litphoria

My feedback is based on my experience thus far with about 1 months worth of experience on the site. Although I made a lot of complaints, I explained why I was complaining; and then after, briefly gave my opinion on what should be done about the matter. Chat problems? I recommended a new chat system. The basic outline of characters seem to have problems? I recommended a new system, adding things and mostly removing things. Chat problems? I explained the problems - admitting I didn't know anything about how chat works, and informing people that it is important (maybe just to me?) how important the chat is.

Although I did give a lot of critical feedback, I can't help but feel as though you don't agree with all of it; that or assume that I am unaware of how the community runs. (The site is pretty dead, I mean give me a break. The only people I actually have access to speak with are from Arbor park, otherwise everybody I message tell me to just go to F-list, or tell me how much of a shithole this place is because of F-list. (not my words.) Chat rooms are next to desolate), if you message somebody it can take anywhere between instant responses, which are incredibly rare, to a response within 2 weeks of time! If you do get a response so late, you won't get a second one - even if they do explain that they are indeed, interested in roleplay.

1. Going to a chatroom to find players isn't a viable option, you will have a choice of 1-6 people, if they don't fit what you're looking for: that means post length, language, character image if you're into that sort of thing, religious, etc - then you're basically screwed for RP.

2. The roleplay button is useless.

3. My point is to identify somebody with stereotypes, not terms that actually make sense. This doesn't mean identifying somebody by their genitalia, because a cuntboy is actually a girl and a dickgirl / shemale is actually a guy by genitalia. This is important to the smut community because . . .they're widely accepted terms that everybody that does SMUT RP will know about them. The community isn't always right, just because the community voted on them - doesn't instantly breed it to be right. That's considered Argumentum ad populum. Right now we don't have a credible sized community to even use this as a reason to keep all of this, and thus, speaking about this doesn't seem to add anything to the critical discussion at hand; more so, just a roadblock.

4. No, that isn't true. It takes way more time to skim through a profile than on F-list, you could look over several more profiles in the span of 1 profile with the F-list design; of which I recommended the modified version. Which again, Argumentum ad populum. Give the players the tools to identify what is important to them on their profile, do not just do it for them - it adds clutter!

5. The typing system is straight up broken for me. I dunno if it's just me, but everybody that I do speak with on Litphoria seems to recognize that there is a problem. With this, I pretty much consult with myself that: Yes, there does seem to be a problem - and I don't know how to fix it.

6. You gave nothing to add to the discussion. Yes, they are user made - no - that doesn't mean they need to be disconnected. You're seperating the community into smaller communities - when these smaller communities die off, you lose a population. Rather than hiding your marbles throughout the house - keep them all in one jar, why in the world are we hiding marbles anyways? Make something that unites everybody - because at this time, I don't see Litphoria doing that. (Via, the Slimcat topic.)

7. Slimcat, no extra site should be required if I'm not mistaken; then again, I don't have any experience with this type of thing. F-list is also anonymous while linking characters, most times you can see if it's an alt account because everybody has a writing signature. My signature is that I use a lot of - - - - these <------ and a lot of spaces . . . between . . . my . . . words . . . some people prefer certain words. Anonymous between accounts isn't that hard to overcome - and you're therefore sacrificing new content for this. Link accounts together if you need to, there should be a way to keep things a secret like F-list does.

8. Yeah, I actually looked at that the first time I got in - but the community informed me that the admin wasn't looking for any staff, or is extremely strict about that sort of thing - so there is no chance. I just thought that it was so outdated that something happened, and so a year later - he/she is afraid to hire new staff.

Overall: Litphoria is so slow and without populace that I feel like whatever the community recommended / which is more choices - is just awful. There is so much unecessary stuff on the profile, and if we removed like 3/4 of it and gave the player/person the tools to do it themselves, then it'd be more user friendly.

This is how I see Litphoria, and why it is having trouble get up and off the ground again.

