Good morning everyone. Some of you may have noticed probably late yesterday evening but for those who did not: The magazine now has new ownership!
Long story short: The kbin dev finally added the means to transfer ownership on magazines which are deemed ‘abandoned’ which, unfortunately SquaredCircle technically was (i.e. the owner being AWOL for 1mo+).
Given this meant anyone could apply and gain control of the community within hours, after talking to Tellum and Neon (and having AKittyCat’s blessing), I am now the owner of the magazine.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR YOU, THE COMMUNITY?:
Nothing, idk lol.
So with that all out of the way: A question:
Our rules. How things are ‘done around here’. The magazine itself.
What are your thoughts?
Is there anything you would wanna see change? Relax any rules? Change anything? Implement anything new? Want everything to stay 100% the same? Either way, sound off below so we know how ya feel and can get a discussion going. For non-kbin users, I’ll include a comment below with the full rule list as it currently stands since you folks can’t see the sidebar.
(Also I guess if you read this far and have no real opinion either way then here’s Rikishi/Too Cool vs The Radicalz from WWF No Way Out '00 so the read was worth it lol)
Edit: I’ll leave this up for a few days so people can chime in and then post updated rules for you all to look over.
The only issue I have with these rules is that they were originally written for a MUCH larger community in the form of reddit’s SC, which had about 830k members, compared to this kbin magazine being around the 1k subscribers mark.
Do these rules maybe stifle interactions that could help us grow? With the much larger userbase, the lower effort content was basically spam, but here, it’s actual engagement we might not have otherwise.
You are not wrong.
For my own opinions on the list:
The first 6 rules are basically 3 rules, each repeated in a slightly different context and can be cut down and reworded.
Reposts - 5 months and we’ve had 1 that I’ve seen. Whether it needs to be a rule? maybe, maybe not, community call.
Not Related to Wrestling - Self explanatory.
Spoilers - Ditto
Vague/Editorialized Title - This one depends on the spirit of the terminology. An editorialized title is a title different than the source for any reason. Sometimes for clarity a title should be editorialized (i.e. “[PWI] Huge Surprise Coming On Wrestling Show” > “[PWI] Huge announcement coming tonight on AEW” and honestly the few times it does happen (even sometimes by me) none of us seem to care about it cause the titles are always clear and make sense. Maybe a re-write of the rule to just state to keep the title clear and sensicle?
Sexualized Content/“Plot” - Probably safe to leave this as is, no reason someone can’t start a fediverse wrestlewiththeplot/wrestlewiththejoshi if they want it.
Split Interview/Article & Secondhand Source - Gimme ya’lls opinions on what to do with these.
Banned Source - probably should not change lmao.
As far as the Split Interview/Article section goes, It’s all really dependent on the discussion around the secondary article IMO. If the article is just a clickbait summary, nah. If the article focuses on a certain topic discussed as part of a bigger interview, there could be merit to discussing it in isolation, but accompanied with a mandatory link to the full interview/thread? Mods discretion really.
I agree. We’ll see what the community thinks, but personally, I wouldn’t mind nixing the rules from derailing to reposts. In my opinion, we remove them and only re-introduce them if issues arise in the future. But those are just my thoughts, and I hope you all feel comfy enough to chime in with your own.