Below can be found the summary of the site direction discussion that occured on the staff discord server that occurred in January of 2024. It contains all the needed information about the expected audience, quality, and future of the site. Keep in mind the examples given under each section aren't set-in-stone changes, and therefore might not necessarily happen as they are written. Nonetheless, this page contains everything you can expect for this site moving forward.
Site Direction Discussion Recap
The site's quality
The site quality has been a tough subject for a while. However, most staff and more importantly greenlighters agrees on the fact we should aim for higher standards of quality. This means prioritizing good pages above quantity, and publishing pages at the peak of their potential instead of something "mid".
Devloping what we already have
This direction, or at least its foundation, is already present on the site. Indeed, the entire GLMP is heavily in favor of this mindset, and as they are the people in charge of criticizing the pages and allowing them to be released, it makes sense that this is something that is already sort of around. Moreover, our established authorbase (basically the GLE people) rarely uses said coldposting powers, as they instead aim to make the best out of their writing. However, this mindset isn't present for new authors, who don't care for quality as much as the established community does. The issues and their reasons have already been discussed a lot, but said people are not here to contribute with something meaningful and interesting. They are rather on the site to write solely for themselves, not caring about improving or providing people with something genuinely good, and /or creating purely for fame, as they want their concept or their page to be used in Backrooms games, featured in videos… Which, ironically, doesn't allow for a good writing to be created, nor for a good community-driven website in general. Of course, those traits aren't bad in themselves as long as the author still want to create something of quality to please both themselves and the site they are writing for, but they are the main reasons the new authors write here, which doesn't allow for a healthy site writing direction.
Keeping the userbase that defines us
As we are the second biggest Backrooms website, it is important for us to offer something of quality and worth in order to keep our authorbase around. While this isn't the only factor of the lack of crit right now, a lot of our greenlighters become more and more inactive on our wik, focusing on places where their criticism and overall skills will be listened to and allow for a positive influence. This loss of such important members comes from a feeling of not being listened to by writers, and not being able to properly improve the site. Directly stating we wish to be a quality site will help our loyal members of the community to have the positive impact on the site they wish to bring, and therefore allowing said site to always become better as it features greater and greater pages. Enforcing it is obviously equaly as important, so as to clearly show the goal we as a site and a community have, driven by the opinion of most of the contributors.
Helping newer members in their writings
Of course, newer members wouldn't be left with a high wall impossible to climb. In the last year, we got a lot of very promising authors who stayed around as they wished to improve their writing and create great things for the site first and foremost. This is a healthy mindset that can be present with new authors, and as long as they wish to bring something for our collaborative project, they will always be welcome and we, greenlighters and critics, will take our time to help their writing as long as they are ready to take said help. Pedantic people who don't listen to the collaborators trying to help them don't have a place on our site, as they are acting against the system the older community would like to see around (older community who, again, defines us). Places like fandom (with lower standards) or even freewriting are places where said people can thrive because the overall mindset of those communities allows this to exist. However, we as a site currently wish to be a site ever-increasing in quality, helping new and older members alike to produce works that will please this community. We don't want to prevent new authors from posting and improving. As long as they have a healthy mindset for the site, we will support them. We prefer to see a mediocre page from a new writer who did their best and listen to help, as they will become better and create better and better writing as time goes by. However, an established author posting a half-baked page, refusing to bring it to its full potential by not listening to anyone's review, goes against this vision of the site.
How to get there
This isn't something impossible to do. After all, our authorbase is already embracing this view. Therefore, our goals on the site quality will be to sustain this mindset by featuring changes that push the features of our site and community there, allowing for a more obvious presentation of our community's will and mindset, which is to produce quality pages, few if necessary, for the community to enjoy, while always better themselves in writing, helping other motivated people to achieve this goal as well. Note that the ideas below are only that, not all of them have been discussed yet (let alone fully) and serve more as examples to what points we can tackle for this particular part of the site direction, no need to discuss them at the moment, their time will come when it will be needed. This is also true for the other examples of the other points that will be presented.