Slimcat and litphoria were made by the same person, just fyi

I've made this point on other tickets, but possibly this should be separated into eight separate threads and each issue dealt with in isolation. In particular, that way the individual issues can be endorsed on their own rather than as a whole raft of issues someone may not agree with. Dumping a wall of text that literally requires topic headings/numerical references to disentangle does not make for simple reading in a feedback system that is designed to be tersely read.

Your use of argumentum ad populum is interesting, by the way. From the Wikipedia article on the fallacy:

Appeal to belief is valid only when the question is whether the belief exists. Appeal to popularity
is therefore valid only when the questions are whether the belief is widespread and to what degree.
I.e., ad populum only proves that a belief is popular, not that it is true. In some domains, however,
*it is popularity rather than other strengths that makes a choice the preferred one,* for reasons related
to network effects.

The whole site is literally designed quasi-democratically; by definition it is considered that if the community are prepared to conscientiously dump endorsement points on a suggestion, it will be looked into. You can only claim argumentum ad populum of matters about which there is an independently verifiable, non-subjective matter of fact. What is right for a particular community who self-determined and voted for these features, continue to use them and mostly seem quite content to just get on with using them without complaint is subjective to that community; that is why the feedback system gives them the ability to self-determine.

You have an opinion of what is good and proper in an ERP system, and this is fine, but this does not make your opinion an objectively correct fact and thus the views of a community that disagrees with it false ad populum. To make a claim of ad populum you have to be able to demonstrate that the popular claim is objectively, verifiably incorrect, which is essentially impossible of value judgements, such as those you are making of the effectiveness of Lit's features (and by extension, the same judgements any user makes here about features in general). That being impossible, this reduces to a simple difference of opinions, and generally speaking in a democratised system, it is desirable for the majority opinion to predominate. That indeed is the basis Lit's feedback system works upon.

You are quite welcome to disagree and see if people will agree with your dissent. File specific tickets on each of the issues you've raised, and get people to discuss/endorse them there. If enough people want it, you might become part of the process to create change!

It is very well easy to decide on the points of what is objectively easier to look at while comparing the two formats together; in regards to Litphoria & F-list. It takes under 5 seconds of determine sexuality, age, etc - this means the information is more accessible in an easier manner. Litphoria, it can take much longer than 5 seconds. If you would like, we can do a test to prove this.

This is an example of easy to access information that you don't need to scroll to determine if you want RP or not with a character.

The comparison per profile is largely differing in complexity, it is then - a matter of opinion if complexity is what the community really wants, as that makes things more complicated. The comparison profile is mine:

Take notice that you don't have any of this important information concerning the character, such as age, identification, etc. Actually, this information can be found in differing positions depending on the profile, and so, memorization can become even more difficult because of this layout. Yes, you can click on these features for more information - but why? This type of information should be in your face, breathing down your neck like you should be aware of it instantly. It should be like a fat stalker that follows you around everywhere you go.

An example of this issue is This. Information spreads depending on the profile, it isn't consistent - this is objectively fact and not a matter of opinion. It is matter of opinion, on if people like the constantly changing display of character information.

Keep in mind, you need to literally search throughout the profile for this information - unlike a more consistent format, where you can simply look to the left and find the information necessary for a quick glance. Litphoria does not have this feature, which makes things more complex; as a profiles configuration display can change widely different depending on the Roleplayer at hand. Some people straight up just ignore this feature, or have completely given up on it - because it's just too inconsistent / complex. Sometimes having too much complexity can breed confusion.

My recommendation is essentially standardizing things in a more consistent format, leaving things basic for users but offer complexity up to the individuals effort; and less so much that Litphoria is bombarding a user with things to do at the very beginning of creating a profile. Newly Created profiles will be inconstant with information if a system becomes more and more complex . . . I understand that the community is where it is right now because of community suggestions; but sometimes that isn't always the way to go. As things stand, the system is currently failing. Perhaps moving from a Quasi-Democratic system to a new system is the better way to go. I can make a suggestion, if that is desired . . . as I have good intent for the community. That would be another recommendation of mine. Unfortunately though, the people I have spoken to on Litphoria have, in my eyes, seemed incredibly unmotivated for making an attempt at the better. Honestly, I don't know how many people exactly do come to Litphoria daily . . . perhaps the community is a lot larger underground, like that of IwakuRP?

