11
$\begingroup$

Required Reading: Help Center Upgrade: The Future of Storybuilding

A year+ ago I started the process of thoroughly reviewing the Help Center to make some desirable and comprehensive changes. The project was larger than I had time to embrace. However, one issue continues to dog us something awful: story-based questions. We lose a large number of questions and users for our failure to support this kind of question.

Changes required from the moderators

If the policy, below, is accepted some changes must be made via tools only available to the moderators.

  • Regarding brainstorming, the Help Center "What topics can I ask about here?" page should change "might not be a good place for your questions" to "isn't a good place for your questions."

  • The statement "When asking questions keep in mind that the goal of the site is to help you build your world, not to tell your story" on the Help Center "What topics can I ask about here?" page should change to "When asking questions keep in mind that the goal of the site is to help you build your world and craft your story within the rules of Stack Exchange. When asking for help crafting your story, questions must adhere to the story-based questions policy."

  • The VTC:Too Story-Based close reason should be removed as an option when voting to close questions.

Request for help bringing this to the attention of the community

Unlike in years past, it is very difficult today to bring Meta issues to the attention of the general user base. I pesonally feel uncomfortable perceiving this as an accepted policy change with a score less than +25. Whether you feel this proposal has merit or not, please consider using the @user tagging function in comments on Main to invite five or more other users to visit this meta post.

Based on the required reading I formally propose the following policy.

Story-based and storybuilding questions are acceptable on Worldbuilding.SE when questions conform to the following expectations and conditions

Worldbuilding: is the objective development of the structure of an imaginary natural world situated within a universe of rules defined and consistently applied by its designer — or the similarly objective design of cultures, civilizations, and technologies — to be used as the framework for stories or game play.

Storybuilding: is the subjective effort to develop a narrative involving the lives of individuals and their choices — or similarly a subjective history — that are necessarily dependent on the goals of the author and therefore cannot enjoy a definitive "best answer" in terms of Stack Exchange's basic design without first identifying the desired answer to explain the terms of that decision.

The nature of Stack Exchange is objectivity. An objective request for help solving a problem is followed by solutions that can be judged by both the original poster and the community just as objectively. This is why worlbuilding is fundamentally acceptable on Stack Exchange. Storybuilding is naturally subjective and are therefore only acceptable on this Stack when they conform to the following expectations and conditions.

  1. Brainstorming remains prohibited. Brainstorming is defined as soliciting a list of options rather than seeking a best solution. Brainstorming violates the Help Center's prohibitions against questions that lead to all answers having equal value and/or being open-ended. Stack Exchange users are obligated to ask questions with the intent — even if the user never follows through — of objectively selecting one best solution. Therefore, specific goals, expectations and conditions relating to the objective choice of a "best answer" must be provided. The community will help users to build their stories, but it will not participate in spitballing. Ask a specific question or don't ask it here.

  2. Questions about character or organization choices, motivations and actions will be limited. Choices, motivations and actions are often indeterministic. Users must provide sufficient details, goals and expectations to narrow proposed solutions to a finite list of things. If you have not read it, please consider reading the How to Ask Help Center page.

  3. High Concept Questions (HCQ) remain prohibited. A HCQ has the form of positing a seemingly simple change ("Hitler is killed two years ealier") then asking for broad and often vague help ("how would this affect the outcome of World War II?"). The scope of any story-based question must adhere to Stack Exchange's Book Rule. The community will help users craft their stories, but it will not write the book, or even a significant part of it. HCQs are inherently an invitation to develop plot points or portions of a story that are substantially beyond the scope of Stack Exchange.

  4. Asking a story-based question under this policy assumes the user understands the legal limits of this service. Copyright law and the CC BY-SA license under which all Stack Exchange sites operate may cause legal difficulties if the posting user expects to commercially publish their work using any ideas derived from this Stack. Posting a solution does not automatically convey to the original poster permission to use the solution in a commercial context. Users seeking to use Stack Exchange-derived information (or, indeed, any social media-derived information) should consult a copyright attorney before using that information.

A good storybuilding question is an objective request for help resolving a story development problem by asking a community of users with a wide variety of skills and talents to offer insight into the problem's resolution. It is not a request for ideas to choose from, also known as brainstorming or raw idea generation, but a directed effort that includes conditions, restrictions and limits combined with an explanation of goals and expectations (often taking the form of why the question has been asked). Questions left intentionally vague for the purpose of maximizing the number of provided options are prohibited.

