little background into your GM before you join their RP. Look at other RP they have run and find out if they were successful then.

I like GMing and I'm not going to claim I'm the best GM who ever told a story although I wouldn't do it if I didn't think I was good at what I do. That's why It's a source of pride for me that my RPs have some "regulars" who have joined a few RPs that I have run. I'd take this as a sign your GM is good enough to have people coming back to write with them.