litphoria

Simply put: there are non-applicable interests and traits as well as those that are of no particular weight for given profile. It would be nice to be able to make them 'dismissed' so they don't show up any more when you go into adding interests - less visual clutter, makes it easier to move around creation and see what possibly relevant is still there to decide on.

Also, helps people who just can't live with the fact there is something showing on their list and not assigned anywhere.

Yes please! I have loads of traits and interests I'd dismiss on a per-character basis, because I'm simply never going to use them for the foreseeable future for those characters and they're clutter.

That said, I might change my mind in the future, so it'd be useful to be able to un-dismiss something. Maybe adding it through the interests or traits page could remove it from the dismiss list of a character you add it to, if it's there?

I would lean towards what Cinder said - some sort of toggling them back would be nice and hopefully easy to use. And one could dis-dismiss them later on from that place much more conveniently than by browsing actual whole list of those from main page.

Dismiss where, per character, per account?

I don't see it being a good thing to let people ignore not filling out traits. Those are super important for searching to almost all be filled out fully and correctly. The only time I can see right now wanting to dismiss traits is sexual stuff on a non-sexual profile, but that should be implicitly done by having a non-sexual profile, and not something you do by hand.

I think per character would be the best option - it is simply there to filter things that are not going to be relevant for given char and make them not appear - so you have a list that 'verifies' that you thought about it for given char and decided it is not going to have any stance/relevance.

Maybe not so much for traits, yes. Hard for me to tell, I am mostly interested in this thing for Interests

WA: I agree it's a good idea to fill out traits as much as possible, but Velus's profile has had breast size, mating cycle and supernatural abilities sitting there in the "add new trait" dialog for a while and there's no correct way to fill those out. These are the traits I'd dismiss.

Unless the idea is that every character should have an option in every trait that covers them, and we should be making some suggestions for this stuff?

@ Velus: I default to setting Mating cycle as Opportunistic for males who are human-like with their sex life because it seems to be most logical
Breast size I suppose should be Flat for males, because that is what logic dictates
Supernatural abilities indeed lack a None category.

Because is how Dragon said - every trait should be applicable to any given char. It might just be that we lack in department of category names/descriptions, sometimes actual categories.

I'm not sure flat breast size applies to males though - we have a flat chest, but having no breasts the breasts size is just flat out n/a.

At first I wasn't sure if I like this idea. It seems like added complexity without significant benefit. Imagine: Somebody accidentally dismisses something, and doesn't realize it's hidden. It's a very possible sort of mistake!

However, if Dismissed traits appeared on the edit page only like a normal added trait, simply set to Dismissed, this might not be so bad. And if it could allow you to set preferences for a trait you don't use - like breast size for males - that seems like a significant use, to me.

That sounds like it could be workable, Tyne.

I still would want to be able to dismiss interests, as I have a couple of dozen I will simply never add to any list.

Maybe going with the theme of keeping them from simply going invisible, it would be appropriate to have a list of interests you've dismissed present on your profile editor, and you can X them out to un-dismiss them.

But wasn't the entire point to get it off the screen for people who don't want to have them sitting there because they'll never use them? I think for that reason, setting them aside on another tab where they can easily just tab over and go "Wait, I did want this" and un-X them without them sitting there mucking up the active profile editor. If you just gray them out on the main page, then it's basically what your brain would do to it anyway, and it's still sitting there for you to scroll through.

Cinder, I was picturing a collapsed section at the bottom of your interests columns in the editor (only in the editor, only visible to you) listing the names of interests you've dismissed and an X beside each one to un-dismiss them. Dismissed interests don't show up at all in the regular autocomplete / suggestions area. Would that be satisfying?

For traits, I think Tyne is suggesting something like giving all traits an automatic "dismissed" category? (Is that right, Tyne, or do you mean something else?)

If i'm understanding how you're saying it, yeah

I'm okay with Tyney's idea of having an implicit "none" or "n/a" or "dismissed" for all traits to let you set context and preferences on it while not having anything in particular that applies to you.

In another discussion, this came up, so I'm copying the gist of my comment over here:

It seems like the main goal is to get them out of the Add Trait/Interest area.

For Traits, it seems like this ignores the issue that while you don't wish to add them because they are not-applicable to your character's description, you still might need to set preferences on them.

So for Traits, perhaps instead of the "Dismiss" term, a "Mark Not Applicable" term should be used instead. This would move it down to the applied section, indicate Not Applicable or N/A as if that had been a trait category that had been selected for that Trait. Then preferences can be set. Finally, if it is N/A, and no preferences were set, then in viewing mode, it might be hidden from view, perhaps.

