Talk:Sissyfight 2000

message: I would like to get this page to a point where it might qualify for the Article Improvement Drive, and perhaps even to Featured Article status. Unfortunately, this seems something of an uphill battle; Wikipedians tend to ignore or even question Sissyfight's significance, while the Sissyfight community has shown little interest in improving this page (beyond acts of vandalism). Still, I think there's hope for this article.
The featured article after which the Sissyfight page can probably best model itself is probably the StarCraft article, since it's the only MMO that's been recognized with such status. Other gaming pages which have achieved featured article status include Donkey Kong, Doom, Half-Life 2, Katamari Damacy, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, Perfect Dark, and Super Mario 64.
The Kingdom of Loathing article, while not featured status, is another MMO model which might give this page a sense of direction.
--C-squared 18:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving this page 

message: I took the liberty to modify the whole article and write a stub instead. As it is, it mightbe kept, I think. Pfortuny 14:08, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keep/delete 

message: In one of her many June 6, 2006 edits to this page, MaudB removed the summary of the individual moves one can make in the game. While her edit was uncommented, I can understand why she removed it; it was too much detailed information about the inner workings of a game, and doesn't follow encyclopedic style. Nevertheless, I'm going to include it here in the on the Talk page to open for discussion whether we should either restore it to this page, or possibly even create a new page for it.
For clarity of format, I've marked off the deleted section with horizontal rules below. In order to avoid confusion, it might be best to comment above these horizontal rules. --C-squared 09:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: MaudB, thanks for your insight and edits. Sorry if I came off a little uppity -- I'm a little over-protective of this page and, of course, the SF community. (And, well, there's no feeling quite like having your foot surgically removed from your larynx.) I'm sure there's a way to incorporate a lot of the information you've shared here (maybe under "Development" or "Cultural impact" headers? I dunno). If you need to contact me, you can do so via my own talk page, or even by PM on the SF message boards. Posting email addies on Wikipedia is an invitation for Bad Things. --C-squared 05:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: C-Squared, oh no, no, no; I was the uppity one, rummaging around in the entry without knowing what I was doing. But all's well that ends well. Of course I am nothing but thrilled that you care about the page and the SF community. I'm too lazy/busy at the moment to think about categorizing some of the info I threw in here yesterday, but we can work on it together bit by bit.
I was just now thinking that perhaps another, small, historical note that might be interesting is that as a teenager, I participated in a little-known computer system that was the first significant online community - in the mid-1970s (!). I looked and there's no entry on it, so I started a discussion item (see, you've learned me some WikiManners) on the Wikipedia page for Control Data Corporation, the owners of the system, called PLATO. It is apparently common knowledge among those early PLATO users that many of them went on to try to duplicate that initial online community experience in their later lives (see: PLATO: The Emergence of Online Community: "As a communication system, PLATO has numerous other descendants. Many people who experienced the online PLATO community were inspired to replicate it on other platforms."), and that was certainly true of me and Sissyfight. If this interests you/others, check out what I wrote and the informative links I added.
To me, the significance of this lies, again, not in my personal story, but in these: 1) PLATO in and of itself is very important to the development of online culture, and the evolutionary line from PLATO through HABITAT and ECHO (the online community I've virtually lived in since 1991) to Sissyfight couldn't be clearer; and 2) that it's no accident that a sophisticated multi-user online game appeared that was so culturally distinct in its theme, design etc. from previous games; the reason being the immersion of its creators (save for Eric Zimmerman, who brought another type of expertise) in online community since they were kids. This led to their not thinking of online community and games as foreign or lesser media in which to work, even though, post-adolescence, they'd moved on to more mainstream and artistic cultural interests (i.e., not just Star Trek and medieval knights). I think the game might be alone in that regard, in its generation.
MaudB 3:18 pm, 14 June 2006 (aka Tootsie on Sissyfight)
----
The moves that a player can select in each round are:
*Scratch: An attack which deals a -1 penalty to the defender. Can be countered with either a cower or a grab, and does double damage if the victim is being grabbed or licking a lolly.
*Grab: A passive attack which prevents the defender from scratching, teasing, or licking. It also sometimes prevents other players from grabbing. A grab also acts as a 2x multiplier against a defender when she is being scratched. For example, if Girl A is grabbed by Girl B and scratched by Girl C, Girl A will receive 2 damage; if Girl D also scratches Girl A, she will receive 4 damage.
*Tease: An attack which is entirely dependent on teamwork. A single-person tease (also called a "solo tease") is ineffective against a defender. However, for every cumulative teaser added, the defender receives 2 damage. For example, two teasers do 4 damage, three do 6 damage, four do 8 damage, and five can wipe out a player in the first round with 10 damage. Two-person teases can be countered with a single grab.
*Cower: A defensive move which can dodge a single scratch, grab, or tattle. Successive unproductive cowers, which are cowers that do not dodge an attack, receive a -1 penalty.
*Lick Your Lolly: A high-risk defensive move which normally adds 2 hit points. Since the maximum number of hit points in the game is 10, licking with either 9 or 10 hit points is of limited utility. If an attacker scratches someone licking, the licker will choke and receive a -2 penalty instead. A lick can also be stopped (with no penalty) if the licker is grabbed. Teases do not interfere with licks, but if a licker receives enough damage to be defeated with a tease, the player will be defeated, regardless of whether or not the lick would have allowed the licker to barely survive the tease. If someone with 3 health is teased for 4 damage while licking, that person would be defeated, rather than survive with 1 health. Each sissy can lick a total of three times in a single game.
*Tattle on Everyone: An attack which can potentially damage everyone else in the game. The tattle does 3 damage to anyone scratching, grabbing, teasing, or being grabbed or scratched. If two or more players tattle at the same time, the tattle backfires and does 3 damage to each tattler. A successful tattle can be dodged by a cower or a successful lick. Each sissy can tattle only twice in a single game.
Failure to select a move by time the timer rings results in -1 health as a penalty, thereby gradually eliminating those who do not decide in time. However, many players tease out consistently indecisive players. Additionally, if all the players make their decisions with more than 10 seconds left on the timer, the timer accelerates to a countdown from 10, ending the round early.
----
Whoo, it's been a while. All the recent activity, BTW, has been because of the successful Kickstarter campaign that ran from April 30 to May 30, 2013.
I restored the text above (with a few adjustments) because the movelist that was there was... meh. It might still be too much, and it would be good to pare it down, rather than replace it outright. But I actually think that with the game currently out of commission until September (we hope), a more detailed explanation might work better. C-squared (talk) 20:55, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game mechanics 

