Sidebar tweak?

[Ainsley Lynch]

This is a really minor change over a relatively minor issue, but the thought's been nagging at me for a while now, so I feel like I may as well say something.

I've been noticing more and more ever since it was moved from its own category in the sidebar (I'm not sure if that's the correct term - I'm referring to the list of information that sits under people's avatar) to being next to relationship status, people using the 'Sexuality' field to list their characters partners names. It does make sense - that's useful information to have readily available for plotting purposes. But so is a character's sexuality, and if you include one piece of information, you have to exclude the other. My suggestion is to keep the bracketed section next to relationship status as a place to put partner's name, since it fits really tidily there, and move sexuality back to a separate labelled category in the sidebar, so it's possible to include both pieces of information and have them visible at first glance for easy plotting/understanding threads you read.

For example, Ainsley's would read:
Relationship Status: Interested in somebody (Amber)
Sexuality: Pansexual

Just a really tiny tweak, but it'd make it possible to include information people obviously want a space for in the sidebar Thanks for reading this, and sorry for (as ever) taking far more words than necessary to say something relatively simple!

 

[Stefan Archer]

Rowan,

While we understand the desire to have a separate sexuality field as it was before, it works as it currently is. Sexual orientation having it's own field is not entirely necessary, the bracket allows people to put in information that they feel is important to their relationship status, whether that be in a name or a sexuality. It keeps the bit neat and tidy, and avoids filling up the sidebar with information that can be said in a simplified manner as it is now.

Returning to the way that it was before likely wouldn't necessarily solve people putting in different or seemingly unnecessary things within either the bracket or the sexual orientation. (People put non-sexual-orientations of all sorts in this field before.) Further to that, having it in the bracket is just a simplified manner of stating what a character's sexuality or status is, which would be expanded upon further and better in a biography or just by asking a person about it, that would still not be possible with a separate field.

We appreciate the suggestion, and encourage any feedback, but for now, we won't be implementing any changes to the way relationship status and sexual orientation appear.

 

[Ainsley Lynch]

I'm not suggesting this as a solution to people putting non-sexualities in the sexuality section though, I'm specifically talking about partner's name. Partner's name and sexuality are both handy pieces of information to know about a character for plotting purposes before contacting someone about a plot (being able to see who someone's in a relationship with, AND whether your character would be eligible as a possible partner if/when that relationship ends) and as it currently stands there's only space for one of them. They're both useful pieces of information people clearly want a space for, since different people are already using the bracketed section for both things.

I understand not wanting to clutter the sidebar up, but I still think these are both useful pieces of information to have readily to hand, and I wanted to clarify my point. I'm talking about the fact that there are two separate pieces of relationship information people want to convey and only one section to do it in, not people using the sexuality box for things unrelated to sexuality/relationships altogether.

 

[Nicolas King]

Guys (Rowan and people liking her his posts), we went down the road when I moved sexual orientation to the brackets. It's not changing back.
If you want to use the brackets for a name, whatever, but that's not what it's there for. You could put a name in your member title (many people do). You can put almost anything you want in your member title. (Any additional info you think is key for your character and we don't have a field for, really.)
All love/romance/sex-related things being in one field in the mini profile (all denoted by a heart in the default theme) makes sense.

 

[Ainsley Lynch]

(Rowan and people liking her posts)

*his posts

I understand that. Just wanted to state my reasoning more clearly, since I felt like the original response was addressing an issue that wasn't the one I was actually talking about.

 

[Geovanna Adler-Cade]

(Rowan and people liking her posts)

*his posts

I understand that. Just wanted to state my reasoning more clearly, since I felt like the original response was addressing an issue that wasn't the one I was actually talking about.

I liked it because I like people considering new ideas

I think it would be a good idea. Even if nothing happens it's good to talk about things that could potentially move the board forward. While I can also see the point Nick is making in that it was discussed before, I still believe things like this should be viewed with an open mind and not shut down due to previous decisions. It's just a suggestion after all and things like this may be good to reconsider every now and then. It may just be me, but I'd feel more intimidated to suggest an opinion if I thought it would be met with a wall.

Can't say I don't appreciate the sidebar as it is now though

 

[Nicolas King]

(Rowan and people liking her posts)

*his posts

Sorry about that, Rowan!
Honestly, I think what mixes me up is not just that you're playing a female character but also that this character was female - and so I read the name and just go "girl" even though I know that's not true.

Forgive meeee?

 

[Nicolas King]

It may just be me, but I'd feel more intimidated to suggest an opinion if I thought it would be met with a wall.

Which might be why I want to avoid the back-and-forth and cut to the chase about this having been visited before - I'm mindful that it's not a majority of suggestions that we implement, but suggestions are what have kept the site exciting and fun, and so I don't want a long drawn out thing about something that's settled which might discourage others because they think it's change itself we don't like.
(That said, I think we try our hardest with lots of suggestions and some just don't pan out in the end, like make-up NEWTs. )

 

[November Albertson]

I like this suggestion because Rowan has a fair point. But also I have to agree with Emzies and Nick on this.

Personally, I could easily move Flavio's name to November's member title and list her as whatever sexuality she is and I think it would fix the issue of not being able to list both, as the member title is there for whatever we want. But I personally decided awhile ago to not list sexualities (most of the time) on the sidebar of my characters, instead I put other information that maybe the sidebar isn't intended for. But I also respect your want to being able to have both on the sidebar, who the person might be with and sexuality, Rowan.

I like the fact it is there as it is now and I have the option to do so, and I agree it's a handy bracket to fill but it's a bracket as it's meant to be a choice. But for me forming potential plots it's simple to ask the player what the sexuality is or have it listed in their character development or bio as well.
​

 

[Daisy Parker-Taylor]

While I can also see the point Nick is making in that it was discussed before, I still believe things like this should be viewed with an open mind and not shut down due to previous decisions. It's just a suggestion after all and things like this may be good to reconsider every now and then. It may just be me, but I'd feel more intimidated to suggest an opinion if I thought it would be met with a wall.

All suggestions are taken into consideration and discussed. It's hardly ever just a straight "no", unless it's something cray cray like "let's pretend Voldemort didn't die and HP did and RP like that."

 

[Sloane Halliwell]

While I can also see the point Nick is making in that it was discussed before, I still believe things like this should be viewed with an open mind and not shut down due to previous decisions. It's just a suggestion after all and things like this may be good to reconsider every now and then. It may just be me, but I'd feel more intimidated to suggest an opinion if I thought it would be met with a wall.

All suggestions are taken into consideration and discussed. It's hardly ever just a straight "no", unless it's something cray cray like "let's pretend Voldemort didn't die and HP did and RP like that."

Just saying though, that'd be a great suggestion
​