Just watched http://www.twitch.tv/joyofcubing/b/332675734
I wanted to say that I thought your rant at the very end, (@2:32 for reference) was as good or better than your regular podcasts. I think part of it was that you were getting quite passionate about your subject matter, and partly that you had the leeway to just rant for a while without having your flow interrupted or stopping to ask guests for feedback. Maybe it's just my preference for this "Rant" style of discussion rather than the "interview the guest" type that the podcast tries to accomplish. Perhaps split the difference and do a "Kranny's rant" in the first half of the show and then have the guest react (w/ host interaction) in the second half? Or 15/15/15/15, whatever.
Funny that your reasoning for not reading the Megathread is that it's time consuming and my reasoning for not reading the SCDs is that it's time consuming. I don't see how it's more time consuming to check one thread than it is to check 10 or more. For me it takes a lot of effort to visit each and every thread that's created for different cards and then read all of the discussion for those cards and then find time to add to that discussion.
Yes, that's why I threw in my opinion for counterbalance. It takes me more time to read through the megathread because with the megathread I have to try to jump back and forth often to find discussion about cards I'm interested in (especially when the discussion is often jumbled), and also because I can simply avoid certain SCDs where I'm not interested at all in the card or the discussion. For example, I'm very torn about Rakdos Shred-Freak, so I follow that thread closely to see how the discourse is developing. I can skip the thread about Dryad Militant because there's no question that I'll add the card. This is time efficient for me.
What I'm advocating for is not location, but rather discussion quality. I'd rather not see the discussion content in the SCD threads become overflooded by declarations of excitement without analysis.
I certainly don't mind if the threads are placed into a subforum for spoiler season. It's not really that big of a step to click into another link during the timeframe of the spoiler season alone. I do, however, hope that the threads are not archived and then closeted away -- for two reasons. First, because the SCD experiment is still new, so there is no need to jump to the conclusion that the discussion during spoiler season will be worthless and that we'll need "real" SCD threads later. It would be fun to watch the evaluations of cards change over time in an organic way, and to observe different members' methods of evaluation and whether their predictive capabilities turn out to be strong. Second, I would rarely want to repost my opinion if I've already done so in the "spoiler" SCD. When I post an evaluation of a card I'm generally confident about my evaluation of it, and as a consequence I very rarely change my evaluation of a card after I've posted my thoughts, even during spoiler season. I'd be extremely discouraged to write anything in the spoiler threads if I thought that they'd be hidden away later. Perhaps that's a good thing, though, because it forces posters to strongly consider postponing their thoughts until they've had a better chance to evaluate.
1
Just watched http://www.twitch.tv/joyofcubing/b/332675734
I wanted to say that I thought your rant at the very end, (@2:32 for reference) was as good or better than your regular podcasts. I think part of it was that you were getting quite passionate about your subject matter, and partly that you had the leeway to just rant for a while without having your flow interrupted or stopping to ask guests for feedback. Maybe it's just my preference for this "Rant" style of discussion rather than the "interview the guest" type that the podcast tries to accomplish. Perhaps split the difference and do a "Kranny's rant" in the first half of the show and then have the guest react (w/ host interaction) in the second half? Or 15/15/15/15, whatever.
1
Yes, that's why I threw in my opinion for counterbalance. It takes me more time to read through the megathread because with the megathread I have to try to jump back and forth often to find discussion about cards I'm interested in (especially when the discussion is often jumbled), and also because I can simply avoid certain SCDs where I'm not interested at all in the card or the discussion. For example, I'm very torn about Rakdos Shred-Freak, so I follow that thread closely to see how the discourse is developing. I can skip the thread about Dryad Militant because there's no question that I'll add the card. This is time efficient for me.
3
I certainly don't mind if the threads are placed into a subforum for spoiler season. It's not really that big of a step to click into another link during the timeframe of the spoiler season alone. I do, however, hope that the threads are not archived and then closeted away -- for two reasons. First, because the SCD experiment is still new, so there is no need to jump to the conclusion that the discussion during spoiler season will be worthless and that we'll need "real" SCD threads later. It would be fun to watch the evaluations of cards change over time in an organic way, and to observe different members' methods of evaluation and whether their predictive capabilities turn out to be strong. Second, I would rarely want to repost my opinion if I've already done so in the "spoiler" SCD. When I post an evaluation of a card I'm generally confident about my evaluation of it, and as a consequence I very rarely change my evaluation of a card after I've posted my thoughts, even during spoiler season. I'd be extremely discouraged to write anything in the spoiler threads if I thought that they'd be hidden away later. Perhaps that's a good thing, though, because it forces posters to strongly consider postponing their thoughts until they've had a better chance to evaluate.
1
For some reason I read that as fist-pumping. I like that better than firebreathing.