- The new crit system and deletion threshold proposition. This could allow for a broader room for maneuver thanks to the minimal risks it would create with the harsher condition for a page to be posted or staying around. Moreover, this would also help in making sure pages from members with a bad mentality (being what got discussed previously, no reception for crit nor wish to truly contribute) to stay on the wiki. This would also allow for an evolution of the checkmark system into something more practical for writers and critics alike quality-wise.
- mass edit proposal. While harsh, this proposition would help us raising the quality of the wiki significantly, opening for rewrite the pages that aren't representative of our site anymore, yet are on the front of it because of their number/importance. This would also help new writers, as they wouldn't be subjected to such "bad examples" of writing.
- improving critic skills and activity. While not a concrete proposal, this is nonetheless an important point, as we will need to train, actively or passively, more critics so as to help new authors better. Things like Critathon or the how-to critique guide are already in place, but a devlopment and better publicity for them could be needed.
The site's audience
For the longest time, the Backrooms has been a nexus for a lot of different audiences and sub-communities. Although we are mainly exposed to the contributors and the on-site readers, there are also other publics, like the offsite readers, artists… However, all of those audiences have different reasons to be on or to follow the wiki. This is fine on its own, but became an issue for our wiki as we tried to content everyone, or even the majority. In addition, staff usually made paradoxical decisions, sometimes working in favor of an audience they would deceive during the next wiki change. This made the entire staff lack an efficient decision-making process, which had consequences such as the lack of clear standards.
However, the most important part of our wiki is the contributors. The authors, translators, critics, and staff members/helpers who develop the wiki and the community, taking from their time so as to make this place interesting and good to live in. Moreover, they are the people who are the most touched by the change, as they are the one being at the front of everything we do. Without them, the wiki wouldn't exist. We can't subsist without contributors, as they are the one working here. We are seeing this right now, as the severe lack of greenlighters and critics make the publishing process hell for everyone.
Getting feedback more easily
As they are the people who are active here, they know the wiki more than anyone. While they haven't necessarily been here the longest, they know how this place work, what the general community appreciates, and since they are the people who make the wiki what it is, it makes sense that we need to listen to their opinions first and foremost, so as to not drive the site against what the contributors are already doing, causing yet another paradoxical state for the wiki. Moreover, as they are on the front of everything, we as staff know where to find them and gather their opinion. It saves a lot of time for us, as we don't have to waste days just to see what the readers think of something with forms and questions in plenty of different places.
Keeping our contributors
Moreover, listening to our contributive authorbase also allows us to keep them around. They are present on this wiki for a reason, and making decisions that go against what they appreciate around here will ultimately drive them away, making our wiki just a lifeless shell, devoid of any people wanting to involve themselves here. We need to motivate the people who give their time to this wiki by rewarding their efforts by listening to their concerns, opinions, or reactions, which will allow the wiki to grow in the right singular direction, benefiting everyone who makes the wiki what it is. Having a random reader who isn't even on the wiki form an opinion is something, but this opinion doesn't value as much as the one from someone who has been writing or criticizing pages for months. The latter has brought something to this place, allowing it to become better, and is not only better suited to know what's good for this wiki, but should also be rewarded more for their investment.
Motivating people
Opening ourselves mainly to our contributors also gives the rest of the Backrooms community (onsite or offsite), more motivation to participate here and be active. Having his work rewarded by being listened to and respected is something that will bring more and more people here as time goes by. Those members can start investing themselves here, growing their skills and making social connexions, effectively being a win-win situation for both parts. As the contributors give some of their time for this place, we start evaluating their opinions and their view, since we respect their work and their involvement here. This would allow for a retention of our most active and important members, since they will have reasons to stay around in a place where they matter because of their contributions and the efforts they put.
Listening to the rest
Of course, this doesn't mean we should dismiss all opinions coming from other places. It's always interesting to get feedback from the people who aren't as familiar as contributors are, for example with things like site accessibility. However, we as staff shouldn't complicate our lives by reaching places who could very well make our decision-making harder overall. We will listen to our authorbase primarily, but other audiences may very well be important in some of our discussions.
