When I first submitted primers, they were pretty messy, so honestly getting feedback was the best thing that could have happened for my content.
I was the same, I felt like I had already spent a billion hours on making sure the content was all there, so what does it matter if stuff is a bit out of order, etc, etc. But ultimately I realized that you have a team of people just trying to help you make it the best you can, so from a personal point of view I just appreciate the extra eyes getting you to that goal. At the end of the day it's your primer, so you should enjoy spending the time making it presentable.
The end goal is to give your readers the best experience, so the committee goal is try and help you to give that.
And if you don't want to spend the additional time on formatting, that's cool, the threads are still up for people to find, and they usually will (if interested in that commander). But having a standard for "official" primers just meant that readers could expect a certain quality, a portion of that being presentation.
Maybe my experience is worst than most, but I spent a solid 20+ hours just working on formatting, mostly just to appease the committee. The first round or two of updates was fine - I did improve the readability a fair bit, and made it much more navigable. I was happy with how it looked. And then I had to change it, over and over, sometimes even changing things that I preferred to something I didn't in order to fulfill the requests of the committee.
If these were being published on CFB or SCG or something, I could understand having a strict adherence to formatting standards, but this is all unpaid labor. And having passion for the commander says little about the desire to spend ages formatting something - especially when that formatting is sometimes against your preferences.
This isn't a matter of black and white, but a matter of degrees. Having standards is good. Making formatting suggestions is good. But there's a reasonable limit, and imo the primer committee is well past that limit.
I'm not a huge fan of the formatting side of primers either. I got off easy with Patron of the Orochi, in retrospect I think the committee knew that nobody would care about the thread and just slapped on the primer tag to get me to stop bumping the application. My Daxos the Returned was a bit thornier, but ultimately I ended up with a primer template that I was happy with to the point of back-porting my Patron list to the same style. I figured it was worth to put in the elbow grease that one time to figure out something that worked, if I decided to make any future primers.
Eventually, I got smitten enough by Feather, the Redeemed to go for it. I mirrored my Daxos primer in layout, wrote everything up carefully while keeping in mind the content feedback I got last time around. It came back with stylistic change requests.
I'm aware of some builds that are primer-worthy and well maintained, but the authors are just unwilling to put up with this process. I can't blame them. I'm picking up some similarities to peer review in academia, where reviewers tend to suggest stuff for the sake of suggesting stuff. If we're going to be this picky about layout, create a gold standard template that people can copy-paste and fill out to get around the stylistic requirements.
I'm not a huge fan of the formatting side of primers either. I got off easy with Patron of the Orochi, in retrospect I think the committee knew that nobody would care about the thread and just slapped on the primer tag to get me to stop bumping the application. My Daxos the Returned was a bit thornier, but ultimately I ended up with a primer template that I was happy with to the point of back-porting my Patron list to the same style. I figured it was worth to put in the elbow grease that one time to figure out something that worked, if I decided to make any future primers.
Eventually, I got smitten enough by Feather, the Redeemed to go for it. I mirrored my Daxos primer in layout, wrote everything up carefully while keeping in mind the content feedback I got last time around. It came back with stylistic change requests.
I'm aware of some builds that are primer-worthy and well maintained, but the authors are just unwilling to put up with this process. I can't blame them. I'm picking up some similarities to peer review in academia, where reviewers tend to suggest stuff for the sake of suggesting stuff. If we're going to be this picky about layout, create a gold standard template that people can copy-paste and fill out to get around the stylistic requirements.
This. The biggest thing that always got me when I was on the committee, was and I quote "a submission is never approved on the first request". Which, why not, if such a thread were well written enough to be that good? Like you said, it comes down to people in power making suggestions just for the sake of making suggestions, almost like it lends them an aire of superiority.
Maybe my experience is worst than most, but I spent a solid 20+ hours just working on formatting, mostly just to appease the committee. The first round or two of updates was fine - I did improve the readability a fair bit, and made it much more navigable. I was happy with how it looked. And then I had to change it, over and over, sometimes even changing things that I preferred to something I didn't in order to fulfill the requests of the committee.
If these were being published on CFB or SCG or something, I could understand having a strict adherence to formatting standards, but this is all unpaid labor. And having passion for the commander says little about the desire to spend ages formatting something - especially when that formatting is sometimes against your preferences.
This isn't a matter of black and white, but a matter of degrees. Having standards is good. Making formatting suggestions is good. But there's a reasonable limit, and imo the primer committee is well past that limit.
I was in the same boat as you, I easily spent 15+ hours formatting a thread, and honestly came pretty close to giving up. The end result however was worth it. So I completely understand where frustrations come from. Going forward we definitely don't want people to feel like the process isn't worth it.
