Descriptions in AR

[Davairus]

So as far as I know, everybody who is currently approving descriptions is already doing so on an even keel. I have seen no recent evidence otherwise, and we definitely arent going to stop desc checking.

[voidwitch]

As is often the case when disagreements like these unfold on the forums, I am of the firm opinion that you are ALL wrong.

While I think immersion is essential to effective role-playing environments, some suspension of disbelief is required to engage fully with the game and its premises. I think Mogu has the right of it here.

I also understand that the volunteer immortal staff have disparate tastes and may therefore fail to enforce description rules uniformly: this is not malice but rather subjectivity.

@Stiehl26, I did not find your list of examples especially compelling and do not think most rise to the level of offense you've ascribed to them (in addition to Wylsin's description, you also excerpted Ilromie's. I'll note here that, while both of these characters were RP juggernauts in the AR landscape, neither of their descriptions was commended).

Ultimately, I much prefer to read something interesting and engaging rather than a rote inventory of physical characteristics that (apparently) I should only be able to observe when the character is sleeping.

Where I do sometimes take issue with description policing, however, is when descriptions with egregious (and to my mind obvious) errors are elevated. I will share a recent example below and hope this is not construed as an attack on the character/player:

When Fawneria's description was first commended, it was riddled with errors (typographical errors, repeating sentences, etc.); it even referred to the character by the wrong name near the end of the description ("Seraphina's presence. . ."). It seemed obvious to me that it had been composed by an AI engine or "borrowed" from somewhere else.

Since then, it appears that a staff member has assisted Fawneria in fixing (most of) the errors in that description before commending it anew (it still contains one sentence fragment and the typo "allurepiercing").

I mention this because I do think it illustrates the dilution or changing of standards.

[Davairus]

says everybody is wrong. says mogu is correct in next breath.... I love to read it! That's such good shit haha

[Scrynor]

Seems like this horse is pretty thoroughly beat but I can't help myself...

1) respect the effort
2) obey the rule of cool

#1 goes for the person writing it and the IMMs reviewing it. They put in way more time on this topic than you did reading it. If it's clear the effort is there, Make like Elsa and let it go.

#2 "they are more guidelines than real actual rules persay". The investing feelings thing is the biggest sticking point. Other than that... If it's cool it should be fine. Nothing turns a fun read into a trash read faster than getting five to change something you spent 30 minutes writing and really liked. That can make players phone it in across many characters. I want to throw props to Dogran on this. When I first came back he was a real stickler. This happened to me and others I know and I trashed it up for a bit. He dialed it back, started giving more leeway for what the player clearly wanted to do while asking for adjustments to egregious breaks, and I instantly felt my investment rise. People don't change that easily so I want to shout him out for it, especially if people are pushing against him when is adaptation was a response to what I know a decent portion of the player base wanted.

[Davairus]

Fawneria

[Ashlyn]

I get the personal beef when people put in a lot of effort to churn out an amazing description and don't get recognized then the five line cookie-cutter, copy paste, or chat gpt desc gets gilded. I feel that pain in my soul. But at the end of the day its like anything else. Humans will do the best they can with it.

[Davairus]

Well, generative AI is part of the world now, probably forever. from my recent experimentation with it, I find it is a very good tool to generate text that follows an example with some rules, and that isn't surprising. The fact it is producing content that some human's think is worth praise should really be expected, considering we have had the best minds in the world paid millions of dollars to make it do just that. However, I find it performs INCREDIBLY poorly at analyzing human-written text to see if it follows those rules, and obviously cannot replace humans at all for that task. It gives us some instant feedback and looks like its catching very obvious noob mistakes, but it gets easily confused and reports complete nonsense as well. I instructed the desc AI to also tell us if the desc looks generated by AI. It doesn't give a very accurate reading. It is what it is.

[Merlandox]

Are you guys trying to catch and prevent players from using AI to generate description? I don't see an issue with using AI.

