TFT Limited Publishing Agreement coming!

[mook]

"The limited publishing license will provide fans of The Fantasy Trip with more support than Steve Jackson Games alone can manage."

I may be entirely wrong (we're all just guessing until official word is released), but to me that sounds like there will be "gatekeeping" and oversight only insofar as adherence to the license responsibilities, not for quality. The market will decide by voting with their wallets?

[zot]

Originally Posted by Anomylous

Please, do gatekeep aggressively! Better to have less, but high-quality, content than reams of mostly-crap. I'd like to contribute, but I'd rather have my contribution rejected, than see Cidri and TFT become a chaotic, monstrous, self-contradictory mess...or have to deal with players who show up with characters built using obscure and broken rules from some supplement, that make them too overpowered and/or hard to deal with.

I think that's exactly the wrong way to handle it. Gatekeeping is less than one-dimensional, it's either "in" or "out", without even a scale.

Originally Posted by mook

"The limited publishing license will provide fans of The Fantasy Trip with more support than Steve Jackson Games alone can manage."

I may be entirely wrong (we're all just guessing until official word is released), but to me that sounds like there will be "gatekeeping" and oversight only insofar as adherence to the license responsibilities, not for quality. The market will decide by voting with their wallets?

Yes, market-driven is the best way to handle quality. I'd like to see a rating engine that supports curated lists and comments. This would not only let users rate products and comment on them but would also let them group supplements that work well together and allows users to rate the quality of the lists themselves and comment on those.

IMDB has a system like this. Here's an example of a list of "movies coming soon". It supports commenting but not, as far as I can see, rating. Amazon's wish lists can be public but don't look like they support commenting or rating.

[Shadekeep]

Originally Posted by zot

I think that's exactly the wrong way to handle it. Gatekeeping is less than one-dimensional, it's either "in" or "out", without even a scale.

I do think some supplements are going to have to be outright disqualified for one reason or another. But for the overall approach, perhaps company-level curation is preferable to rigourous gatekeeping.

Originally Posted by zot

Yes, market-driven is the best way to handle quality. I'd like to see a rating engine that supports curated lists and comments. This would not only let users rate products and comment on them but would also let them group supplements that work well together and allows users to rate the quality of the lists themselves and comment on those.

This is fine as long as the system is resilient against spurious vote inflation/deflation (people rigging high positive or negative ratings) and sockpuppetry. That's why I advocate SJG providing a level of curation - the administrative oversight helps counteract the worst abuses of such systems.