$\endgroup$
24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Are you trying to get votes (Yai, Nay) for this proposal? If so, how? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 7:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Can you provide an example of what you would consider a good story building question. Can you provide your reasoning for why we should permit story building questions on this worldbuilding site. Why not create a new exchange foe story building? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 9:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @sphennings Why not create a new exchange? That idea was proposed and shot down. Further, I asked our SE Overlords about it and they think storybuilding is already covered on Stack Exchange. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 16:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @sphennings provide your reasoning for why we should permit story building That reasoning was in the required reading. Said very simply: we can't leave them alone. We can't even depend on the moderators to leave them alone. Better to create a predictable path to success than to continue turning people away with mixed messages. ... I'll get to example questions this weekend. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 16:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @L.Dutch Per the Request for help... section of the post, I've already dropped comments on Main to a dozen of the highest rep'd users still active on the service. I'll be dropping more this weekend. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 16:54
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Demon reporting for duty, Sir! (I've read this, I will chew on it and potentially add some thoughts - unless someone adds things that align with my own and articulates better tha I can) $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 22:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You could put up a banner on main - it'll get attention, and be within the system $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DanielB I'm not planning to make it a habit, but this proposal represents a significant change in community policy. With the loss of community ads and the small visual space "hot meta" and "featured meta" links possess, there's few other ways to draw attention. Knowing it wasn't a preferred method, I selected posts that were +/- a month old so they wouldn't conflict with current reviews. A week from now I'll go back and delete them. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Seems comprehensive. We'll add to this or tweak it as necessary, I'm sure. Thanks for putting in the work behind the scenes @JBH $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Seconding @sphennings asking for an example of what would be a good or at least acceptable story building question. The closest I can think of are the "What would probably X do in the event of Y?" where X is a real-world organisation and Y is something like an alien invasion. However, given some of the bizarre, irrational responses of some governments to recent real-world events such as the COVID pandemic, the invasion of Ukraine and trade imbalances, even an answer giving a really sensible course of action is not necessarily "best" or "most likely". $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I wholeheartedly support such a proposal. I have repeatedly taken notice with how many new users get their questions shot down and are discouraged from future engagement for not meeting current criteria. Broadening the scope of allowable questions and topics is something that this community desperately needs if we want to keep growing an active user base. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe this is just a reflection of my own interests, but I'd prefer more of these kinds of questions rather than this site just being questions about orbital mechanics. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have not been part of this discussion much, so I may be behind a bit. As the SE team has said the existing stack exchanges are sufficient, have we reached out to the others (particularly Writers.SE) to see if we can work together to fill the gap of these kinds of questions? I don't think we can solve this ourselves, but it may be possible to make it so that all "good" questions at least have a home somewhere, even if it isn't here. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I like @CortAmmon 's idea of working with W.SE on this. I would say that if SE itself says our forum is sufficient / the current forum structure somewhere between us, W.SE and SFF.SE is sufficient, then we really need to fill the gap. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @elemtilas Asked at Writing.SE. I don't have the rep on Literature or Freelancing to ask on those Stacks. Although I might find a mod at each and find a back door. $\endgroup$ Commented yesterday

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
7
$\begingroup$

CC BY-SA

User contributions licensed under CC Attribution–ShareAlike, and not under any other license.

This has two important consequences for questions which ask for story building:

  • By default, the answers cannot be used in any kind of commercial context. This may be kind of important when the answer is the story, or at least an element of the story, of the work.

  • The story which uses one of the answers has shared authorship; at a minimum, it must include a notice that it is based on a story by <author-of-the-answer>.

Based on a story by
Name Of Author of Answer

Shared authorship has dramatic consequences both in the materialistic world on Anglo-Saxon copyright, and in the idealistic of world of the moral rights of Civil Law countries.

There was a fun story recently involving a Danish court strongly enforcing the moral rights of a bunch of actresses. (Link goes to Ars Technica.) Specifically, the imprescriptible and inalienable right to the integrity of the work.

Oh, and I for one would be most unhappy if the notice used my short handle on Stack Exchange instead of my real name. Or instead of a suitably chosen pseudonym; you know, depending on the story and on the nature of the work to which the answer contributed.

The proposed changes to the text of the Help Center absolutely must emphasize the consequences of asking for story building help. In bold.