I'm aware of some builds that are primer-worthy and well maintained, but the authors are just unwilling to put up with this process. I can't blame them. I'm picking up some similarities to peer review in academia, where reviewers tend to suggest stuff for the sake of suggesting stuff. If we're going to be this picky about layout, create a gold standard template that people can copy-paste and fill out to get around the stylistic requirements.
For me personally, all my primers are different in layout and the way content is delivered, and from what I've seen of the other primers this is true as well. Simply because the flow of information is unique to each one.
Trying to set a "gold standard" isn't something that we want, because then you'd never progress forward with new innovative ideas.
We want primers to get better, so I hope feedback for future applicants is received in a manner that is trying to make your content the best possible read, rather than doing it to get approval or to make it look exactly the same as other primers.
This. The biggest thing that always got me when I was on the committee, was and I quote "a submission is never approved on the first request". Which, why not, if such a thread were well written enough to be that good? Like you said, it comes down to people in power making suggestions just for the sake of making suggestions, almost like it lends them an aire of superiority.
Maybe this is true to an extent in that a person can have a particular way they like to see the information, so as soon as it's not "the same", you'll get the suggestions. But I really hope you don't think it's from a point of view of "superiority", as I just haven't felt that.
If the statement "a submission is never approved on the first request" was thrown around, then I promise you that is not going to be the case going forward.
I think if you don't get back any suggestions, then it would mean that people haven't put any effort into reviewing the content, which would be far more of a problem than getting some feedback. It's very hard to get content exactly right by yourself, as you get a bit blindsided from your own perspective, and it turns out as a creator, you don't actually represent your average reader.
We are always looking to improve so that more quality content is out to the public, and if we didn't hear concerns, then we would be failing to move forward in positive directions.
These are the sorts of goals we want for the commander community.
A place where people feel confident in submitting or creating content for commander to share with others. A home for the entire commander Magic community.
More primers. More people writing content about their decks and/or their commander. There are a lot of untold stories about commanders, please get inspired.
Very high success rate of submissions to primer status turn around. Not by lowering standards, but by encouragement and time investment by a mentoring team and the writer and giving the applicant a positive feedback loop.
The biggest thing that always got me when I was on the committee, was and I quote "a submission is never approved on the first request".
Wait. When did this become a thing? When I was on the Committee (which wasn't all that long ago), we totally approved prospective primers on the first go.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
The biggest thing that always got me when I was on the committee, was and I quote "a submission is never approved on the first request".
Wait. When did this become a thing? When I was on the Committee (which wasn't all that long ago), we totally approved prospective primers on the first go.
When I was part of it (years ago), that was one thing I'd see from multiple other members in discussion. "Well, it's the first submission, we need to find something because it can't be approved on the first go."
Trying to set a "gold standard" isn't something that we want, because then you'd never progress forward with new innovative ideas.
I don't get this at all. There's already a template for sections to include (which is the area where I'd expect an expert on a deck to have ideas for improvement as they create their content). But we don't want a template for formatting so that...formatting can keep improving? Then someone on the committee should do that "improving". I wrote a guide because I know a lot about content. I didn't write a guide so I could advance the fine art of screwing around with style tags.
Trying to set a "gold standard" isn't something that we want, because then you'd never progress forward with new innovative ideas.
I don't get this at all. There's already a template for sections to include (which is the area where I'd expect an expert on a deck to have ideas for improvement as they create their content). But we don't want a template for formatting so that...formatting can keep improving? Then someone on the committee should do that "improving". I wrote a guide because I know a lot about content. I didn't write a guide so I could advance the fine art of screwing around with style tags.
I meant not suggesting a particular primer to be a "gold standard". I worded that poorly. We still want people to have flexibility with how you want to present it, but as part of that we try and help you to make it presentable.
I don’t know about the hatred towards the primer committee. I do it also as a “labor of love”. Just like I receive nothing for my two primers, I receive nothing for my time on the committee. Each time I review someone’s application and make suggestions, I’m not doing so in order gain an “air of authority” or because of some power trip, but more to help the author. It’s a shame that so many, including past members, feel differently. And since my time on the committee, I do not ever remember a time where I felt compelled to make some suggestion just because we “can’t accept on the first request”, and I do not recall ever seeing another member post that either. Must have been before my time?
I meant not suggesting a particular primer to be a "gold standard". I worded that poorly. We still want people to have flexibility with how you want to present it, but as part of that we try and help you to make it presentable.
