>>25627922
they already tried that. They quit after realising nobody actually writes.

>>25627938
They?

File: 1793236499944983.png (107 KB, 356x256)

107 KB PNG

We've never had a /lit/ project that ended in anything other than a fiasco that involved some Anon or other's massive ego sinking the whole thing.

It's actually quite striking to think about, realizing I share a board with so many petty tyrants.

>>25628416
Right as we speak someone is skipping sleep in order to derail the /lit/ writes thread

>>25628429
Based. Those threads are always gay.

Not that I'm against it, but it will have two releases and be dormant afterwards. People on imageboards don't like to work on stuff long-term, and the only zines made by imageboard users (e.g. lainzine) only made releases because they are effectively detached from the imageboard and done by people on IRC or Discord. Also weekly is far too frequently, monthly is even too frequently, maybe biannually would work.

>>25628429
good. those cringe threads derail the board so good

>>25628448
Derail lmfao does it really stop you discussing Game of Thrones tho

FWIW if there was one I would absolutely read it.

>>25628451
so that's your limit of what this board is capable of huh? shitty word game threads or GoT? You are even more pathetic than I first thought

>>25628416
>>25628437
There have been plenty that went perfectly fine (see https://lit.trainroll.xyz/wiki/Collaborative_Works), though they all run their course eventually. You'd hope for more than a couple releases, but that's better than none, and the longer something runs the more likely it is to become detached from the board. And yeah, weekly is too much.

I think a convincing start is what matters. Gotta convince anons it's more fun to contribute (and read) than not.

>>25627922
What are you waiting on?

>>25628434
>>25628448
Honestly I do try to be mindful of not posting them too frequently, since I know from /mu/ how annoying it is to have some gay /general/ filling up the catalog with bullshit. Some anons really fucking hate them though and I genuinly wonder why
Fascinating psychological case study in the current iteration

As far as I can tell the average /li/ user copes with reality mostly by imagining that they are the most intelligent and talented person to ever love. Collaboration necessarily runs the risk of exposing you to people who are more intelligent and talented than you and this is absolutely intolerable to them. Hence the self sabotage amd deliberate undermining of every collaborative/lit/ project that has ever existed.

>>25629484
Those and "write what's on your mind" threads are just excuses for people to discuss off-topic shit. Just fuck off to discord at this point.

>>25629701
Agree about the "write what's on your mind" threads but why does that bother you? It's so easy to just not click on it / hide it if you're a Page 1 browser

File: 1788400743667143.jpg (106 KB, 1179x1537)

106 KB JPG

>>25627938
Putting work on here would be basically throwing it away because there's no way in fuck you can ever use it ever again, it's tainted by this website.

>>25629757
I do that, but then in a random thread some anon starts bitching about how his shitty low-effort thread got derailed by some talent so all I can think is "BASED"

>>25629781
>derailed by some talent
lol wat?
I really do want to know how the "/lit/ writes a story" format can be improved. I think it's a winning thread idea, (theoretically) fun to participate in and generating prose that I genuinely think is enjoyable to read.

>>25629511
I suspect there's some attentionfaggotry at play as well. If you're constructively contributing to a collaborative work you're kind of a cog in a machine, but if you're the guy fucking it up in an idiosyncratic way you're an individual

Hijacking (derailing?) the thread to ask, completely sincerely: is /lit/ at large generally annoyed by the "/lit/ writes a story" threads? I know it's consistently on the first few pages for weeks at a time and is usually inane babble, but I also think it's both a fun game and a genuine collaborative project that results in moments of actual literature

>>25627922
I'll make the logo!

>>25630284
It's ONE or TWO fucking threads at most, at a time. Only a pedant would be overly bothered by them, there's plenty of space on the board. Fuck, go down to Page 10 and there are threads still up that are literally weeks old.

>>25630284
It's not annoying as that retarded write your thoughts or what's in your mind or whatever they call their gay little general

>>25630429
I like that thread because it prevents me from having to go to /b/ or /trash/ to say something random.

>>25630432
Yeah I like it too, it's certainly full of faggotry but I'm only exposed when I click on it

Why would I write? I let others do that for me

>>25630600
No anon we need your talent

>>25630284
they are terrible just full of homosexual fantasies and trolls

>>25631299
Why not make them better?

>>25630284
I'm biased since I think the story threads are fun and I've taken part, but in my opinion they're way way better than the Write Your Thoughts threads (which I consider a scourge). The story threads are at least productive and are undeniably literature, even if it's goofy; it's also clearly of the same ilk as some of the old collab projects from /lit/.

I'd like to see more variations on the structure, where it's not just X words or whatever. Maybe something about haikus. I dunno. Kind of a shame there aren't IDs.

>>25632236
/lit/ writes poetry is a good idea!
Tried "no wordcount at all" and it was underwhelming, just anons trying to be funny for paragraphs at a time. Perhaps an upper limit instead of a strict count. I also specifically want "/lit/ rewrites jumani five or eight words at a time" at some point, got a good feeling about that concept

>>25632236
>>25632243
but also nah fuck IDs, that's why >>25629701 is a dumb idea. It should be a big anonymous blob. You can still see individuals emerge (for good and for bad...) but I think it would be way less fun to be accountable for contributions

>>25632259
>it would be way less fun to be accountable for contributions
That's a good point. I just wish there was a way to prevent people replying to themselves, since that's lame and against the spirit of the thing.

Haikus would benefit from forcing a limit in reply number and in each entry's length (if you go hardass on syllables or whatever). Anything short demanding structure would be good.

Another idea: stories/poems are built by direct replies but it ends after X replies. Word limit could be the last digit. This opens things up since continuation is entirely up to the replies, you can revisit things, you can ignore things. A little too open maybe, but limiting the reply length by last digit means it's not so easy to force a narrative.

>/lit/ rewrites jumanji
That's a neat idea. As in write it from scratch? or modify the script? Could definitely work loosely, but I also think it'd be neat if the OP listed the plot points that need to be met. Like "X saves Y" then "X and Y go to Z."

>>25632347
Meh I don't mind people replying to themselves as long as they're not too spammy about it. I'll samefag but mostly only if the thread is down to page 4.
>Another idea: stories/poems are built by direct replies but it ends after X replies. Word limit could be the last digit. This opens things up since continuation is entirely up to the replies
Having a hard time visualizing what you mean by this
>That's a neat idea. As in write it from scratch? or modify the script? Could definitely work loosely, but I also think it'd be neat if the OP listed the plot points that need to be met. Like "X saves Y" then "X and Y go to Z."
Naw I'm really just expecting a chaotic free-for-all, but there will always be the fallback of "and then Judy rolled a 7" to keep a scaffolding. I'm skeptical that any kind of strong direction will work.
Also you should just do it lol. I'm not trying to be like a /lit/ personality, I'm just the only one who makes the threads for this imo very winning idea