[Stiehl26]

I don’t think anyone is trying to catch people using AI, per se, but rather the people who write descriptions that follows the rules written about how descriptions should be. They shouldn’t tell me how I feel, they shouldn’t tell me what draws my notice, they shouldn’t tell me what impresses me or makes me feel…those are the issues and the people approving them saying those are great and sometimes “gilded” .

Thank you for your efforts in trying to curb this D.

[Kornhole]

Latest gilded description is 8 lines, and at the end "He moves with a fluid grace, exuding a sense of primal energy that commands fear and respect in equal measure." Not a problem in my eyes, but if my character doesn't give two fucks about physical prowess? One before that begins with "The disparity of the colours of this females features are the first thing you notice about her." One before that "Massive hands hang loosely at her side, near the hilts and handles of a number of weapons hanging around her body which clank quietly together as she moves looking around her whereabouts." One before that "The faint glimmer that pulses behind them suggests a motion that should be impossible." One before that was already discussed as possibly too much but included "...appearance is as grotesque and disturbing as your most vivid night terror." Just saying if one was looking for evidence of not all who can approve descriptions being on an even keel, one would not have to look very far. I am a terrible example, I usually have to write my descriptions from the description room at level 30+. Upon reflection, this has happened due to past experiences with the description "nazis". Being told once I could not include eye color, because "what if you are asleep". Now, in the defense of the person saying that, I deserved a flogging, I think that particular character made level 42 before winding up in the room, so I deserved extra scrutiny, and as many corrections as one could possibly find. I love AR and I love anyone trying to make it better. I have had big problems with certain posts from Stiehl before, but this subject has been an issue of mine for a long time, sometimes I get approved for the 5 lines I "Oh shit, im level 19 already, I better slap something up", and then a masterwork I spent hours preparing before I even put in gets, hey fix this and that, and you can't put that. -Endrant

[BlackWidow]

To paraphrase George Orwell...

All descriptions are created equal, though some descriptions are more equal than others.

That jest aside, the description starts with a figurative blank page or slate and while there are some minimal expectations regarding what you create, it's yours to do as you wish with it. The Immortals still have the right to tell you when they think it needs to be changed... At one point I took a phrase from Hamlet in a character's description and they effectively pointed out I wasn't being specific enough with my definition of size at that point. It was a fair critique and definitely needed to be made.

[Davairus]

I mean we can take gilded away if its just going to cause butthurt. Or maybe that becomes a Herald award or something. The point was just to have a way to give positive reinforcement instead of having only trouble rooms and punishments.

[Dogran]

I don't think we should take it away, I like the feature, but I think they should be rare. I mean, I think I have only had one or two personally. There are some people who get them on nearly every toon.

[Stiehl26]

Sometimes volume may be confused with quality?

[Ashlyn]

The problem is there is a subjective nature to determining quality. Some things can be agreed upon overall but others will be disagreed upon.

[Stiehl26]

I think that rules listed in help description should be able to alleviate that subjectiveness. I would think that is specifically why they are there.

[Dogran]

If anything, maybe a guideline or a point system for elevating a desc. IE possible max points of 5, and must meet 4/5 points to qualify or something. IE a point for length, a point for creativity, a point for adhering to all the rules of posting a desc, a point for not stereotyping idk I am sure we can figure something out.

[Ashlyn]

I'd love to see the critical AI response on some of my descs though. Might make me better. I already have an army of scholars ripping apart my backgrounds, lol.

[Davairus]

Please use the insanity command to report descriptions that break immersion because of forcing actions, feelings, judgments, according to the guidelines in "help description". That will more or less guarantee a trip to the desc room for corrections.

[Mr. Forgotten]

Gilded description? Is that the gold outline when your description has been commended?

Do those show up in the recently distinguished descriptions or is that something that you've just been honored for by another player?

I noticed several of my characters have that gold outline and I'm not really sure how that happened.