The specific suggestion made was to have a format template, so that someone creating a primer can be certain that they've met the requirements if they're using that template. Leaving people freedom to customize if they want to do fancy stuff with formatting is fine, but a lot of people - clearly - are not very interested in formatting and just want an easy solution. Especially when it seems like the committee DOES have a pretty specific format they want, given how many times I had to change mine because it wasn't EXACTLY like what they wanted.
I think one thing in particular that rubs me the wrong way about the primer committee is that there was essentially no discussion of content. I could be writing absolute nonsense and it seems like it would make it through the committee just fine. If anything should be held up to a rigorous standard I should think it would be content first, not formatting. I get that analyzing content is difficult, but replacing it with additional scrutiny on presentation feels like the definition of style over substance.
The only feedback I did get about content was essentially "you don't have these sections, you are supposed to have those sections". Which is pretty damn inflexible if you ask me. If you want to give people flexibility, I'd say that's a much better place to start than formatting.
Thanks heaps for this. I really don't want to resort to the toxic wasteland of bilge and detritus that is Reddit, and there's lots of people here I enjoy conversing with. Eyes will be peeled.
Sorry to quote this late but the reason I stayed here after much thinking about hosting my Ephara content is that the only other option for interaction really seems to be Reddit, and it is:
1) incredibly toxic
2) somehow more inbred than MTGS in terms of its EDH Ideology
3) so fleeting as to be meaningless, extremely difficult to maintain long term topics
I truly hope the MTGS successor is not garbage, and hopefully is not affiliated with Curse / Twitch / everything so as not to bring all that annoying baggage
The only feedback I did get about content was essentially "you don't have these sections, you are supposed to have those sections". Which is pretty damn inflexible if you ask me. If you want to give people flexibility, I'd say that's a much better place to start than formatting.
I definitely felt the same way during my primer analysis, fwiw, the only content suggestion I got was ribbing for not suggesting an alternative Azorius commander (when I had specifically explained that there are so few Azorius commanders that support creatures that it was difficult to suggest one). Everything else was structural, although one of the structural suggestions turned out to be one of the more popular sections of the primer ("How to play the deck").
It's really tough, but primers need to be carefully reviewed for content. Lots of primers are somewhat light on...priming, as it were.
Just as a side note, the #1 thing that makes me enjoy maintaining my primer is people posting in it and asking questions/telling me what worked in their builds/giving me ideas/etc.
I try really hard to encourage this, but I feel like the current volume of people on the site and the structure of the site are not particularly encouraging to people.
I'm not sure how you as forum admins/primer committee people/etc. can help to generate interaction. But I think that's what drives most people to create content. So something to think about. Maybe more of that kind of "primer of the week" type stuff, maybe some kind of drive to draw new members in, I dunno
Partnering with EDHREC would be a really good start. Having a prominent EDHREC link to the primer for each commander would be a huge benefit. EDHREC seems to drive a ton of traffic.
The criticisms about the Primer Committee that have been mentioned are fair, and will be taken into strong consideration on the new site. As darrenhabib mentioned, the goal of the Primer Committee is to create a positive experience for general readers of the Primer, to encourage Primer submissions, and to approve Primer submissions.
Some changes that have already occurred since my tenure in the Primer Committee, which post-dates after 3drinks' Primer submission(s), DirkGently's submission, and Rumpy's submission(s):
The Primer Committee has created and approved a Primer template that has a significant number of coding tags already built in, including the Table of Contents tags/coding, box tags, anchor tags, etc. This is the template that we've provided to several of our applicants and the goal of it was to relieve the applicant of learning the intricacies of BBCoding (of which I'm still not a master of myself). I believe that we'll do something similar on the new site so that an applicant has something to work off of before submitting their thread for Primer status.
Use the Deck Tags and Deck Builder Tool to create your decklist!
I also like to sort my decklists according to function and then separately according to card type, but that’s totally up to you.
This is where you should talk about the nuts and bolts of how your decklist plays out. What do you do in early turns of the game? What are some good opening hands?
What about the Mid-Game and Late-Game strategies?
Do you have a specific backup plan in case your primary strategy gets foiled?
This is where you would want to talk about these kinds of things.
This is a section where you talk about individual card choices that are located in your decklist. I also recommend you include other popular cards that other users may have used and include a brief description as to why/why not you’re running X card.
I personally enjoy reading about how Primers, and their respective strategies, match up against some of the more popular Commanders you play against IN YOUR PLAYGROUP or for Commander generally.
I’m 100% confident that you didn’t build your Commander deck in a vacuum. This section is to give credit where it’s due and help you build a solid reputation.
