Pleeb August 20, 2012 August 20, 2012 Wonderland has been coined by Irish, who wrote up the guide, and the term is pretty much accepted around here. To a newcomer, it could be abit off-putting, which is why mindscape can be applied to the glossary as well; however, removing it would require significant changes in the guide, titles, etc., and won't be the greatest from an SEO perspective. Alliteratively, the term could be redefined as a "NOTE:" in Irish's guide or something. I'm up for adding the term Mindscape and Dreamscape into the glossary the same way Creator, Host, and Tulpamancer (or how Tulpæ, Tulpas, and Tulpi) are handled. While a hologram is technically a 'tulpaforced item,' it was referred to less in the context of a tulpaforced item and more in the context of a visually-imposed hallucination (don't tulpaforce a strawberry, but impose the image of a strawberry on your field of view!). You can read where it came from, here: How about "hologram"? Supposedly, it's an inert, mindless and unchanging image, something even lower than a servitor. Though I'm not sure if it's not be being confused. Followed by: I sort of coined the term hologram in one of my early guides or something and basically it's the product of someone working on nothing but image and the senses. Nomadic you got the definition right for sure. I've only seen it done once, and it's almost never talked about anymore; it was mainly discussed in the earlier days. We should keep Visualization and Vocalization for the reasons stated earlier in this thread. The term tulpaforcing was because you're 'forcing' the tulpa into existence (that is, forcing a being that doesn't exist into existence and ultimately into your reality). I'm indifferent when it comes to using a new term for it. I kinda wanna side with Purlox on the note of newcomers, in which we have no idea how newcomers would act, or how they'll respond. We don't know if they'll read the glossary, but I would hope that they would. Like most terms, a lot of these are used in the guides and around the community, which is why they're in the glossary. Someone coming across it in a guide will be able to find that it as a defined term. For this reason, I'm not very content with the idea of removing terms from the glossary, but I'm fine with attempting to phase ones out and adding alternate terms. Like, we can start using the term "mindscape" much more often, and if we chose to officially endorse 'mindscape,' we can add it into the FAQ to replace 'wonderland' (though I'm not rewriting guides). Spoiler An image in a signature behind a hidden tag!
Purlox August 20, 2012 Author August 20, 2012 If they refuse to look at the glossary for the definitions of the terms, or fail to understand that this is foremost a psychological site from the obvious layout, then they aren't worth having. They're the people who will give up after 5 hours because "It doesn't work!". They are also the people that will then spread rumors on how it doesn't work, taking away potential users that would have actually meant something to us. People who turn away because of the terms are either those people, or people who never really were interested in the first place. Why exactly would we want them to stay? "Wanting to make everyone aware" is a fruitless goal, because all it will do is sprout arguments over whether it's real or not, and as soon as the news gets hold of it it's over because of their unreal power to create bias opinions. As soon as the news says it isn't true then it isn't true, game over. Can you please not assume what they would do? There are many different types of people that could potentially be turned off by this and even then everyone in such group is different person and they may not act as you think they would. And if someone is going to spread rumours (e.g. like FAQman did), then you prove them wrong. Don't assume people never were interested in it if they leave us because of terms. They could be cautious people that want to avoid metaphysical nonsense and the terms didn't make good impression on them even though the site's slogan did. And what about people misunderstanding terms. That is also their fault I quess ... I know this was meant for Phi, but; This site, like every site IS meant for newcomers, of course, it should be newcomer friendly, but that doesn't mean it has to only cater to people in their first week. The site has adapted and grown to match what everyone here says and uses to describe things. The term wonderland was coined by Irish, who was the main guy for wonderlands- he wrote the first guide. He was first, so we go by his term for it. Anyone can use a different name, it's just everyone uses the same one so we don't get confused. (although this particular subject isn't particularly confusing, wonderland, mindscape, memory palace, it's relatively obvious). However for deviation, narration and imposition, these are self explanatory. I haven't heard of a single newcomer who has joined and wondered what these terms are referring to. The only questions I have seen have been about what they actually do, what to talk about, how to impose. No one asked what you have to do during narration, it's obvious. Imposition isn't as obvious, but it's still the best single word to explain it. Deviation is appropriate because tulpae can and do deviate away from any sort of original design or idea the creator had. Yes, we do want to attract as many people as we can, but not everyone. There is a line between everyone you can possibly make this site appeal to, and as many people as possible. If you try to make this site appeal to as many people as possible, you get a ruined site. Pleeb would have to set up vidya discussion boards or christian studies boards or porn boards or add new profile features so people can blog shit easier, etc etc. It's better for the interests of the site, as well as all the keen and focused members in it, if we stick to trying to appeal to the members we want, need and can handle. We want people with focus and dedication and some level of maturity and flair for scientific exploration. Not just everyone. Honestly, right now, if we made ourselves known to everyone, we would be laughed at. Radical new ideas and concepts don't just explode because the few think it's good. You need to build it up so you can persuade more people that "hey, this is an interesting idea, and there are a lot of people doing it..", rather than "hey, this is an interesting idea, but there's only a small community and it's mostly ponyfuckers and weaboos". Too many fallacies for me to bother responding.