How to get there
Again, the following points are examples of some axes we can work on, and may not have been discussed fully yet, if at all. They aren't the focus, but instead act as a way to present how it could be put into place.
- Restricting comfeeds and suggestions to contributors only. This could allow for only meaningful and developped feedback to be posted and discussed with staff, and therefore avoid any useless post that would decrease staff efficiency.
- Rewarding newer and older authors. Giving people more reasons to invest themselves on the site can help them go through the initial difficulty of interacting and making a difference in an already established community. Whether it's roles, achievements or access to special channels. Giving people reasons to be around and work for the site will allow us to sustain our community. Things like crits or the assurance of getting various soft skills can also help newer people be interested into the community. It's also important to have more commnity input in the article discussions, to point out the stuff they enjoyed so as to continue to guide new authors.
The site's future
Perhaps the most important part of the site direction is to answer the question of where we are heading to as a site and community. This means we have to define what is our site identity; what makes us interesting and different from other Backrooms or even writing sites. This means we need to analyze what the site is lacking, what people seem to be heading to in term of writing, and what can be sustained in the long term with staff action. Understanding why our former pillars of the community leave is also key in this process.
Unlike sites like fandom or even SCP, our site and its contributors head more on the narration and stories for the site. While tales aren't that much read, it's hard to deny that format-screws, especially narrative ones, are a big par of our site recently. The solely clinical pages that present a level with few gimmicks become rarer and rarer, and this frankly isn't the demand on this wiki anymore, nor is what writers are focusing on. Narration allows for a more live universe than places like fandom, and format-screws creates more originality in what can be posted on the site.
However, storytelling can't go far without a base. We need a worldbuilding to use to create a universe that feels alive and interesting to read about. Many established fictional universes (like warhammer or dnd) have extended worldbuilding and stories. This is what we should be heading to. We are a site presenting a universe, and we need to allow for both worldbuilding and narration for each to truly work. Not only is worldbuilding needed but there are also people here who are equaly interested in such writing, author and reader-wise. Therefore, both type of people can bring something valuable for the site universe and writing, with different approachs that are still healthy and needed for our community, working with each other.
Fixing our worldbuilding
As of now, our site lacks proper worldbuilding. Although we have groups, levels, entities… Those are usually severely underdeveloped. Questions like the daily life of a Backrooms citizen in Level 11, the form of levels in the Lost era, the trading roads of the Backrooms or the history of the early M.E.G. are all examples of obvious important plot elements for the development of the universe of the wiki, yet they are unanswered on the site because pages that are supposed to develop them (group pages, level pages…) don't dive deep enough in this. This creates a difficult environment for creating stories because the base of the universe isn't clear enough for people to expand on them. Pages like levels of the main 9, used heavily when creating bases or stories, only present few bullet points for the groups for example, or barely develop the physical structure of the level. Entity pages can also lack proper behavior explanations, and groups usually need a more detailed storyline and explanation. Those issues mainly remain on the site because our worldbuilding pages are (almost) all pages from the 2020 era, devoid of actual entertaining and useful devlopment for writers. This makes the expansion of our universe difficult, because of how clunky our bases are. The site, to devlop itself, therefore need both revamps of this old lore in the form of page changes, as well as devlopment with new created pages able to contribute to what is already on the site. Only with the creation of such elements will the narrative and story-based nature of the site truly shine, as it will be able to use elements from the universe that will make the world feel cohesive and alive, creating a more pleasant reading and writing experience.
Narration
Yet, a world without stories is an uninteresting world. Without stakes, without the development of tales, the universe is only an unused shell. Having lore elements is needed, but those elements need to be used in stories. As explained already, our site is already heading toward a story-based era, where many format-screws and original narratives are created. They can be made to show objects, entities… in a more personal or appealing way, but can also be created as a way to use the setting with interesting characters to make a compelling story using what the people appreciate about the universe, developing great characters and adventure that are, again, compelling to write and read about. As a writing website, we should be focused on exactly that, writing, and this means telling stories. This requires this place to make tales more appealing for example, or to make the universe easier to use in said stories.
