Sagan 4 Forum [Menu]

While it isn't technically against the rules, mni might ask you to change the description to not be formatted...however one describes that. There was actually a discussion about avoiding narrativization on the staff channel earlier today.

I don't like the genus name.

Oh my, I didn't even notice the common name. Yeah, referencing the situation with Amber Heard and Johnny Depp in this way is completely inappropriate. It needs a different name.

I have to agree that naming an organism after some real-life drama, however important or silly, isn't good practice. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason for the reference, anyway (although I think this is a good thing because it can be changed without altering the organism itself).

QUOTE (Cube67 @ Sep 25 2022, 02:16 AM)

I have to agree that naming an organism after some real-life drama, however important or silly, isn't good practice. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason for the reference, anyway (although I think this is a good thing because it can be changed without altering the organism itself).

Any name ideas?

I feel like the description did not describe the ecology of this guy at all....


Also, didn't you quit sagan 4?....

This post has been edited by OviraptorFan: Sep 24 2022, 06:40 PM

I think this description is absolutely fantastic.
Like wow, I'm really into this method of introducing body parts, it is so creative.

QUOTE (Jarlaxle @ Sep 24 2022, 08:26 PM)

QUOTE (Cube67 @ Sep 25 2022, 02:16 AM) I have to agree that naming an organism after some real-life drama, however important or silly, isn't good practice. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason for the reference, anyway (although I think this is a good thing because it can be changed without altering the organism itself). Any name ideas?

maybe something more... descriptive? like "Giant Saliscuttler" (it's big, lives in saltwater, and is a scuttler)

Alternatively, a name that's shorter and derived from obscure roots, like "Selpunai" (truncated from French "sel punaise", or "salt bug")

- - -

This post has been edited by Jarlaxle: Sep 26 2022, 01:58 PM

New common name, new genus name, expanded on its ecological role.

QUOTE (colddigger @ Sep 25 2022, 03:37 AM)

I think this description is absolutely fantastic. Like wow, I'm really into this method of introducing body parts, it is so creative.

Thanks, went for bit of A Cthulhu-priest-ish "rise from the deeps" speech as a context that follows into a guided body scan meditation... But for a scuttler. Really hope they let me keep the format.

Got off work, for a name, how about "Mareenix" (Mariner + Nixie)?

Also, this description, while amusingly colorful, should be made to match closer everyone else's so it can be perfectly clear what differences there are...

With THAT said, you can keep the original as a bonus.

QUOTE (TheBigDeepCheatsy @ Sep 27 2022, 08:53 AM)

Got off work, for a name, how about "Mareenix" (Mariner + Nixie)?

No worries that was about the previous name (Amberdepp). I think Nixie (German water spirits) works fine, and is short enough to add things in the future (Tree Nixie, Borrowing Nixie, Orange spotted Nixie).

QUOTE (TheBigDeepCheatsy @ Sep 27 2022, 08:53 AM)

Also, this description, while amusingly colorful, should be made to match closer everyone else's so it can be perfectly clear what differences there are... With THAT said, you can keep the original as a bonus.

I've updated the description in a way that I think works for the standard intro but still incorporates the body scan method to describe the internal physiological differences, and abandons the 2nd person. Hopefully that works.

Added annotations, a bit of a mess but hopefully it will make the diagram more readable rather then less.

This post has been edited by Jarlaxle: Oct 12 2022, 11:32 PM

Jarlaxle, please don't use profanity. It may not be directed at anyone in particular, but that's a rather strong word to be using.

This kind of blended narrativization doesn't work well as either a description or a narrative. As an educational narrative, it's clunky, and as a description, it has a bizarre over-emphasis on one individual.

It would be best to remove the "Johnnyheard" reference on the title description entirely, even though that won't last as long as the organism name itself.

QUOTE (Coolsteph @ Oct 13 2022, 02:23 AM)

This kind of blended narrativization doesn't work well as either a description or a narrative. As an educational narrative, it's clunky, and as a description, it has a bizarre over-emphasis on one individual. .

What would you suggest?

to be honest the visual daigram alone is enough explanation of the physiology for me to make a descendent if I wanted to, at least body-wise.

The final portion of the description covers the general activity of the critter, which would allow for figuring out descendent behavior.

I dunno, I think it's fine.