Lastly, it’s fun to keep track of how your deck has changed and evolved as you have as a player. It also gives readers an idea of what cards you’ve already tried out.
Sure, it might encourage a homogeneity of Primers but that's a separate issue (that I personally have no problem with, btw). By providing at least a template to applicants, we are reducing a significant complaint that has been presented within this thread, that of the time commitment of learning the coding required to make a visually appealing Primer. When I first submitted my Memnarch Primer, I too had to spend hours learning the coding tags of BBCode and it was laborious. My goal once I joined the Committee was to eliminate this concern as much as possible, hence the creation of the Primer template.
We've had internal discussions about the key components we look for in a Primer application and have compiled an internal list of requirements that we like to see. As we receive additional comments from users within the Commander forums and balance that against the feedback of the Admins, Mods, and Primer Committee members, we will perhaps be able to release a formal checklist of Primer requirements that a user can review before submitting a Primer for the official Primer tag. This should address another concern that has been legitimately brought up within this thread, that of unclear expectations of what constitutes "Primer Quality" threads. By establishing this kind of checklist alongside the Primer template, we should have a clear path forward for users to create a visually appealing Primer on their first try without having to devote hours in formatting and coding education.
We've begun to optimize our review process internally so that it's systematized and efficient for the Committee itself. This should reduce the wait time that applicants experience when they submit a Primer for review and ensure that Primers are released to the general community in a timely manner, which will justify the time and energy spent to create a Primer in the first place.
Finally, we've advocated strongly with the Admins and Mods to create Commander based content that will specifically feature the Primers that are approved. This will create a deterministic and real incentive for Primers to be created and to justify the QC process that the Primer Committee engages in. These articles will hopefully be approved on the new site and will be directly written by members of the Primer Committee/Primer owners themselves as a way to both showcase the work of the Primer applicant and drive traffic to the site. Consequently, there will be REAL standards that we have to measure up against since the Primers will potentially be featured on the site in formally written and approved articles that will generate traffic to the site.
I have personally done real market research on why people don't like MTGSal as a platform. I've asked users on Discord and Facebook primarily, and my sample size was probably around 100 responses all said. The main attraction that regular users have to MTGSal as a site is because of the visually distinctive Primers and coding capabilities of the site, in addition to the improved community experience that MTGSal now offers (props to cryogen and other Mods for reducing the Flaming/Trolling that this site used to have). Because these are the qualities that differentiate MTGSal (and hopefully the new site) from other Commander platforms, it's important that the Commander Primers (which drive a majority of the traffic to this site in the first place) maintain that market-leading quality.
This is at least one valid justification of why the Primer Committee can appear to be "strict" about Primer submissions; the reasoning is directly related to what drives traffic to the Commander forums and MTGSal and thus ensured its continued existence. While this may have been conveyed poorly in the past and the criticisms of previous Committee members accordingly harsh, it was (usually) with the intent to ensure that the Primer, and consequently the site overall, received more views and traffic in comparison to its competitors. In the end, MTGSal is an asset and a business and the needs of the business have to come first. And the Primer Committee indirectly played a role in ensuring that the site was able to be viable by maintaining a quality Commander Primer that attracted users from a Google search about a specific Commander.
I realize that this site is closing its doors, and I'm legitimately sad to see it go for deeply personal reasons. It was a lifeline for me when I was getting sober 8.5 years ago because this site was so engaging for me, the community was so friendly, and the threads were usually well written. I've verbally committed to being a part of the new site that Feyd is building and will carry the collective suggestions brought up here to the new site. It's a chance to start over, which is a rare opportunity, and the Primer Committee members who have committed to being a part of the new site are an excellent group of people who are genuinely trying to help our applicants create the best Primer possible, both for quality reasons and for site specific reasons.
I hope that this novel of a post helps to convey the fact that the Mods and the Primer Committee actually hear and respond to the comments and suggestions that are mentioned. In order not to derail the thread further, I encourage everyone to either PM a member of the Primer Committee or create a separate thread so that we can keep track of the suggestions more efficiently.
I meant not suggesting a particular primer to be a "gold standard". I worded that poorly. We still want people to have flexibility with how you want to present it, but as part of that we try and help you to make it presentable.
The specific suggestion made was to have a format template, so that someone creating a primer can be certain that they've met the requirements if they're using that template. Leaving people freedom to customize if they want to do fancy stuff with formatting is fine, but a lot of people - clearly - are not very interested in formatting and just want an easy solution. Especially when it seems like the committee DOES have a pretty specific format they want, given how many times I had to change mine because it wasn't EXACTLY like what they wanted.