These things are obviously important to you, and you are entitled to your view that one is subjectively easier to read than the other. Truthfully, I find Lit's layout easier on the eyes, and I think this very much demonstrates the problem. You're claiming your personal opinion of the site is objectively correct. The near-complete absence of feedback tickets to this effect doesn't bear you out; I'm unconvinced at the moment anyone but you has these issues. If I'm wrong, I invite people to speak up; that's the point of this system. But the whole site isn't going to change for one person.

Also, really, please don't keep making new reccommendations in this thread; start new threads.

There is a difference between being easy on the eyes and actually being accessible in a quick and easy manner, I recommended that you'd test this out with me in order to prove this; if you truthfully and have confidence that it is only subjective, then we can test things out; you go through 25 profiles on Litphoria and I go through 25 profiles on F-list. The determining factor would be based upon gathering basic character information that applies to everybody.

Some things are subjective, some are objective.

If you really want to play this game you need a larger sample population and a proper testing regimen. What is to be measured? Trait accuracy? Descriptions? Would I find this profile interesting? Speed is easily measured but not, I think, an especially important characteristic unless you literally skim through a profile in a few seconds without giving the rest of the backstory a look in. Which tells me, for one, you're certainly not the kind of partner I'm after.

On F-List, the search results show a dense, inconsistent, difficult to read (to me) infoblast of profile metadata that tells me almost nothing about what that character is like beyond their genitals and orientation and if you're lucky a few one-word descriptions of their mood and their job. On Lit, the tagline is brief and entirely up to the writer, who can make it about anything they like that would grab the interest of the peolle that they want to play with.

The metadata in F-List searches is also redundant, because most of it is the actual search terms I used. I don't really need to know that all the results in my search for female, gay profiles into demons, pregnancy and romance are female and gay; that should be a given based on the search terms. And yet, F-List wastes space repeating it on every profile it lists as results. So in terms of skimming search results to find profiles that interest me, I'd say Lit wins hands down.

Alternatively, this search returns all of the profiles on Lit matching the F-List screenshot you provided. I can know that, if all I care about is what you screenshotted, every one of those profiles matches those characteristics. I can also, in under a second, determine which of them interest me based on their taglines. This is before I've even opened a single profile tab.

There are thirty profiles in the second lot of results. I spent about 15 seconds determining maybe two of them interested me, and about a minute more each reading up on those two to confirm. If you think you can beat 15 seconds for skimming thirty profiles on F-List, be my guest.

Finding a profile is as easy as going into global population, clicking on the profile, then looking to the left. I'm not talking about the search regiment, that is why the post is in on cohesive idea that a global chat should be a thing. Literally nobody uses the search mode in F-list because it's trash, I suggested using Slimcat as a platform for online players. This is a detail that you seem to be discarding with each of your posts, and I would greatly appreciate the passive aggressive attitude be put down as that helps nobody in the community.

I'm not playing a game, don't act like I'm playing a game. If you don't want to test something then so be it, don't put other people down but be uncooperative in testing with them. You know as much as I do that Litphoria lacks the population required for the testing that you are trying to suggest. Rather than using the faulty website search that I already said is a piece of trash, try using my recommendation of actually using the global chat to find people, then deduce what kind of profile they are. If you would like, we can test this together.

Using a search mode on a forum provides little to no benefit for people because of how many accounts are made and how many are actually inactive. As my post said, which has been ignored several times over . . . we should have a global chat to surpass this problem. Giving players a list of who is online for play while also being in a chat for instant communication offers more than just instant RP, but also offers players easy click-access to important information. Thus: Slimcat solves this issue, though Litphoria needs to be re-mastered. In order for a re-mastered version of Slimcat to be implemented.

This is my recommended test, as these are the basic informations that a character can be identified as in under 10 seconds time, a lot less if you're experienced.

Please record your feedback so that people are aware that it isn't tampered with.