message: Over the past few weeks, probably due to prominent exposure from this thread on the Sissyfight Message Boards, the Sissyfight article has been subject to several acts of vandalism, biased edits, and insignificant additions (imho) by either anonymous or newly registered users. Many of these contributions seem to be merely petty attacks against the Sissyfight administration and established community. I've felt justified in deleting these contributions since (1) none of them have been commented, (2) none of them have been discussed on this Talk page, and (3) most of them do not necessarily seem to be in good faith or NPOV. If you actually feel that the inclusion of this information will improve the article as an encyclopedic entry, then please extend the courtesy of discussing it here, or at the very least, commenting your edit. --C-squared 12:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent deletions (June 2006) 

message: Over the past few days (July 31-present), Nicorette (Talk) and 70.157.53.248 (Talk) (very likely the same person—their edits have been identical or similar) have been editing the History section of this page to include subjective, petty, paranoid conspiracy-theory-style attacks against the Sissyfight administration, with no support from a reputable source. Again, as above, (1) none have been commented, (2) none have been discussed here, and (3) and they do not seem to be in good faith or NPOV. I have been treating these edits as vandalism, and I have left the appropriate vandalism warning templates on their Talk pages.
I do not believe that this is the same sissy who uses the handle "Nicorette", since that person lives in Australia and the vandal is a BellSouth.net customer.
--C-squared 16:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent reverts (July-August 2006)

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Unconditional support. Horsesforcorses (talk) 20:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Many of the changes to this page over the past year have been relatively minor updates, appending the legacy structure here. I think it's worth exploring an overhaul, now that the open beta is underway. --C-squared (talk) 06:58, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013-2014 Kickstarter/Sissyfight Returns