OFF-LINE: The Condensed Ckafybarja Papers 1/2

[VILVA@viikki21.helsinki.fi]

To Ivan, Mark and Nick

lojbab asked me to prepare a transcript and and a condensed
version of all the postings concerning the Ckafybarja Project.
The transcript contained also the first stories and the
ensuing conversations till the end of August but they have
been deleted from this version except for the English
descriptive material.

This is the first version of what is to be a regular posting on
the list (kind of FAQ for the project). I tried to preserve all
the essential details but this, of course, is just my opinion
of what constitutes the essential. I have deleted a lot of
material -- mostly my own and lojbab's -- and made some minor
changes to the remaining text to make it seem more natural after
the deletions. ! I have NOT indicated the deletions -- except
in the translation of Nick's Fraktur rant !

The hardest decisions concerned the controversy about the
characterization of the personnel. There were quite many postings
and picking out the essential wasn't too easy. As far as I can
see we didn't actually reach a consensus and we don't really
know what the non-netters do think about the questions. Lojbab
has sent a copy of the total transcript to Karen Stein but I
haven't received any comments yet.

The last section concerning Nick's Cafe Newsletter proposal
will be eventually removed from this 'FAQ'. Now it is required
as background material for discussion.

I'm working on a summary which will be posted separately.
After seeing the first posted stories I feel we can proceed
in a way which will keep most people happy. I think we'll
retain the background information and the excerpts from the
discussions in this 'FAQ' indefinitely so that people can take
them into consideration when using the eventually appended
descriptions. Even though many writer's feel they need the
descriptions I think in practice these will be mainly used to
provide a few reference points to the background and a starting
point for the story. This, of course, will vary from writer to
writer. We'll try to keep the published descriptions 'decent'
and no doubt those writers who don't like the official
descriptions will be able to find ways to avoid using them.

I'm NOT going to state all this in the summary. I'll outline
the descriptions along the original lines as I see no reason
not to and then I'll include a separate subsection about the
controversial questions and refer to this 'FAQ'. Eventually
we ought to have guidelines for the writers in the 'FAQ'
pointing out the aspects about characterization and mutual
interaction Ivan, Mark and Nick have expressed in various
postings contained in this 'FAQ'.

*****

I decided to send a copy to all of you who were involved in the
conversations so you can check I haven't left away something you
consider essential or made changes you don't like. I'm prepared
to make all the adjustments you consider necessary before I post
this on the list. I've run the text through a spelling checker
(US English) but retained obviously deliberate misspellings and
Nick's British spellings.