For Interests, there has been talk about leaving an interest un-selected as a sort of "Maybe", given that "Will Try" is not quite the same thing as "Maybe". Due to this, there are things that I neither select as "Will Try" or "No". At least for me, if there is a "Maybe" category, there would be no reason to leave any Interest un-selected. And it need not be a category that is shown in view mode. In other words, treat all un-selected Interests as "Maybe" by default, and let search work on them that way. Explicitly selecting "Maybe" is just a way to get it out of the Un-selected pile in Edit mode. In Edit mode, you would have a region of "Maybe" Interests, and you would be able to switch them around just like with Interests in other categories. Of course, I'm not opposed to showing the Maybe Category, and generally prefer all things to be explicitly shown. (Which includes the Giving/Taking indicators that currently get hidden and create a HUGE ambiguity with N/A!!) But then does the Displayed Maybe category include all the traits that were un-selected still, or just the explicitly selected Maybe traits. Not showing it is effectively the way it is working now, and it makes the display of a profile that much more cleaner, if that is really that big of a deal.

Hmmm, but if "Maybe" interests are hidden, you wouldn't be able to put notes on them, or their would be no reason to put notes on them. So then the creation of a "Maybe" category means it should probably be a visible category, IF it is created.

A maybe category probably won't be created. It deliberately doesn't exist in Litphoria. WA's elaborated on why in chat before but I'm not sure if they've mentioned it anywhere permanent.

Since dismissing a trait is more about "I don't care" or "This isn't relevant to me", I don't think putting them into an invisible list called "Maybe" would make much sense.

As for a public list, the point is that we don't care about them enough to add them to any, so the list should be private.

That said, a default n/a option in traits could help in a lot of cases.

The "Maybe" is for Interests, not Traits. I'm saying you "Dismiss" Traits with the 'N/A' tag.

I can see some people looking at some Interests as "I don't care" but then you should really put those in No usually, and if you are not willing to put them in No, then you are really saying they are "Meh, maybe if you really want to, and go along with all my other Core stuff, Okay?" My un-allocated Interests are actually "Maybe", but I have nowhere to put them. They don't fit in Will Try. And Will Try basically leaves only the iffy Maybes left rattling around in the jar, at least for me, so it isn't really a huge deal, either way. I leave them un-allocated because of exactly what I said above. I'm not opposed to them, but "Meh." The whole Dismiss concept for Interests just doesn't make that much sense to me, given that they all are hidden until you go poking around in it again. Then again, some other people probably have a huge number of "Maybes" judging by what is left un-allocated.

I think you are missing the point, Cress - Dismissing is not, in any way, to communicate anything to anybody. It is to make filling out profile easier - if you can decide given interest is 'Meh' and hide from default view during adding Interests, it won't clutter your view and you will have easier time getting to other Interests, especially once you have 20+ 'Meh' ones and just want to periodically check if something was added.
By default, if you are 'Meh' towards Interest, you are neither liking, disliking or wanting to try it - so what remains is usual "Don't see? Ask about it", or at least that is my take on it. Creating any sort of 'Maybe' or whatever like that clutters view and muddies up profile, because you want to show things relevant, the ones that actually stir any kind of non-neutral reaction in you.

Whoops, yes, I meant to say dismissing an interest in that middle paragraph.

Roel has the right of this feedback though. This is just dismissing it from the editor so we don't have to keep seeing it in the suggestions when we go to add a new interest. I am in that category of people with 20+ interests I don't care about adding anywhere, so I'd prefer to just eliminate them from my view until I one day change my mind about one or two of them.

Roel, I'm not sure you read my points in their entirity. I clearly understood what was meant by Dismissing. Sure, I don't really care that much for it. You have to go through Interests once, and then pretty much never look at them again. And if you 'dismiss' them, how are you going to ever change your mind about any of them? You would have to go back and read through them anyway to make that change of mind. Is it a nice little feature? It's OK. But its a lot of time that could be spent on the far, far more irritating things, or the many grand-idea things I would really love to see implemented.

"Maybe" does not "clutter up the view or muddy up the profile," if it isn't visible. But it is an actual category. If it wasn't, you would put Interests in one of the other categories and be done. And the "Maybe" concept is synonymous with your "Don't see? Ask about it" concept. What is that but literally "Maybe" with a lot fewer words? I already said that "Maybes" i.e., anything you leave un-allocated, could just be left off the viewable profile, especially because they should be the iffiest of Interests. My suggestion of creating an explicit "Maybe" was in order to make them disappear from the un-allocated pile, same as "Dismiss". I then said that these explicit "Maybes" need not be displayed in the viewable profile. So, if you had understood what I wrote, you would have actually said my "Maybe" is just a rename of "Dismissed", but so? If you aren't willing to put them in one of the other categories, they literally are "Maybes". Might as well put them in the correct box instead of sweeping them under the rug, even if that box is hidden from view.

That wasn't clear, especially given you were suggesting these maybe list be visible. Calling it maybe or dismissed is ok, but dismissed is clearer, especially since people are already expectant enough to see a maybe list on the site. Better to avoid that name, and call dismissed traits dismissed.

It's OK. But its a lot of time that could be spent on the far, far more irritating things, or the many grand-idea things I would really love to see implemented.

Then by all means, don't put your endorsement points on this, and put them elsewhere instead on those features. I'm not sure how "I don't feels this is worth it" is relevant.

We're exchanging far too many words for what is essentially just: "the dismissed interests should go into an list called Maybe, only visible from your own editor, perhaps."