I think one thing in particular that rubs me the wrong way about the primer committee is that there was essentially no discussion of content. I could be writing absolute nonsense and it seems like it would make it through the committee just fine. If anything should be held up to a rigorous standard I should think it would be content first, not formatting. I get that analyzing content is difficult, but replacing it with additional scrutiny on presentation feels like the definition of style over substance.
The only feedback I did get about content was essentially "you don't have these sections, you are supposed to have those sections". Which is pretty damn inflexible if you ask me. If you want to give people flexibility, I'd say that's a much better place to start than formatting.
It's been my general observation that those applicants that are submitting Primers are generally putting in solid content, so that's rarely a concern for the Committee. We usually give it a solid read as is and 99.99% of the time the content is excellent. Rumpy's Feather Primer is a great example of this, as is your Phelddagrif Primer Dirk. I think you bring up a fair point that it would be useful and welcome to more critically look at the content of a Primer and offer praise/criticism as part of its formal review, but I think that your generalization is not fair. Granted, your Primer pre-dates my addition to the Primer Committee, so I can see why you'd feel justified in your assertion.
darrenhabib's Primers are a good example of why we don't have a formal template that we absolutely require in order to receive Primer status. His primers are much different than mine but are still well written, visually appealing, and thoughtful. A template is available and we reference it when warranted.
You guys do a ton of hard work for no pay so I hope you take any sort of criticism kindly and with a grain of salt.
Primers are definitely the draw here. And deck threads in general. The deck threads that are 5 or 10 years old are just gold. Reddit and Discord simply cannot compare to that level of persistence. The nature of those platforms is just not toward long term engagement.
There's some lessons to be learned from EDHRec and its SEO. I hope that the new site can form useful partnerships with additional/external sites so that the new site can truly be a haven for MTG users, particularly for the Commander format.
Thanks for the comments benjameenbear but I find your comment about the sample primer to be interesting. Even now, knowing it exists, I still can't actually find it anywhere. Admittedly, I didn't look for very long since you provided it above but it seems like it should be something readily accessible as people are trying to create Primers. You comment makes it seem like it is something that needs to be requested. Perhaps I read that wrong?
And, on that topic: I am not sure on the feasibility nor on the usability of this, but it is possible for the Primer Sample to be in a "form" on the new site? While I don't mind messing around in the BBCode to make content, it is pretty daunting when one looks at the BBCode of the sample above if someone wants to create content but isn't well versed in BBCode. Perhaps a way to drive content would be to make it easier to create the primers in the format desired and then allowing the person creating the Primer the opportunity to modify the underlying BBCode after the bulk of the primer is created. This would lead to more uniformity across Primers in terms of content, which might be a good thing, while also still allowing people to add a touch of personal flair to their primer.
Thanks for the comments benjameenbear but I find your comment about the sample primer to be interesting. Even now, knowing it exists, I still can't actually find it anywhere. Admittedly, I didn't look for very long since you provided it above but it seems like it should be something readily accessible as people are trying to create Primers. You comment makes it seem like it is something that needs to be requested. Perhaps I read that wrong?
And, on that topic: I am not sure on the feasibility nor on the usability of this, but it is possible for the Primer Sample to be in a "form" on the new site? While I don't mind messing around in the BBCode to make content, it is pretty daunting when one looks at the BBCode of the sample above if someone wants to create content but isn't well versed in BBCode. Perhaps a way to drive content would be to make it easier to create the primers in the format desired and then allowing the person creating the Primer the opportunity to modify the underlying BBCode after the bulk of the primer is created. This would lead to more uniformity across Primers in terms of content, which might be a good thing, while also still allowing people to add a touch of personal flair to their primer.
Do you mean sort of how our deck builder has sections that you can fill in?
Well, I didn't think of that since I never use the Deck Builder here, but yeah, something like that
Basically, something similar would allow people to fill in all the relevant sections and have the form create the structure of the primer so they don't have to worry as much about trying to get the BBCode just right. And, then, they could modify the BBCode to do different things if they want. I don't think it should lock people into a specific format or template but could go a long way in getting content by just giving an easy way to structure the content at first and modifying the layout rather than having people have to create the entire layout themselves.
Don't know if you guys have used Sharepoint, but you can think of it as a content type. There's Posts and Primers, each with different associated metadata. Primers would have different metadata fields that gets fed into those sections, etc.
This would in fact be crazy easy to do in that type of model but no idea if forums have that concept. My guess is probably not
What's gonna happen with the decklist database? Is it just going to slowly be rebuilt anew at the new place?
Dragonlover
Unfortunately since this is going to be a brand new site and not an updated MTGS we are unable to directly port anything over (and especially work that is not individually our own). So it will be up to each person to port over any of their own threads or decks.