Phi August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 Can you please not assume what they would do? There are many different types of people that could potentially be turned off by this and even then everyone in such group is different person and they may not act as you think they would. And if someone is going to spread rumours (e.g. like FAQman did), then you prove them wrong. Don't assume people never were interested in it if they leave us because of terms. They could be cautious people that want to avoid metaphysical nonsense and the terms didn't make good impression on them even though the site's slogan did. Why would somebody who is interested in making a tulpa leave because of a term? I would think that they would at least look at the definition before deciding to leave. Only people who were never really interested in it would leave after just seeing a term that they don't like. Interest doesn't just disappear because of a small thing like a term, unless it was weak to begin with. People with weak interest won't likely finish their tulpa anyway. And I think that the way you replied to Avalanche was unnecessary.
412 August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 Is it just me or has the thread been going in circles in the last two pages?
Phi August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 Is it just me or has the thread been going in circles in the last two pages? You may not believe me, but this is the 15,654th time we've had this conversation. In 3 of those, the thread heated up more and more, and Pleeb eventually got angry and shut down the site. In 248 of those, we changed our slogan from "For Science!" In 890 of those, we changed over half of the terms recommended in this thread. In 1792 of those, less than half of the terms recommended were changed. In 12,721 of those, nothing changed.
Nikodemos August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 I think I'm seeing something coming in the distance, what is the word.... Ah yes, shitstorm. Name: Dante Gender: Male Form: Toa Mata Nui, a Bionicle(Amadeus made a sketch of him, kudos!) Stage: Narration, posession Being original since July 2012.
Guest Anonymous August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 You may not believe me, but this is the 15,654th time we've had this conversation. In 3 of those, the thread heated up more and more, and Pleeb eventually got angry and shut down the site. In 248 of those, we changed our slogan from "For Science!" In 890 of those, we changed over half of the terms recommended in this thread. In 1792 of those, less than half of the terms recommended were changed. In 12,721 of those, nothing changed. We honestly need to have a vote on this. It's obvious the community is split on the topic, so our only resolution would be a fair vote to either keep the current terms, or change them. Nobody gets anywhere discussing things like civilized adults on the internet.
412 August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 We honestly need to have a vote on this. It's obvious the community is split on the topic, so our only resolution would be a fair vote to either keep the current terms, or change them. Nobody gets anywhere discussing things like civilized adults on the internet. +1 to this... But seriously , after 15,654 threads? Why didn't we do that earlier?
Purlox August 21, 2012 Author August 21, 2012 We honestly need to have a vote on this. It's obvious the community is split on the topic, so our only resolution would be a fair vote to either keep the current terms, or change them. Nobody gets anywhere discussing things like civilized adults on the internet. So we are going to resolve this by using argumentum ad populum. Sounds fair. Why can't we just have multiple terms for something and let people decide whichever they prefer? Just adding synonyms to the Glossary isn't that hard and Pleeb wouldn't mind doing it, so why do you think we have to agree on one set of terms to use?
Sands August 21, 2012 August 21, 2012 Adding synonyms at this point - when they haven't been used pretty much anywhere - is a bit silly. Start using those words and get a few people using them so that people actually need to be explained what you guys are talking about. Some of them like mindscape and such are solid words some people are already using, so adding those if it already hasn't been done is alright. If we just keep adding everything someone thinks should be added, the glossary will become extremely bloated and full of useless fluff and synonyms. I hope you're not thinking that your suggestions are so good they should automatically be accepted while everyone else's ideas don't, right? I'll never understand why you guys even keep debating about things like these. You all already know what you want and you believe what you say is right and the best way to proceed, none of you are going to change your way because someone says something. The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
Recommended Posts