I literally have better things to do with my time than exhaustively UX test. Wrecked Avent has already done oodles of that already.

There are as of this writing 5177 profiles on Litphoria. For the past month,F-List has averaged 6500 online users, only ~16% more. F-List's webclient and slimCat both only work on online users, so considering the populations they deal with are within one-sixth of each other, I'd say it's a bit rich saying Lit's search has too small a population to work with.

Also, again you're entitled to your opinion, but speaking as someone who only ever found profiles on F-List by searching on the site, it was fine. It certainly wasn't perfect, and Lit's system absolutely outclasses it, but it did the job well enough for me to productively find partners for over three years. Trash is a bit of an overstatement, frankly.

Lit isn't a chat site. It's a roleplay platform that offers chat. F-List is a chat site that offers roleplay features. There's a fundamental design difference and it strikes me you're trying to ask that Lit become something it is flatly designed to avoid devolving into. That said, finding who is online at any given moment on Lit is just another search.

As has been mentioned previously, you are aware slimCat's dev built and runs Litphoria, right?

I am aware of the fact, if you have nothing constructive to add or give to the conversation then don't partake in it; that is all I have to say about that.

Misdirection with statistical facts doesn't breed a person to be right. If you truly want Litphoria to remain dead, then support a conservative stand point; that isn't my view, and as you have said over and over again without change: it is my opinion. At least I'm trying to make something of my opinion though, and I am not putting those down with opinions of their own: I am arguing with them in a civil manner.

The statistics are literal, measurable, objective facts which disprove your claim that population has anything to do with the usefulness of Lit's search.

I am doing my level best to be patient here. From your opening post, you have insisted you opinion is an objective fact and that every disagreement with your opinion is simply factually wrong. It is very difficult for me even with a maximum of charity to read you as presenting this with any sense of humility or even a basic understanding of how anyone other than yourself uses the site, perfectly effectively.

Litphoria is dead is patent nonsense. I am a regular user and see plenty of activity daily. I don't understand how you don't.

In the interests of getting anything sensible out of this, I repeat my request from before:

I've made this point on other tickets, but possibly this should be separated into eight separate threads and each issue dealt with in isolation. In particular, that way the individual issues can be endorsed on their own rather than as a whole raft of issues someone may not agree with. Dumping a wall of text that literally requires topic headings/numerical references to disentangle does not make for simple reading in a feedback system that is designed to be tersely read.

Within the last 60 minutes there have been less than 15 profiles online at one time, where is this activity that you're seeing? Can I know? I'm dying to know where the rest of the population is, because it seems to me that everybody is resting in a tomb. Your misdirection of information is because you're using it to prove a point that is downright stupid.

Within the last 15 minutes F-list has maintained more than 3000 profiles being online at one time, that is more than 500X that of Litphoria. Your comparable stats is different because you're comparing TOTAL NUMBER OF PROFILES IN THE PAST MONTH to active members on F-list. Which is again, a different story and different statistic - it is a statistic that fits your point of view though, so you use it. Which again, it's a statistic fact being put up against another statistics fact that is like comparing apples to oranges. Within the last 50 hours of time, less than 100 users have actually been online. The community is so atrociously and astronomically small and dead that it's actually fanatically laughable and hysterically humerus that you seem to think it has a big, or not even big - even a medium community.

Minecraft servers like Equestrian Realm (a my little pony server) had more populations than this during mid-terms. (The server is now dead.)

Stop repeating your advice, I am not taking your advice. Instead of arguing another problem out as a scapegoat to get out of doing testing to improve the server, why don't you do that something that is so important to you? I don't know what it is but apparently it's better than actually testing something that might improve Litphoria.

I'd rather have a focus on forum-based role-play instead of chat. Otherwise you end up with Flister-type activity where people just shitpost all day, every day, and act snobbish regarding role-play.

Also, I don't want to be called a "cuntboy" if I'm a dude with a vagina. Cultural relativism is ethically skeptical: Just because everyone else does it doesn't make it right. Just look at F-List's userbase.

