Socials

[Mantorok]

At least you didn't try every combination you could think of trying to get a social to match what someone was doing because you had no idea about the emote command.

[Thuvia]

I figured as much, but I want Thuvia to know I appreciate the effort put in.

I've sat down a few times thinking I would try and add something, but I've never worked on a wiki before so its kind of intimidating.

Oops, sorry about that. I really didn't mean did that to sound angry or anything, more just trying to be encouraging and saying there are plenty of useful things people can do...I should have put a smiley face there or something.

Don't worry about how a wiki works or formatting or any of that stuff. I can handle all the technical stuff behind the scenes. If you or anyone has anything you want to add, just put it in somehow somewhere and I'll make sure it gets all wikified.

[Mantorok]

Hey Thuvia, think there's any way to integrate a character giveaway page into the wiki somehow?

[Jomin]

With regard to awkwardness with socials - you should only "stroke" someone you really get on well with!

[rixie]

With regard to awkwardness with socials - you should only "stroke" someone you really get on well with!

I remember using the social stroke to show I was thinking something over. Then the AS interviewing me asked me why I was touching myself. I'm wondering WTF? Talk about awkward.

I thought everyone knew that if i used the stroke, I was emoting rubbing my chin. I wondered if the AS was doing a form of crazy making just to put a novice at ill ease?

I got out of this as gracefully as I could by behaving as poker-faced as I could as saying merely that I believed myself to be only rubbing my chin and nothing else. I remember thinking something is off here.

[Thuvia]

Getting back to this topic. While it obviously needs to additionally include the output of when self-targeted, I wonder if a more thorough article may be better.

I'm considering a table format to replace the current lists. The page would still be broken up by alphabetical letter, as currently, to make navigation easier. The current setup only shows a second-person perspective. One version of the tables keeps that (though I did third-person for it in this case). The other version shows all possible outputs from all perspectives.

I'd like some input from the community before changing this over. What format would you prefer?

1. Current bulleted list, expanded with self-targeted socials
2. Small table format from second or third perspective only
3. Larger table format with all 3 perspectives

The current page is here: http://wotmud.wikia.com/wiki/Social
The examples of tables can be found here: http://wotmud.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Social

I look forward to any input.

[Kilgore]

Pretty big fan of the first in depth table. It's enjoyable to see all the variable outputs and it shows everything you'd want to see. The second is also nice because of its compact nature.

[Thuvia]

If no further comments on the layout are received in the next day or two, I will go ahead and start changing the page to the new, long-table format.

Thank you for the feedback.

[Shamara]

+1 long table version

Idea: You could remove some fields if you made the table span across more, e.g.,

Imagine this as a table:

Code: Select all

Social  Target  Self Output             Other Output
Kneel   None    You kneel...            A chicken kneels...
        Self    You limber up...        In preparation for battle...
        Other   You solemnly kneel...   A chicken kneels....
        You                             A chicken kneels....

Or you could put it as the following if it was more readable having the target in the middle:
Social / Self Output / Target / Other Output

[Thuvia]

Thanks for the feedback. If I understand correctly, both of your ideas have the goal of reducing the height of the table by putting self and other outputs beside each other rather than one underneath the other, yes?

I can see the benefit in terms of comparing the height a bit, but are there any concerns about making it too wide in that case, especially for a mobile device?

Admittedly the wiki is still not set up too well for mobile use overall, so I'm not sure how valid that objection might be.

I've made a quick version of your idea on the talk page now. The extra "you" may lead to some ambiguity, not sure. Let me know what you think, and thank you again for the ideas.