Traits

Posted in

#2001 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-28 at 08:37
@savagetiger: ok now before loosing too much information, I reverted "Friend" by make it applicable again. Even warfoki was not sure about it, so I guess it's time to decide what we want to do with it. After we have decided I can make it unapplicable again or leave it like this. The main problem is not about the friend trope but it's about the trait itself being SO generic.
I really would have liked a way to express relations by graph.Last modified on 2020-02-28 at 08:38
#2002 by naiohoras
2020-02-28 at 09:06
yeah, I actually agree with Savagetiger that "protagonist's friend" is a trope and need to be minded, but the current "friend" trait is too generic just like you said and doesn't really help much as a trait since the description itself is:
This character is a friend of someone.
the relation graph would be pretty helpful indeed, but is there anything we can do beside waiting ten more years for the graph?Last modified on 2020-02-28 at 10:52
#2003 by yorhel
2020-02-28 at 09:21
ok now before loosing too much information
I've just fixed the unapplicable-traits-get-deleted-on-edit bug. Sorry for taking so long with that, I kinda partly considered it a feature in that it helps speed up the migration to newer traits, but I can see now it's been more of an annoyance.

EDIT:
but is there anything we can do beside waiting ten more years for the graph?
Code it! :DLast modified on 2020-02-28 at 09:28
#2004 by rampaa
2020-02-28 at 09:49
Code it! :D
I don't know jack-shit about Perl. To compensate, I'd like to suggest a simpler idea to code. I daresay it can be done in 5 years!

I think a [Protagonist's] checkbox for Relationships tree would be immensely helpful. So when we add a relationship trait, we can check that checkbox to indicate the character is protagonist's X, not some other random character's. Obviously this wouldn't be as good as a fully functional character relationship graph nor would it work for games with Multiple Protagonists, but it's simple enough and it would still be an improvement IMO.Last modified on 2020-02-28 at 09:49
#2005 by warfoki
2020-02-28 at 12:25
@Yorhel: I actually liked that bug, if I edited an old character, it basically warned me that "hey, you gotta add some traits bub". Oh, well, back to actually paying attention to what I'm doing.
#2006 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-28 at 12:56
@Yorhel: I agree with warfoki.

I also wanna add that while it was nice to have it fixed in the tags it's not here in the traits.
In fact in the tags it happened to me the need to save a new tag and I lost all the information on all the other unapplicable tags upon saving, and since there is not an history like in traits I couldn't remember wich tag where present before saving (since ofc there was only my vote on them, if multiple votes are present then they don't disappear).
In traits we can check history so it's not that bad as a "bug feature", expecially since we should be more accurate on what to and what not to make applicable or not.Last modified on 2020-02-28 at 13:19
#2007 by naiohoras
2020-02-28 at 15:12
I've just fixed the unapplicable-traits-get-deleted-on-edit bug
that was a bug!? I thought it was an intended feature all along. since it was so useful.

@rampaa: I've been thinking of something similar as well. since it would take a long time to apply the relation graph, why don't we just add "relation to protagonist" first? I'm imagining the feature will be something like this:
>>> Char (e.g. Sora), relation to protagonist: which protagonist? (e.g. Kakeru)>what's the role? (e.g. Younger Sister.) done. it would show up below the "role" section, I guess.Last modified on 2020-02-28 at 15:17
#2008 by yorhel
2020-02-28 at 15:21
In fact in the tags it happened to me the need to save a new tag and I lost all the information on all the other unapplicable tags upon saving
That should have been fixed since about 10 days ago.

My trigger for fixing the "bug" for traits is seeing that the applicable flag gets enabled again for traits that shouldn't be applied anymore, suggesting that the flag is not as useful when it causes traits to get deleted automatically.

On the other hand, it's totally not obvious right now whether a VN/char have non-applicable tags/traits applied - I'll need to fix that. (Easy fix for tags, will take a bit longer for chars)

I think a [Protagonist's] checkbox for Relationships tree would be immensely helpful.
Easy enough, but I'm not a fan. Half-assed solutions tend to be more work in the long run than solutions that have had some more effort put into it. If character relations are really such a popular feature, it should just get pushed up a few levels in my todo list.
#2009 by warfoki
2020-02-28 at 15:30
the applicable flag gets enabled again for traits that shouldn't be applied anymore

I would have reenabled that anyway, since disabling a commonly used trait is only acceptable if we have more specific child traits covering all ground. Which was decidedly not the case.

I honestly would prefer this function back. It allows gradual replacement of old, outdated traits with new, more specific traits instead of having to purge stuff in one go via a script.

