Issue #20 - Suspense & Decision PBM magazine

[Lugh]

But both Facebook and PlayByMail.net (and anywhere else we can think of) can advertise the availability of an issue through a single download link. It's not actually ON the forum, so doesn't require any sort of participation there.

Good point!

[Lugh]

Every single website has someone who hates/refuses to use it. If we allow a single user to veto a website or idea then nothing will ever get accomplished. I do think it is a good idea to host the PDFs away from Facebook's control, but I firmly believe that we need a frequently updated Facebook page to reach the maximum number of potential PBM recruits. I am sure something can be worked out so Davin can get the PDFs without having to visit Facebook.

[Davin]

Put the PDFs anywhere public on the web (as they are now and have always been) and just keep a Facebook page (such as the PBM one that's there) updated with what's available with links to it. The PBM forum already has a topic where new issue announcements with links are posted and that can continue to be updated. Anywhere else we want to talk about it is likewise a good place to keep references, but they can all point to the same PDF files on the same non-social, public website. And people could always go directly there to check for the latest releases as soon as they learn where it is - I've done that fairly often myself.

I'm not talking about anyone vetoing where notices are posted. I'm suggesting we post everywhere at once, but just keep a single download copy in a publicly (and anonymously) available location.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but what's wrong with that?

[Lugh]

Put the PDFs anywhere public on the web (as they are now and have always been) and just keep a Facebook page (such as the PBM one that's there)...

IMO, the one that is there is driving younger people away talking about receiving snail mail turns by posting pictures of envelopes...  I think we need a more modern approach when we promote Play-By-EMAIL on websites.  Emphasize the deep gameplay and use examples of your own Galac-Tac as a PBeM that utilizes technology to enhance the experience.

The PBM forum already has a topic where new issue announcements with links are posted and that can continue to be updated. Anywhere else we want to talk about it is likewise a good place to keep references, but they can all point to the same PDF files on the same non-social, public website. And people could always go directly there to check for the latest releases as soon as they learn where it is - I've done that fairly often myself.

I'm not talking about anyone vetoing where notices are posted. I'm suggesting we post everywhere at once, but just keep a single download copy in a publicly (and anonymously) available location.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but what's wrong with that?

I apologize, Davin.  I do not intend to put words in your mouth.  Your "I refuse to use Facebook" (paraphrased) sounded like a veto to me at the time.  Now I better understand your meaning.  I have no objection to what you said in this paragraph.  The more important issue (which I helped derail us from) is abandoning the single massive issue that comes out every 2 years in favor of lots of smaller PDFs that come out every few weeks...

[Davin]

IMO, the one that is there is driving younger people away talking about receiving snail mail turns by posting pictures of envelopes...  I think we need a more modern approach when we promote Play-By-EMAIL on websites.  Emphasize the deep gameplay and use examples of your own Galac-Tac as a PBeM that utilizes technology to enhance the experience.

Fine, but that's no reason to dispose of the delivery method (which is what I thought we were talking about). If we need to change the appearance, then just do that. Work on different cover art and add commentary around the releases as seems appropriate -- perhaps mention the melding of both old and new technologies and let that lead them into the magazine where they can find more details. We could even start off the S&D web page with an overall description of the industry and the possibilities available therein, just to give them an idea of what they're getting into.

[Davin]

I apologize, Davin.  I do not intend to put words in your mouth.  Your "I refuse to use Facebook" (paraphrased) sounded like a veto to me at the time.  Now I better understand your meaning.  I have no objection to what you said in this paragraph.

What I was trying to "veto" was making it ONLY available on Facebook, with no other recourse to getting it. Too many people would not have access to it like that. I have no problem with promoting it on Facebook as well as other social media and just linking people to a common distribution point that everyone has access to.

[Davin]

The more important issue (which I helped derail us from) is abandoning the single massive issue that comes out every 2 years in favor of lots of smaller PDFs that come out every few weeks...

I agree that one issue every few years is bad, and we should do something to correct that. It seems to me that the biggest problem there is the construction and publishing of the PDF, and from the sounds of things, caused by the manual labor time it requires. If we can improve that substantially (perhaps with some automation assistance) then I think that can get us around a major hurdle. The second most important problem I'm seeing is the contribution of articles. I see no easy fix for that, but increasing frequency and readership sounds like a good first step to encouraging more participation.

As for size, I wouldn't want to see it degenerate into single, independent articles. I'd at least want a real e-zine with stuff collected together and a standard format (including the title page) in a publicly downloadable (probably PDF) file. I agree that it should come out as frequently as is reasonable given what content can be acquired. A fixed schedule may or may not be possible, though.

[Lugh]

I apologize, Davin.  I do not intend to put words in your mouth.  Your "I refuse to use Facebook" (paraphrased) sounded like a veto to me at the time.  Now I better understand your meaning.  I have no objection to what you said in this paragraph.

What I was trying to "veto" was making it ONLY available on Facebook, with no other recourse to getting it. Too many people would not have access to it like that. I have no problem with promoting it on Facebook as well as other social media and just linking people to a common distribution point that everyone has access to.

I do not believe that I said ONLY available on Facebook...

[Davin]

I do not believe that I said ONLY  available on Facebook...

My apologies - from my interpretation I thought that...

For example, a Facebook page.

...meant that you intended to publish articles directly on Facebook, rather than a public e-zine, thus making the articles unavailable to anyone not present there.

What, instead, was your meaning?

[Lugh]

I do not believe that I said ONLY  available on Facebook...

My apologies - from my interpretation I thought that...

For example, a Facebook page.

...meant that you intended to publish articles directly on Facebook, rather than a public e-zine, thus making the articles unavailable to anyone not present there.

What, instead, was your meaning?

I am advocating that we publish individual articles directly on sites (Facebook was the example, but never intended to be the only website) without putting them into the PDF format.  Publishing the PDF is the major pain in the hindquarters that keeps the articles from seeing the light of day!   Just post the text on the sites (including S&D) with a relevant image or two.  Add a hyperlink back to the game's forum on S&D... Lather, rinse, repeat.

I am not saying that someone should not make the PDFs.  If someone with the time to spend wants to gather up the articles and do the work to publish the 50 page PDF...go for it!  Some will find that quite useful and appreciate that format.  I am saying that we should not hold up the articles waiting for the 50 page PDF that may never be completed...