Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
How's the interest for a Worldbuilding site?
I would like to propose a Worldbuilding Q&A site. This site would be similar to Worldbuilding SE and would be ideal for anyone creating a world, including: writers, game designers, and anyone else looking to fact-check the plausibility of their creations.
The website is primarily geared around:
- Checking to see if a given scenario is realistic/plausible
- Asking what would realistically happen in a given scientific scenario (based on supplied/known/theoretical science, not pure speculation).
- Asking how a desired effect/scenario can be achieved scientifically, with a given level of technology/biology
I for one used Worldbuilding extensively in the days before 'the incident', and I would love to have an alternative where I can pose my ideas and see if they are realistic before I include them in my writings.
Note: Worldbuilding by its nature blurs two lines: one is between what belongs on worldbuilding and what belongs on writing. The other is between questions that help others and questions which apply only to you. If we create this site, special attention should be given to the guidelines section in these two areas.
Since I'm no longer on SE, I don't have a group, but I'm sure others would be interested in this, specifically creative writers, game designers, and people interested in scientific application to theoretical scenarios.
1 answer
Please use this post to indicate your interest in helping to build this community. You can either edit this post (if you have the edit ability on Meta) or comment and someone else will edit it into the post.
Please indicate if you expect to be a casual or more active participant. If you anticipate primarily asking or primarily answering questions, please indicate that. If you have particular expertise, either in the topic as a whole or specific areas, please say so. We're asking these questions so we can get a sense of the community being built and whether there are important gaps.
0 comments
8 comments
You might be interested in this Speculative Science proposal, which is from other (ex-)WB members, but aims for a smaller scope (more scientific = less subjective posts AFAICT). It also looks like the proposal being able to launch quite soon, so you might be interested in watching this post. — luap42 😷 11 months ago
@luap42 Thanks for the link. I went over by the proposal. 'Speculative Science' isn't exactly what I'd look for when looking for a worldbuilding Q&A. — Thomas Myron 11 months ago
@Thomas it started out as "WB, but without the magic complications". I see you've found that proposal now and I'm very interested in your input in shaping it. I think it does much of what you're looking for, though maybe not the "plotting" questions ("what would happen" can run quite a gamut). — Monica Cellio 10 months ago
@MonicaCellio Yes the plotting questions can be difficult. It's the difference between asking what could happen and what will happen, based purely on science/logic. I'll clarify that. — Thomas Myron 10 months ago
I think "what could happen, based purely on science/logic", fits Speculative Science. We're in the process of importing data there now, after which we'll write some custom scope help and meta posts and stuff (reflecting the discussions here). I think it will meet your needs -- and if not, please use that site's meta to raise issues so we can all work together to clarify or adjust. I hope we'll see you there! — Monica Cellio 10 months ago