Hello everyone ^^

I will start by recalling that there were lamentations about the feedback system not being used to provide feedback. I was pretty excited to see some feedback in the feedback section instead of suggestions for features, but if giving actual feedback overall to the site requires multiple feedback submissions, I wonder if the feedback system works very well. It seems like that kind of thing would make giving feedback more difficult than it needs to.

As far as I could see, the suggestions are subjective, but that does not inherently make them wrong or incorrect by itself. Something consistent I have experienced with new users is that profile creation is not user-friendly, sometimes frustrating, and complicated. I remember that the way certain things were presented to me originally were also confusing. Even after the profile creation change I still hear new users complaining about profile creation. To me this indicates something is wrong with it. I do not think the searchability the profile system was designed with is inherently the cause of this problem. I feel it is more of an interface design problem, if I would have to guess.

The actual inactivity of litphoria is more of a debate since the private activity of the site is supposedly high. I think I will ignore that for now in favor of addressing the apparent inactivity in the public community since that would be more useful for the current discussion. The inactivity of the chatrooms has more to do with the chatrooms not being designed very well for more than 6 people at a time, especially if all 6 people are active. Once 14 people are all active in one room at the same time it becomes almost impossible to follow a conversation, especially for those who already have trouble with such hectic environments. Another reason for inactivity in the rooms has to due with the history of harassment and abuse users have received on this site. I have had to witness people talking behind each others' back for various slights or just simple disapproval. I have heard of people being pm'd to delete all their profiles and characters, messages that celebrate people leaving. There was a time a fight and argument would break out on this site every day if not multiple times a day. I often felt that people just simply refused to be considerate to each other, that they had more concern about being right than they had about how they made anyone else feel. It was on this site that I had been treated the absolute worst I have ever been treated. I am a bit reluctant to say so since I don't want to scare anyone off, but I feel this had more impact on activity than everything else. I don't want to bring my friends to this site because of those kind of things, it is possible other people feel the same way. Combined with the design problems, inconsistency with options, and other things, they all combine into reasons to not bring people here. The most activity I saw on the site was during a time people were bringing their friends here on top of Wrecked Avent updating every month on the development of the site. I feel these two things combined to bring a lot of people here, as it showed signs of activity and development, it gave that sense there was a future.

I have been doing my best so far, despite how much stress this site has brought me, to try and ensure the people that come here have as pleasant a time as I can try to make. I wanted people to feel welcomed, and I wanted them to know that there was someone they could go to if they ever had a problem, an issue, just something bothering them in general. I wanted them to have a better time here than I did, so I for some reason devote my time here to trying to ensure those kind of things. I am probably not very good at it, but I just feel the need to try my best there.

I have a friend who was involved in the design of various prestigious websites, so I wanted them to take a look at litphoria. They did not think litphoria was designed particularly well. I kind of wanted to urge them to send a full indepth review on things, but I can't really blame them if they didn't want to invest time in something they were not particularly interested in.

From what I know so far, I do not think litphoria was designed with a forum stand-point intentionally so much as a result from inexperience with chat roleplay. So I do not think Litphoria was designed to avoid a chat system, and as someone who primarily roleplays through chat systems I think it may be a bit exclusionary and hurtful to consider them a devolvement ^^' I do not think the two systems inherently oppose one another. Litphoria was advertised as a site centric on all roleplaying, so to de-prioritize chats actually goes against that statement.

There was quite a bit said already, and it is difficult to properly address everything. I feel like I missed quite a bit, but I wanted to offer what little I could to the discussion as someone who is much more familiar with chat rp than forum or note-based rp, and has used chat-oriented sites for awhile; also as a non-F-list person. Also please excuse me if I am misremembering anything, human memory is very unreliable.

If it's about role-playing, we should build a userbase of role-players, rather than gun-toting, beer-swilling hicks and people high enough on their own egos and just high in general to be referring to themselves as "authors" in what amounts to a fapchat.