Character relations would help, since the traits are... a bit of mess in the case of VNs where we have more than just a couple of characters.Last modified on 2020-02-28 at 15:31
#2010 by rampaa
2020-02-29 at 00:20
Half-assed solutions tend to be more work in the long run
I don't disagree. But I also think that a half-assed solution *is* better than not getting a solution in the foreseeable future.

todo list
About that, do you have a nigh-complete to-do (and maybe not-gonna-do) list for VNDB written down anywhere? I am aware of d8#4 but it doesn't seem to include plenty of other things you said you are aware of and plan to work on.
#2011 by yorhel
2020-02-29 at 10:42
I honestly would prefer this function back.
Alright, back until I revamp the character edit form to take this into account in a more intuitive way.

Easy fix for tags
Done, non-applicable tags are now highlighted in the tag voting form.

do you have a nigh-complete to-do
Not really. d8#4 should be as complete as possible when it comes to major new features (let me add char relations to that). I do maintain a separate to-do list for smallish features or not-very-visible improvements, which I edited a few times a day and is already waaay too long. -.-
#2012 by ginseigou
2020-02-29 at 11:07
t3314.780 t3314.781 I proposed these changes 4 years ago and nobody cared enough to answer. The problem with this site's moderation is that many suggestions are often ignored and left without answers .
#2013 by yorhel
2020-02-29 at 11:16
The problem with this site's moderation is that many suggestions are often ignored and left without answers
That's a feature. I mean, I don't know what you're expecting, but it's impossible for a small group of volunteers to spend several hours thinking out and arguing about every suggestion that we get. If we get to choose between quality (spend some good effort on a few things at a time) or quantity (spend little effort on everything), I'd firmly advocate for quality. You might want to adjust your expectations...
#2014 by ginseigou
2020-02-29 at 11:24
I think this site needs to be more flexible to changes like Wikipedia, maybe you could give old users more rights to edit entries in the future.
#2015 by wakaranai
2020-02-29 at 11:25
> like wikipedia
no.
#2016 by ginseigou
2020-02-29 at 11:32
@2015 Is that so-called quality of discussion over quantity of changes?
#2017 by naiohoras
2020-02-29 at 11:45
I think this site needs to be more flexible to changes like Wikipedia, maybe you could give old users more rights to edit entries in the future.
just imagine the mess we'd have if every "old" users have the right to change entries...

it works on Wikipedia because information needs to be updated based on newfound facts. AND tag and trait isn't like that. they *are not* an entry that need to be renewed periodically, they just need to be as accurate as possible until there's no more debate. just having moderator is enough.Last modified on 2020-02-29 at 12:00
#2018 by yorhel
2020-02-29 at 11:49
Is that so-called quality of discussion over quantity of changes?
Just throwing random ideas over the fence without thinking it through is the height of intellectual laziness. I'm not sure how you're expecting people to take you seriously when you're not exactly putting in any effort yourself.
#2019 by ginseigou
2020-02-29 at 11:55
@2017 Tags and traits are still an incomprehensible mess with long-winded discrepant descriptions on the corresponding entries that contradict each other on many occasions. There should be the rule at least that tags and traits with the same names should have the same descriptions and the same children Proactive Protagonist Proactive. Like if I want to know fast what some tag or trait means, I have to read a complete essay with several paragraphs sometimes, when all could have been written in a more concise manner.Last modified on 2020-02-29 at 12:16
#2020 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-29 at 12:50
@2015 Is that so-called quality of discussion over quantity of changes?
You wanna change the system because it benefits you in this particular moment, in the long run I don't think it will. And you were the one up for concise dictonary answers so it's more clear to understand stuff. Actually a "no" is the more concise of the answers...hardly not understandable.

Ok about Silent vs Taciturn I report silence(user) answer:
Actually, Silent is not a trait of personality (anymore). It's more like health-related. Maybe we should make it a ...Subject of > Health Related > Muteness, while "Silent" can become an alias of Taciturn.

And about t3314.780 I'm not against merging those traits but again it depends if we want similar synonyms to be merged or not.Last modified on 2020-02-29 at 12:51
#2021 by ginseigou
2020-02-29 at 13:50
And about t3314.780 I'm not against merging those traits but again it depends if we want similar synonyms to be merged or not.
If you're asking me, then I'm for merging. I suggest this description to the combined trait:
This character is selling goods, food or anything else. He may be the store owner.
#2022 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-29 at 14:03
I'm obviously asking to other users, mods and Yorhel, since I won't be able to merge them. Maybe I could try my psionic powers...they did work last time
#2023 by ginseigou
2020-02-29 at 14:06
4 years ago everybody ignored this problem, I'm not sure you'll get the attention this time.
#2024 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-29 at 15:00
@ginseigou: mate and so be it, I cannot force people. Noone is dying for some traits, do they? I'm starting to think you do all of this on purpose.Last modified on 2020-02-29 at 15:01
#2025 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-29 at 15:02
What can I do, if everybody agrees, is applying yours and silence proposal for:

Actually, Silent is not a trait of personality (anymore). It's more like health-related. Maybe we should make it a ...Subject of > Health Related > Muteness, while "Silent" can become an alias of Taciturn.