Can we add an Adventuron category to this forum?

I have no idea who, if anyone, is in charge of this, but… could we add an Adventuron category here? There are dozens of threads about it and it would make Adventuron-specifc things easier to find if they weren’t bundled with other bits and pieces in this ‘other’ category.

3 Likes

What’s amusing is that without checking, I had assumed there already was an Adventuron category, just based on the amount of Adventuron traffic I’ve seen. Discovering that there isn’t one, I also vote that there should be one.

-Wade

Note that you can use the adventuron tag for that, which isn’t too different from a category functionally. It looks like people are using it consistently. Or maybe someone is retroactively tagging things? But all the adventuron posts that I can find seem to be tagged.

But yeah, when this came up back in July there was much less traffic. There has been a big surge in the last two weeks: like 15 or 17 posts? Mostly from just a couple people, but still, if that keeps up, it feels like it’s definitely getting to the point where a category would make sense. @Dannii?

1 Like

ZIL and Dialog only have about 4 or so active posters but they each have their own category. I’m not sure what the requirements are for getting a category, but they seem pretty low.

1 Like

Okay, Adventuron sub-category is created too!

8 Likes

Marvellous, thanks!

Well.

Even though only a few deranged individuals work with it at any one time, ZIL is one of those things you can call “seminal” and not exaggerate. (Plus, nobody wants all those brackets cluttering up a “general discussion” section, do they?)

As for Dialog–this isn’t an easily-tested hypothesis, but it was engineered for easy community acceptance, targeting the as-universal-as-it-gets-around-here Z-Machine as it does. I suspect that gave it an easier path to legitimacy.

(Difficult to test because it’s not every year somebody comes along with a new language targeting an existing, popular format. The “popular” part is an important qualifier, because none of the Scott Adams languages/tools have ever received enough consistent affection to warrant their own discussion pocket. Also doesn’t help that the SA style isn’t particularly prized by this scene’s tastemakers.)