Collaboration
Our site is a collaborative site. In its essence, we write together. We create something cohesive together. I won't touch lore consistency and canon here because that's not the time, but the thing I will touch is how collaboration is needed for our site to be relevant. That's what brought the birth of this community years go, after all. That's why most of our key contributors came here.
Someone writes a level. Someone else wrote a character. And then a third person uses the character and the level created and makes a format screw about the guy being chased by an entity and trying to save himself. Then someone else takes the entity and makes another one related to it, and the two will then be forged in an entity group of interest by one last person.
The first point is passive expansion. Pages written should of course be good by themselves, but also allow for said pages to be used by other people. We as staff should (again, with things like contests) encourage people to create more link between pages so as to create interest between all of them, more traffic, and more interest on the wiki, which make people want to expand characters, groups… Canons like the Terror Hotel started as only a level and an entity. Same thing with the masked maidens. The point of the site should be that people write things that will be used by other people next. Of course, not everything needs to be connected. Standalone pages are good! But there should be a middle point. Even something as simple as "using a level a setting" or "mentioning an entity" to even "the character finds this object" works.
The most important thing however is active collaborations. The site should also have people actively writing together. Things with one-off collabs pages (like L1 rewrite) or bigger scale projects like the M.E.G rewrite project. Again, this is a point that would be emphasized by staff, not initiated, because the start is already there. People already collab more than a year ago, so this direction follows the current wiki style
How to get there
As usual, those are only examples and are not meant to be discussed here and now.
- More collaborative events. It can be contests, special themed months, writing jams… But the core goal would be to help users learn about collaboration, how to participate in one, and how to create a community. Things like guides or special forums can also help.
- Mass edit. The mass edit proposal can help open rewrite permissions for underdeveloped pages, in order to fix their worldbuilding issues to create a more consistent base for further use.
- A better canon. Currently, one of our largest issues as a site and community is the lack of any cohesive groundwork for our stories to build upon. Our extremely strict "no canon" policy is part of this issue, people will see the idea of a "main canon" and promptly freak out. However, it can be addressed easily.
What would a main canon look like?
Instead of a "this page doesn't exist in canon because we said so" system arbitrarily decided by staff or the GLMP, (A system which nobody wants,) a main canon would simply be an organization of the main ideas about The Backrooms. The canon page would simply be the baseline information given to the writers to build from and expand the universe. The canon page would explain simple things like how the backrooms internet works, for example. It would explain the fundamentals, the organization of our lore. It would give us direction. A set-in-stone interpretation of events or timeline, NOT a "these things don't exist because we said so and nothing else". Everything important to understand the universe and write for it would be there.
Now, where would specific pages be in all of this? If we don't have partygoers on the canon page, does that mean they aren't canon?
Not at all
For example, including "Smilers" on the page wouldn't really change much. They're just another monster that exists. There is objectively no reason to exclude them from a "general canon." Excluding them would do nothing but piss people off, with no silver lining. about 90% of pages fall under this category.
Now, there are other pages that can make things a bit more convoluted, but this shouldn't be a real issue.
Let's use The Red Knight as a familiar example. In the main canon, it'd just be what the page is in isolation. A simple knight, maybe a god, maybe they aren't even real. Maybe they're a wander who found a suit of armor lying around. All the pillar-avatar stuff would be for the Pantheon canon to enjoy and deal with. All is well, nobody is pissed off.
Doing a "canon page" like this would actually give other canons more agency and encourage creativity. Essentially, the page would have a main idea similar to "here is what we acknowledge, there is more, they exist in the lore, but they aren't as important and may create minor silly fuckups in continuity. However, you're free to ignore them as you see fit."
If we do an "official canon," we wouldn't be caring about individual pages. We would simply be organizing the main concepts and ideas of what the backrooms is, how it works, and some very VERY general events that take place. Instead of "no canon," we'd be "canon idea, loose interpretation." If a page or a concept (like a group or a storyline) becomes so popular it is used in many writings, it means it will become a part of the site core canon, because the authorbase decided this was something they valued for the universe, and it became a core part of it.