Quote:
Originally Posted by cbk1994
Code Gallery material
|
I feel like I'm about to be off-topic in epic proportions here. I hope no one minds. In this light:
I don't think it's good to be too stingy about what qualifies for a "Code Gallery" script. If someone makes a script to their best effort and releases it, I think it's fine to post it here. If it isn't up to scruff, someone will hopefully give a breakdown of why, the script will be updated. Both the original scripter and future observers will learn something from the critique.
My reasoning for this is that a discussion board will easily devolve into situation where an in-group is deciding on what is good or bad and leading the discussion entirely. In-groups are not always right (in fact, often wrong), and they create some weird sensation of a faux hierarchy which you need to climb to be respected, when you are actually just meeting fairly arbitrary restrictions.
I believe it is best to instead always be critical, and give in-depth explanations of decisions. This way, there is less arbitrary and more precise. Precise is easy to follow, and precise is not easy to bull.
This post is definitely not aimed at Chris. He's usually the one giving the in-depth explanations himself
. It's rather just a preemptive strike against anything ugly happening in the section. Hopefully most agree.
Though. I do value the fact there should be a place to release very polished scripts, ready-to-roll scripts. I don't think a forum is a good place for that. Something like a package system with voting might be appropriate. Maybe this is something Graal can get in the near future.