If these were being published on CFB or SCG or something, I could understand having a strict adherence to formatting standards, but this is all unpaid labor. And having passion for the commander says little about the desire to spend ages formatting something - especially when that formatting is sometimes against your preferences.
This isn't a matter of black and white, but a matter of degrees. Having standards is good. Making formatting suggestions is good. But there's a reasonable limit, and imo the primer committee is well past that limit.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
Eventually, I got smitten enough by Feather, the Redeemed to go for it. I mirrored my Daxos primer in layout, wrote everything up carefully while keeping in mind the content feedback I got last time around. It came back with stylistic change requests.
I'm aware of some builds that are primer-worthy and well maintained, but the authors are just unwilling to put up with this process. I can't blame them. I'm picking up some similarities to peer review in academia, where reviewers tend to suggest stuff for the sake of suggesting stuff. If we're going to be this picky about layout, create a gold standard template that people can copy-paste and fill out to get around the stylistic requirements.
This. The biggest thing that always got me when I was on the committee, was and I quote "a submission is never approved on the first request". Which, why not, if such a thread were well written enough to be that good? Like you said, it comes down to people in power making suggestions just for the sake of making suggestions, almost like it lends them an aire of superiority.
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
For me personally, all my primers are different in layout and the way content is delivered, and from what I've seen of the other primers this is true as well. Simply because the flow of information is unique to each one.
Trying to set a "gold standard" isn't something that we want, because then you'd never progress forward with new innovative ideas.
We want primers to get better, so I hope feedback for future applicants is received in a manner that is trying to make your content the best possible read, rather than doing it to get approval or to make it look exactly the same as other primers.
Maybe this is true to an extent in that a person can have a particular way they like to see the information, so as soon as it's not "the same", you'll get the suggestions. But I really hope you don't think it's from a point of view of "superiority", as I just haven't felt that.
If the statement "a submission is never approved on the first request" was thrown around, then I promise you that is not going to be the case going forward.
I think if you don't get back any suggestions, then it would mean that people haven't put any effort into reviewing the content, which would be far more of a problem than getting some feedback. It's very hard to get content exactly right by yourself, as you get a bit blindsided from your own perspective, and it turns out as a creator, you don't actually represent your average reader.
We are always looking to improve so that more quality content is out to the public, and if we didn't hear concerns, then we would be failing to move forward in positive directions.
These are the sorts of goals we want for the commander community.
Niv-Mizzet Reborn
Feather, the Redeemed
Estrid, the Masked
Teshar
Tymna/Ravos
Najeela, Blade-Blossom
Firesong & Sunspeaker
Zur the Enchanter
Lazav, the Multifarious
Ishai+Reyhan
Click images for decks->
-Prime Speaker Vannifar
---------------------Will & Rowan Kenrith
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
When I was part of it (years ago), that was one thing I'd see from multiple other members in discussion. "Well, it's the first submission, we need to find something because it can't be approved on the first go."
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Niv-Mizzet Reborn
Feather, the Redeemed
Estrid, the Masked
Teshar
Tymna/Ravos
Najeela, Blade-Blossom
Firesong & Sunspeaker
Zur the Enchanter
Lazav, the Multifarious
Ishai+Reyhan
Click images for decks->
-Prime Speaker Vannifar
---------------------Will & Rowan Kenrith
Currently Playing:
Multiplayer EDH Lists (click italics for a link to the thread!)
[Primer] Lord of Tresserhorn - Don't Tell Me What I Can't Do[Primer] Roon of the Hidden Realm - Rhino Blink
5 Color Tribal Guide (Slivers, Atogs, Allies, Spirits)
Also Playing (most decklists can be found on my profile)
MarathGeistKamahlGrenzoBolasThassaGitrog
PiratesZurVial Smasher&ThrasiosYennettJhoira(cEDH)Strix(Pauper)
Legacy: Maverick
Modern:
Melira PodRIP 1/19/15GWHatebearsI think one thing in particular that rubs me the wrong way about the primer committee is that there was essentially no discussion of content. I could be writing absolute nonsense and it seems like it would make it through the committee just fine. If anything should be held up to a rigorous standard I should think it would be content first, not formatting. I get that analyzing content is difficult, but replacing it with additional scrutiny on presentation feels like the definition of style over substance.