That came out jerky, but my point is if we're talking about something simple and small we should keep talk about it similarly simple and small, or it makes it hard to follow with what's really being said.

Will try explicitly means you are interested in trying it, especially when you are not experienced with interest - while not having it there means you don't quite care about the thing. At least is my take.

I'll take a couple of interests Velus hasn't been assigned as an example: tickling and competition.

They're certainly not what I'm here for, so they're not more. I don't feel strongly about them and they're not a part of play I'm actively enthusiastic about, so they're not yes. They could be fun every now and then though. I don't want to eliminate them altogether from play, so they're not no. I have no particular interest in trying them, and they're not something I'm curious about, they're just an incidental detail that might come up - they're not will try, either. They're just nowhere.

You could say "well you should put them on your yes it will try list if you're willing to do them", but they're not important enough to put there and will distract people from the stuff I do feel enthusiastic about. The stuff on Velus's page is stuff where if someone proposed a roleplay featuring some of that stuff, I might be pretty interested. I wouldn't be interested in a roleplay about competition, prayer, tickling and purification, so those things don't belong on his page.I

Not core*. Phew, that was the only autocorrect typo I think.

So, as I mentioned, these things don't go in "no" because I don't want to eliminate them from play. I won't be horribly triggered or turned off if someone prays.

As for adding it to Will Try: that adds noise. There's a lot of things I could or would engage in or be play with happening if they came up, but i want to concentrate my Will Try list on things I am actually excited about maybe trying or think would fit naturally into other play (and I want to signal it'll be fine fitting in).

I don't want to dilute the signal I'm trying to send - I'd like to try these things or think they might be a natural fit! - by also dumping in there virtually every interest I have no strong feelings about one way or the other.

Oh, another way to put what I was trying to express by talking about dilution: all my lists except those in No are effectively an advertisement of what I'm here for, what I want to do, and how I want to experiment. At least, that's how I view it.

I don't want to advertise myself as being here for stuff I don't care strongly for experimenting with. I also want to keep the signal strong for what I do actively care about and sincerely want to do, as oppose to leaving people having to wonder which ones I care about and which ones are list fillers.

I'm interested in experimenting with themes like drugs and hunting but have very little experience engaging in those themes, and will be excited if someone proposes involving one of those to let me experiment and learn. I won't be so interested if someone proposes something mainly involving prayer, so I don't want to feature it, but i also don't want to totally eliminate it and send a signal of "never do this ever" by putting it in No, so it belongs on no list and I'd like to dismiss it from my editor for now until I one day become interested.

However I can understand there being differences in interpretation of what Will Try means: "eh, if it comes up I guessssss I'd entertain it?" vs "I want to try this stuff, please approach me about it!"

Maybe we need a "no strong feelings either way" list at the bottom or something!?

That's actually a really fair point, and sounds like something that could do with a solution... I'm not sure what that solution would be though. Something that distinguishes the "I want to try this but haven't done it much" from the "I am fine with this happening but it isn't exciting".

Has anyone explained if there is anything at all between "Will Try" and "No" that is not literally "Maybe"? (I know that "Will Try" or some Interests that some people would put in "Will Try" is also effectively "Maybe.") You can come up with things that are effectively synonymous with "Maybe," like "Don't Care". But that is just a subcategory of either "Maybe" or "Will Try because-I-don't-mind-or-care" The only reason I harp on "Maybe" is that when you are "Dismissing," I think it is more accurate for everyone to think of these as an actual categorization you are making, not just assigning the tag to limbo. And thus if there are search modes in the future that permit it, it might be useful to explicitly exclude anyone that has one of my "Core" items in their "Maybe" or "No".

From my point of view "Will try" doesn't mean "I will try this if..." then I also could say "Yes" could mean "Yes, but only if...". "Will try" means for me the same as "Yes", just less enthusiastic, like "yes, if you want". I used it as "maybe" since two yes-categories don't make so much sense and I put two interests under mandatory which are not mandatory for me, but would have been a shame to waste a category.

I've always used the 'will try' column less as a 'well if you want, I can try it'. I always used it as "I've never tried, but it sounds interesting"

And where do you put those interests you will only do maybe?

Since just about all things are conditional to a greater or lesser extent, there isn't a spot for things that depend. They are spread throughout.

This misses the point for me. Any kink you put under mandatory, core or yes I will do to your char without asking. Especially when I am domming your char and you have no possibility to avoid things ingame, this is very important for me. A player who asks every time: "Is it okay if my chars spank yours in this situation", will totally ruin the mood. Giving up control is an important point about playing submissive. Putting a interest under "Yes" means you give up control about it, put it under "maybe" means, I have to ask.

Ok, but the fact remains we don't have a "maybe". I wouldn't have sex with a sports mascot or so on. Everything's conditional. If you have requirements you express that in the context.

There is a problem with being able to properly express neutrality towards an interest and how certain traits don't apply. However, there are probably easier solutions to this, such as making "none" and "n/a" a part of more traits and creating a new column for interests. For that reason, this feedback has been rejected.