From my experience it's a 50/50 deal whether or not somebody is negative or positive. Everybody that I do decline RP with though are kind enough to not start any trouble, though I am hearing a lot of bad blood going around that (because I'm a newcomer) I just don't comprehend as for why it's going on. Nobody has gone into detail about this issue. This is including bad blood that concerns the administrator. The goal I do hope to achieve is uniting the community into one format that can offer people the capability to enter a chat or remain to themselves. One of the issues I've been brought up with is that within the last 300 hours we've had less traffic than 250 people on at one time: this means that they've logged on for longer than 1 second, not so much that they've actually interacted with the community.

Another issue I spoke with Ahri about: It is that much of the activity is underground, and when newcomers do come around to explore Litphoria - they are left out and in oblivion because of so many things. If you don't have a connection with somebody then you're not getting to be a part of this underground activity, normally you'd surf through the profiles to find somebody but much of the profiles are dead or hold incorrect / wrong information or the person just lied. (I can't tell. But even the activity that is underground, the population is abysmal. Or at least that's the statistics you get from the search of 300 hours.)

There is nothing wrong with up-rooting the underground and mimicking a similar display to F-list: when something/somebody does something; there is always a way to do that something better. There is a lot wrong that we could correct, maintaining both an opportunity for chat & forum RP is a way to offer more services for people that wish for that type of thing. Making Litphoria more like Skype, Discord, F-lists Slimcat is a way to offer more to those who want easy access to RP.

Finishing up a profile on Litphoria isn't satisfying, It's just a checklist of things to do before you can get started - a ton of people don't even finish this check-list or because it's so gosh darn confusing the information is wrong. (Or they're lying.)

Overall, I am a big chat- RPer, but I came from IwakuRP - and know how a community that is like this can thrive: it just looks like it. Everybody has RP's to do, the ads don't look identical every hour that you look back; public lists of RP's: I ended up making the switch after IwakuRP, to go from that to a chat. Unity can bring in a lot more people than you might think though, putting everybody into one place can bring a lot of good and activity.

I'll say this, since this thread has now taken another direction again - the feedback system is fundamentally a tasklist for the devs that gets prioritized by endorsement points. To be cleared for endorsement and thus any kind of action, the feedback needs to be clear and of specific purpose. Feedback that has too broad a scope by itself is broken into smaller tasks that are individually endorsed. This is necessary to make dev workload managable, but most of all for them to be able to quickly read an entry and know what it is they are supposed to be doing.

The problem with this thread is that its scope began with eight separate matters and kept growing. It is not likely this thread will ever become approved for endorsement in this state because it isn't about anything specific.

If you just want to use this for discussion, then I guess it's fine, although a public chat/RP would have been more appropriate. If you want anything to actually get done except discussion, please file each of the eight different matters as its own endorseable ticket. This would also alloe each one of the points to be discussed in detail seperately rather than everything clumsily in the one thread.

I think that makes sense; however, to counter that, I've asked in the past about feedback in the form of giving reviews, critiques, etc. type of things and was always told it was preferable to put those in the feedback section of the site. So it feels like if that is also not acceptable, there isn't really a place to have a larger discussion like this, or a place to give feedback. This is actually frustrating to me because now I am not sure if I have been misleading people or not.

Reviews and critiques are fine about a specific thing at a time. Ultimately what needs to come out of any feedback thread is what is proposed to be done as dev workload. There aren't very clear guidelines and that itself is probably something to file a ticket about, but the closest antecedent for this system is F-List's suggestion box, which IIRC had a response option that would close threads on the basis of not being specific enough about what actually they want done. Here, threads just remain unapproved for endorsement until edited.

Really, this might be something for staff to clarify, but examining all the past feedback shows that almost everything that has been filed before this is substantially briefer - fourfold at least - and generally about one matter at a time, and if not about one thing then it has been broken up into that many threads. That's how the system is designed to work most effectively and what Kui should do if they want to maximize the chances of their feedback getting a look in.

The site hasn't been updated in over a year, now. Reviews and critiques don't matter if it isn't updated. If it has been updated, then there should be changelogs if it really is democratic and a co-op'd thing.