The only feedback I did get about content was essentially "you don't have these sections, you are supposed to have those sections". Which is pretty damn inflexible if you ask me. If you want to give people flexibility, I'd say that's a much better place to start than formatting.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Sorry to quote this late but the reason I stayed here after much thinking about hosting my Ephara content is that the only other option for interaction really seems to be Reddit, and it is:
1) incredibly toxic
2) somehow more inbred than MTGS in terms of its EDH Ideology
3) so fleeting as to be meaningless, extremely difficult to maintain long term topics
I truly hope the MTGS successor is not garbage, and hopefully is not affiliated with Curse / Twitch / everything so as not to bring all that annoying baggage
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I definitely felt the same way during my primer analysis, fwiw, the only content suggestion I got was ribbing for not suggesting an alternative Azorius commander (when I had specifically explained that there are so few Azorius commanders that support creatures that it was difficult to suggest one). Everything else was structural, although one of the structural suggestions turned out to be one of the more popular sections of the primer ("How to play the deck").
It's really tough, but primers need to be carefully reviewed for content. Lots of primers are somewhat light on...priming, as it were.
-----------------------------------------------------
Just as a side note, the #1 thing that makes me enjoy maintaining my primer is people posting in it and asking questions/telling me what worked in their builds/giving me ideas/etc.
I try really hard to encourage this, but I feel like the current volume of people on the site and the structure of the site are not particularly encouraging to people.
I'm not sure how you as forum admins/primer committee people/etc. can help to generate interaction. But I think that's what drives most people to create content. So something to think about. Maybe more of that kind of "primer of the week" type stuff, maybe some kind of drive to draw new members in, I dunno
Partnering with EDHREC would be a really good start. Having a prominent EDHREC link to the primer for each commander would be a huge benefit. EDHREC seems to drive a ton of traffic.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Some changes that have already occurred since my tenure in the Primer Committee, which post-dates after 3drinks' Primer submission(s), DirkGently's submission, and Rumpy's submission(s):
Put your Intro content here.
Put Your Commander Analysis here. I like using the List tags to sort out Pros and Cons and/or Strengths/Weaknesses.
Use the Deck Tags and Deck Builder Tool to create your decklist!
I also like to sort my decklists according to function and then separately according to card type, but that’s totally up to you.
This is the part where you can put up Tribal decklists, Budget decklists, different power level decklists, whatever.
Remember to use the Deck tags!
Talk about what your deck is trying to do on a broader scale and your own personal philosophy to Commander and your Primer.
This is where you should talk about the nuts and bolts of how your decklist plays out. What do you do in early turns of the game? What are some good opening hands?
What about the Mid-Game and Late-Game strategies?
Do you have a specific backup plan in case your primary strategy gets foiled?
This is where you would want to talk about these kinds of things.
This is a section where you talk about individual card choices that are located in your decklist. I also recommend you include other popular cards that other users may have used and include a brief description as to why/why not you’re running X card.
I personally enjoy reading about how Primers, and their respective strategies, match up against some of the more popular Commanders you play against IN YOUR PLAYGROUP or for Commander generally.
I’m 100% confident that you didn’t build your Commander deck in a vacuum. This section is to give credit where it’s due and help you build a solid reputation.
Lastly, it’s fun to keep track of how your deck has changed and evolved as you have as a player. It also gives readers an idea of what cards you’ve already tried out.
[/quote]
Sure, it might encourage a homogeneity of Primers but that's a separate issue (that I personally have no problem with, btw). By providing at least a template to applicants, we are reducing a significant complaint that has been presented within this thread, that of the time commitment of learning the coding required to make a visually appealing Primer. When I first submitted my Memnarch Primer, I too had to spend hours learning the coding tags of BBCode and it was laborious. My goal once I joined the Committee was to eliminate this concern as much as possible, hence the creation of the Primer template.
I have personally done real market research on why people don't like MTGSal as a platform. I've asked users on Discord and Facebook primarily, and my sample size was probably around 100 responses all said. The main attraction that regular users have to MTGSal as a site is because of the visually distinctive Primers and coding capabilities of the site, in addition to the improved community experience that MTGSal now offers (props to cryogen and other Mods for reducing the Flaming/Trolling that this site used to have). Because these are the qualities that differentiate MTGSal (and hopefully the new site) from other Commander platforms, it's important that the Commander Primers (which drive a majority of the traffic to this site in the first place) maintain that market-leading quality.
This is at least one valid justification of why the Primer Committee can appear to be "strict" about Primer submissions; the reasoning is directly related to what drives traffic to the Commander forums and MTGSal and thus ensured its continued existence. While this may have been conveyed poorly in the past and the criticisms of previous Committee members accordingly harsh, it was (usually) with the intent to ensure that the Primer, and consequently the site overall, received more views and traffic in comparison to its competitors. In the end, MTGSal is an asset and a business and the needs of the business have to come first. And the Primer Committee indirectly played a role in ensuring that the site was able to be viable by maintaining a quality Commander Primer that attracted users from a Google search about a specific Commander.