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ This is a fantastic point. I'd forgotten I'd written this question. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 16:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I updated the post. However, while doing so, I realized that all but the Real World questions fall under this very issue. In other words, this isn't just a storybuilding problem as developed worlds used for commercial purposes become part of the stories. Therefore, while I'm happy to include the issue for the purposes of this proposed policy, such a notice in the help center would need to be all-encompassing and would likely need to pass a Stack Exchange legal review. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 17:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JBH: Yes, in principle. But there is an important difference between an answer which merely offers a solution to a punctual problem and an answer which actually develops the story, or at least a part of the story; the difference is that normally the solution to a punctual problem would not be included as is in the work, whereas developing the story is actual creative content and not "information". $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 27 at 22:44
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ actually I would find this great. Both for usage of worldbuilding answers and story building answers. Right now I imagine that one day I pick up a fantasy book and see a disclaimer thanking for the help of some of our community. I think it would be great if we could find a way to blanket allow commercial usage, but with mandatory attribution. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ @JBH Am I correct in understanding the response on the law stack that this concern is not in fact applicable? $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ @DanielB: The general idea "write a story about the adventures a hero coming back home from a war in foreign lands" is just a vague idea and does not rise to the level shared authorship. But actually developing the plot does; for example, after ten years of fantastic adventures the hero is shipwrecked on an island, where he is found on the beach by the daughter of the local king, who takes to her mother to be presented to the court, and then after the hero recounts his adventures as a story-within-a-story he is given the means to return home... is recognizable as the framework of the Odyssey. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ @DanielB You're not wrong, but the answer also specifies issues of fair use and co-authorship. There's a difference between research (no attribution/rights) and derivative/co-authored works. Basically, the "more" the help on the Stack (in terms of either quantity or quality) the more likely there could be an issue. Frankly, I need to review my #4 paragraph once more (and Alex's recommendation for a help center addition) because there are expectations for both the querent and respondents. We just don't want anybody feeling cheated now or later. $\endgroup$ Commented yesterday
  • $\begingroup$ A genuine & serious question I have about this is: how does shared authorship even fit into this? (Any more than it does already!) Even when we do answer storybuilding queries, we're not supposed to write the querent's story for them. Just as we don't build their worlds for them. One would think that Writing.SE must be absolutely full of respondents who have dozens of credits spanning multiple genres of books if this is really a significant problem! $\endgroup$ Commented 21 hours ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Addendum: It seems to me that if we're worried about shared authorship, book credits, movie franchise residuals, etc here at the first stage of policy creation, then we're probably already planning to overstep what we do when helping people build worlds. I think we should just use the same model we use for worldbuilding. We help you the author write your own story using tools such as applied worldbuilding, joining the structure of the world to the arc of the story, bringing the world out through narrative, descriptive and narrative techniques, etc. $\endgroup$ Commented 21 hours ago
3
$\begingroup$

Where possible, don't let users shoot themselves in the foot

There's an old adage in software development: When you give folks the opportunity to screw something up, sooner or later, somebody will take you up on it. In fact, where I work, even fixing bugs must take backwards compatibility into account, because we absolutely will get customer complaints that essentially boil down to "I've got the gun, I'm pointing it at my foot, I pull the trigger, nothing happens. Yesterday, the gun was blowing my foot off! Please fix this regression!"

As outlined in the other answer, this policy change seems specifically aimed at allowing folks to shoot themselves in the foot. In a very bad way. Many users today ask for currently-banned advice because they want to use the answer to create a copyright quagmire. Worse, they probably don't know they're doing it. Even worse, many won't find out they've stepped on a landmine until well after they've spent a lot of time producing something they can't sell after all.

If the goal is to get more users into the community, because folks come in, try to shoot themselves in the foot, and then disengage because they can't... This solution seems counterproductive. Because it will take time for the damage caused by the policy change to become apparent, engagement might increase in the short term... But at the expense of blowing up the community with an entirely foreseeable and probably inevitable spike in big issues that drives them all away.

This does not seem like the right solution.

Counterproposal

It seems like a lot of people are wanting something that, if they got it, they'd probably wish they hadn't. I think the help center could be clarified, to explain why we don't allow such questions, and to be more explicit that the reason we don't allow those questions are the copyright consequences (and elaborate on how crippling those consequences really are). That might help.

New contributor
Ton Day is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ A counterproposal to the counterproposal could then be to accept storybuilding queries whilst also clarifying the help center to include the use of podiatric firearms. $\endgroup$ Commented 21 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ I'm tempted to ask a question on Law that could be used as a pointer destination, but I don't understand well enough to do the question justice. Fancy having a go? (Assuming that's a viable part-solution given that they can't bind S/E to anything and given the multi-jurisdictional implications). $\endgroup$ Commented 21 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ @Escapeddentalpatient. that question might skirt the Specific legal advice ban there. $\endgroup$ Commented 10 hours ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Escapeddentalpatient. I asked the question some time ago. $\endgroup$ Commented 6 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ Some years ago my family and I owned a micro-publishing house. By the time it closed due to the 2009 U.S. recession, we had over 50 books in print. (a) Research does not compromise copyright and doesn't justify a claim of co-authorship. (b) Good publishers do their due diligence with authors before signing contracts to publish. (c) The idea of adding text to the help center was introduced by @AlexP. (d) Ultimately, it's the author's responsibility to be clear of all copyright claims. There is no warning we can publish that will avoid all possible issues. We're already going out of our way. $\endgroup$ Commented 6 hours ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Another way to say all that is prohibiting 99.99999% of story-based questions to avoid the potential problem of 0.00001% of them when we're already having trouble not answering them is the wrong solution. It's not technically our problem, anyway. A user who offered a solution used by the OP to write a best-seller would start the argument with the author. It's hard to imagine Stack Exchange becoming involved when it's nothing more than a means of facilitating free speech. It is, after all, the obligation of this site's users to read the Terms of Service, which include the CC BY-SA license. $\endgroup$ Commented 6 hours ago

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.