I realize that this site is closing its doors, and I'm legitimately sad to see it go for deeply personal reasons. It was a lifeline for me when I was getting sober 8.5 years ago because this site was so engaging for me, the community was so friendly, and the threads were usually well written. I've verbally committed to being a part of the new site that Feyd is building and will carry the collective suggestions brought up here to the new site. It's a chance to start over, which is a rare opportunity, and the Primer Committee members who have committed to being a part of the new site are an excellent group of people who are genuinely trying to help our applicants create the best Primer possible, both for quality reasons and for site specific reasons.
I hope that this novel of a post helps to convey the fact that the Mods and the Primer Committee actually hear and respond to the comments and suggestions that are mentioned. In order not to derail the thread further, I encourage everyone to either PM a member of the Primer Committee or create a separate thread so that we can keep track of the suggestions more efficiently.
Kindly,
benjameenbear
UB Dralnu, Lich Lord
RBW [Primer]-Kaalia of the Vast
BUG [Primer]-Tasigur, the Golden Fang
GWU [Primer]-Arcades, the Strategist
WUB Primer-Aminatou, the Fateshifter
UBR Nicol Bolas, the Ravager
It's been my general observation that those applicants that are submitting Primers are generally putting in solid content, so that's rarely a concern for the Committee. We usually give it a solid read as is and 99.99% of the time the content is excellent. Rumpy's Feather Primer is a great example of this, as is your Phelddagrif Primer Dirk. I think you bring up a fair point that it would be useful and welcome to more critically look at the content of a Primer and offer praise/criticism as part of its formal review, but I think that your generalization is not fair. Granted, your Primer pre-dates my addition to the Primer Committee, so I can see why you'd feel justified in your assertion.
darrenhabib's Primers are a good example of why we don't have a formal template that we absolutely require in order to receive Primer status. His primers are much different than mine but are still well written, visually appealing, and thoughtful. A template is available and we reference it when warranted.
UB Dralnu, Lich Lord
RBW [Primer]-Kaalia of the Vast
BUG [Primer]-Tasigur, the Golden Fang
GWU [Primer]-Arcades, the Strategist
WUB Primer-Aminatou, the Fateshifter
UBR Nicol Bolas, the Ravager
Primers are definitely the draw here. And deck threads in general. The deck threads that are 5 or 10 years old are just gold. Reddit and Discord simply cannot compare to that level of persistence. The nature of those platforms is just not toward long term engagement.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
There's some lessons to be learned from EDHRec and its SEO. I hope that the new site can form useful partnerships with additional/external sites so that the new site can truly be a haven for MTG users, particularly for the Commander format.
UB Dralnu, Lich Lord
RBW [Primer]-Kaalia of the Vast
BUG [Primer]-Tasigur, the Golden Fang
GWU [Primer]-Arcades, the Strategist
WUB Primer-Aminatou, the Fateshifter
UBR Nicol Bolas, the Ravager
And, on that topic: I am not sure on the feasibility nor on the usability of this, but it is possible for the Primer Sample to be in a "form" on the new site? While I don't mind messing around in the BBCode to make content, it is pretty daunting when one looks at the BBCode of the sample above if someone wants to create content but isn't well versed in BBCode. Perhaps a way to drive content would be to make it easier to create the primers in the format desired and then allowing the person creating the Primer the opportunity to modify the underlying BBCode after the bulk of the primer is created. This would lead to more uniformity across Primers in terms of content, which might be a good thing, while also still allowing people to add a touch of personal flair to their primer.
Do you mean sort of how our deck builder has sections that you can fill in?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Basically, something similar would allow people to fill in all the relevant sections and have the form create the structure of the primer so they don't have to worry as much about trying to get the BBCode just right. And, then, they could modify the BBCode to do different things if they want. I don't think it should lock people into a specific format or template but could go a long way in getting content by just giving an easy way to structure the content at first and modifying the layout rather than having people have to create the entire layout themselves.
Dragonlover
Lathliss Dragon Queen - All dragons all the time!
Mono-White Mono-Legends
Ruhan of the Fomori
Molimo, Maro-Sorcerer
Storrev, Devkarin Lich
This would in fact be crazy easy to do in that type of model but no idea if forums have that concept. My guess is probably not
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Unfortunately since this is going to be a brand new site and not an updated MTGS we are unable to directly port anything over (and especially work that is not individually our own). So it will be up to each person to port over any of their own threads or decks.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg