Story Continuations: We Are Trying Literary Necromancy

1

EDIT (07/07/2026): STORY CONTINUATIONS HAVE BEEN CANCELLED. PLEASE SEE HERE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION.

EDIT (06/07/2026): PLEASE SEE HERE FOR IMPORTANT CLARIFICATIONS.

Hello to my fellow literary icons,

As your friendly neighbourhood Challenge Manager, I come bearing news from the tower, the crypt, the archives, and the broom cupboard where we keep all the abandoned plot threads of yonder days.

We are launching a 12-month trial of a new sub-challenge format called:

Story Continuations

^woop woop, but in pink! idk how to change the text colour so just use your imagination^

Story Continuations are exactly what they sound like. Instead of being based around a theme like our main Story Challenges, these will focus on continuing older stories on the site that showed incredible promise but, for one reason or another, were never continued.

We all know the feeling. You stumble across an amazing story. The premise is brilliant. The first chapters are glowing. The characters have moved into your brain and started paying rent. Then you reach the end and realise it has not been updated since the ancient age of “Last Online: Who Knows Anymore.”

Tragic. Devastating. A literary cliffhanger-shaped hole in the soul.

So, we want to try something new.

Over the next 12 months, we will run one Story Continuation sub-challenge every three months. For each one, we will select a single older story to be continued and put it up for what is basically a very dramatic authorial bidding war.

Authors will submit their own continuation of that story. The community will then vote/rate those submissions, and the winning continuation will become the official canon continuation of that story. The winning author will become the story’s Story Steward, taking up the helm and carrying the story forward.

Think of it as less “grave robbing” and more “respectful and honourable erotic literary succession planning.”

Our intention is to find an engaging, focused way to breathe new life into old gold. By spotlighting one forgotten story at a time, we hope readers will rediscover brilliant older works, new authors will get excited about continuing them, and the site can start solving the age-old problem of wonderful stories being left to gather dust in the archives.

We already have community and branching stories, and those will still exist, but they can sometimes be a little scattered and hard to build momentum around. Story Continuations are our attempt to focus that energy. One story. One window of attention. One chance for our community to rally around a forgotten gem and say, “Actually, I need to know what happens next.”

For the first two Story Continuation sub-challenges, the admin/challenge team will choose the stories ourselves. This lets us test the format properly, track engagement, and see what works before handing more of the selection process over to the community.

From the second sub-challenge onwards, eligible older stories will begin receiving a button along the lines of “Vote for this story to be continued.” Stories will need to meet certain criteria around things like length, number of chapters, and age/inactivity. Those votes will help us build a continuation shortlist.

For Story Continuation sub-challenges three and four, the stories with the highest continuation interest will be the ones selected.

So the rough trial structure is:

Story Continuation 1: chosen by us
Story Continuation 2: chosen by us, while community voting begins
Story Continuation 3: chosen from community continuation votes
Story Continuation 4: chosen from community continuation votes

At the end of the 12-month trial, we will look at the engagement, the quality of participation, the technical headaches, the vibes, the screams, the spreadsheets, and the general “is this actually working?” of it all.

We are very conscious that these stories began with original authors, and we want to approach this with as much respect as possible. The intention is not to erase, overwrite, or disrespect anyone’s work. It is to create a pathway for stories that have been abandoned, dormant, or left unfinished to find new life with modern authors who are excited to care for them, and a community who is desperate to read from them.

continuation submissions will not vanish into the void either. Those branches may still be read, enjoyed, and continued as alternate branches. They simply will not be marked as the main canon continuation, and their authors will not become the official Story Steward.

To help everyone distinguish these from the main Story Challenges, Story Continuations will use a pink “Story Continuation” tag/colouring, rather than the iconic orange Story Challenge tag/colouring.

Pink is the colour of resurrection, apparently. Do not fact-check me. It also stands out well on the site and is distinct from the other colours we use lol.

It is also important to stress that Story Continuations are not replacing main Story Challenges. They are a separate sub-challenge format designed to run quietly and continuously in the background, complementing the main challenges rather than competing with them.

For the very first Story Continuation, the supporting structure will be fairly simple. It will look and function a lot like a normal Story Challenge, except with pink colouring instead of orange. The connection to the original story will be explained and linked, but the deeper infrastructure (dedicated tab, clearer branching displays, stronger visual connections between the original story and continuation submissions) may not all be there on day one.

This is intentional.

We want to be smart with our time and energy. There is no point building an entire enchanted cathedral of features if the first trial receives three submissions, one confused comment, and a tumbleweed.

However, if the first Story Continuation performs well, future rounds will receive better support. That could include a dedicated place on the site, clearer links between submissions and the original story, more obvious canon/branching structures, and whatever else we discover we need once the first wave of literary chaos hits the shoreline.

In other words: this is a trial, and trials are where we work out the kinks, test the idea, and discover which buttons explode.

I am genuinely excited about this. There are so many stories on the site that deserve a second breath, and so many modern authors who could do incredible things with them. If this works, Story Continuations could become a really meaningful way to connect the site’s history with its present, encourage readers to explore older works, and give authors a new kind of challenge that is less about starting from scratch and more about inheriting a spark.

So sharpen your quills, polish your keyboards, dust off your dramatic cloaks, and prepare yourselves.

The doors to the archive are opening, and a fuchsia light is pouring out of them!

4 Likes
2

Are you getting permission from the original authors first? Just because an author hasn’t continued the story doesn’t mean they want someone else too.

Seems a little ghoulish to steal their work for future chapters

6 Likes
3

Of course! The policy is to reach out to authors several times and provide two-months notice before a story is cleared as eligible for this. The reason there is a 2-month limit is because some authors have completely left the site, or retired, and are unable to be contacted - but we still attempt to.

I’d also note that the work isn’t being stolen, it’s being continued? Walt Disney didn’t steal Snow White from the Brothers Grimm, he took heavy inspiration and presented it in his own voice and style. The Author’s right to refuse will be respected, but we aren’t going to operate a modern Disney Company operation where copyright protections have been so egregiously contorted to the benefit of the company and the expense of creativity, writers and readers. An author owns their chapter, but ultimately they don’t own the rest of the story until they write it.

However, if you feel that we should do our best to protect original works made without permission, I’m happy to look into removing all stories referencing superheroes or any known media as I’m not sure we got the thumbs up from DC, Marvel and others.

Original authors, out of respect, will have their permission explicitly sought after if the means exist for us to attain it.

5 Likes
4

I am glad to hear there is at least an attempt being made to contact authors. Just because an author is not using GSS anymore doesn’t mean they have left the story unfinished though. Many authors write on multiple platforms or continue their stories in a Patreon where they earn money from these funds.

Based on the example you gave on parodying billion dollar franchises I understand that no further consideration is going to be taken into this however I needed to make my opinion heard that lack of consent denial does not equate to consent given.

It’s ironic posting this on a site made up of non consent stories but it’s important in these times of AI and authors already having their hard work stolen and repurposed that we don’t misappropriate their wishes for these stories.

5 Likes
5

This is pretty exciting since some previous fan story continuations on this site have been really hot. Glad you’re encouraging more of this.

4 Likes
6

I stand completely with @Hypnofiend23 on this matter. While I understand the logic of this premise and defending it on the basis of transformative work, I find that the way it’s been stated to be currently implemented is shortsighted and myopic.

First of all: The fact that this challenge is functioning as a trial period is, itself, evidence that the team or person running it is not as confident in its delivery as they could, or should, be. In hoping to iron out the kinks (pun unintended) along the way, it shows that the necessary amount of thought or consideration towards this project was not done. The team could not account for every angle and are thus hoping to hear feedback throughout the process to streamline and perfect it. This would be perfectly fine if the challenge was being suggested, with feedback, criticisms, and ideas could be given as a forum before implementing the challenge.

That’s not what’s happening, though–instead, those in charge of this project are going ahead with a half-baked premise and telling users that if there are any issues, they’re welcome to bring them up–but that the project is still going to be happening anyway. There’s no opt-out, there’s nothing to consider or reconsider, what’s done is done.

Second of all: The idea of “literary necromancy” is an interesting one, but comparing what this is to Disney and other multibillion dollar companies do to fairy tales is a false equivocacy. I could also be pedantic about the nature of the Brother Grimm analogy, but it’s irrelevant. To play in the space you made, @AsisAsio: Snow White was in public domain when Walt Disney decided to make an animated movie based off of it. It was a fairy tale that already had a long history of transformative works attached to it, both contemporarily (Brothers Grimm did not invent it, they curated a specific interpretation of a series of similar fairy tales) and throughout literary history. There was no singular author of Snow White, and if there had been, they would have been dead for over a century.

The situation of the GKS archive being used as a similar premise, though, is much more fraught. Something I expect people are aware of, considering that consent is going to be sought out before stories are selected for the challenge, something I’m very happy to hear! However, @Hypnofiend23 was right: Absence of response should not be considered equal to consent. GKS has a responsibility as an archive of works right now, and it is reaching an important crossroads: What is more important? The intent and work of original authors, or the reinterpretation of new authors without the consent of the original writers?

@AsisAsio’s blase response about referencing known media is disrespectful to the point @Hypnofiend23 was making, and is also fundamentally incorrect. You do not need authorial approval to create transformative works of copyrighted products, true. That’s why sites such as Archive of Our Own, Fanfiction.net, and yes, even Gay Kinky Stories can safely host fanfiction using protected properties. However, the language being used for the project of Story Continuations is not, seemingly, about prioritizing transformative works or giving old and forgotten stories chances for a new audience. It reads, instead, as an insensitive and entitled action saying that the works that authors posted on this site are fair game for others to directly claim a stake in, and GKS is being made to make that an official stance.

We already have community and branching stories as site mechanics. In the interest of not simply complaining and pointing out flaws in something, and instead acting constructively, I’d like to suggest that the GKS admin team consider walking back the Story Continuations idea temporarily and opening up a proper forum thread for authors to give their thoughts on if they’d want a challenge like this, and how they’d like it to be gone about. This feels especially warranted if the plan is to spend an entire calendar year on this idea.

In the meantime, to potentially replace it while we all have room to discuss the matter, I think it would be really interesting to see a similar idea to Story Continuations that focuses on branching or community stories! Perhaps authors could volunteer their own pre-existing branching or community stories to the admin team to open up the floor to new authors and audiences! Additionally, anything marked as a community story already inherently has confirmed authorial consent for transformative works and additions added onto it, which would remove a lot of the hot water from the pot.

I really do understand where the team that came up with the Story Continuations idea is coming from. I think everyone here probably does! No one who reads works of fiction online hasn’t experienced the heartbreak of an incomplete work that they were enjoying, with no signs of it ever being continued. But as an author with several incomplete works myself that I have no intention of ever finishing, posted on GKS–I personally decided to not continue those series for a reason. The idea that if I missed an email asking for my consent, and then saw that site administration told the entirety of the community that it was open season, I’d feel awful. I think I’d have no problems with Story Continuations whatsoever so long as it was assured that the team had express and explicit consent from the original authors for using their stories to make transformative works! But the inherent conceit of literary necromancy means that the stories are old and abandoned, making it likely very difficult to get ahold of those authors–and it leaves a bad taste in the mouth to hear that the current plan is to treat getting no response as getting a consenting response.

EDIT: Whoops, got someone mixed up with someone else. Sorry for the false ping!

5 Likes
7

Personally, I LOVE this idea. And I’d say if an author abandoned a story and then comes back unhappy that it was continued without their permission, we can always delete it. As a writer here who has many unfinished stories, I’d be THRILLED to have people expand my lore in any of my stories, so, like, here’s my granted access if anyone wants to continue one of my stories. Even if I go back to those stories myself, I’m happy to have branching realities within my stories. So, just putting that out there. Any EdIam story that isn’t complete, you have my permission to expand upon. I hope other authors feel the same kind of excitement hoping to see what others may do in the worlds they created!

6 Likes
8

Thank you for the detailed response! I do genuinely appreciate people taking the time to write out their concerns properly rather than just throwing tomatoes from the balcony.

I do want to clarify a few things though, because I think a couple of points have been misunderstood, and a few assumptions are being made about the scale and intent of this that don’t quite match what is actually being proposed.

First off, the fact that this is a 12-month trial is not because the idea is half-baked. It is a trial because we are deliberately testing different versions of the idea before deciding whether it should become a permanent feature of the site. That is not a lack of planning, that is the planning. We are measuring engagement and responses to the different sub-challenge styles, and we will take our learnings and incorporate the best of them all, if appropriate.

At the moment, the trial is intended to test different kinds of continuation situations.

Sub-challenge 1: a story with an initial chapter, no active author, and a clear or clearly implied intention to continue.

Sub-challenge 2: a high-demand/highly loved story that may be more about adapting or reworking a concept than directly continuing a specific plot.

Sub-challenge 3: an active author volunteering one of their own unfinished stories, where the original author can act as a lore wizard/ombudsman/keeper of sacred notes while new authors submit continuations.

Sub-challenge 4: a story with multiple initial chapters, no active author, and a clear or clearly implied intention to continue.

So the trial is not “oops, let’s throw this at the wall and see what breaks.” It is “let’s test different models, measure engagement, see what the community actually responds to, and work out which version of this, if any, is worth keeping.” That feels like the responsible way to do it, especially before anyone spends a silly amount of time building dedicated infrastructure for something that may or may not work.

Secondly, I do want to push back on the idea that community and branching stories already solve this problem.

They solve a problem. They do not solve this problem.

The issue we are trying to address is not simply “how do we let people write branches?” The site already has that. The issue is that there are old, unfinished stories that were clearly intended to continue, that readers clearly wanted to continue, and that have sat abandoned for years and years despite comments, requests, love, and demand from the community. Sending people toward existing community stories does not do anything for those stories. It does not help the reader who found a fantastic unfinished story from 2013 and is still sitting there at the end of chapter one like a Victorian widow staring out a rain-soaked window, waiting for their husband to come home from the mines. It does not help the archive feel alive, tt does not help new authors engage with older works, and it does not address the fact that some stories genuinely have a large amount of community demand behind them and no realistic path forward. That is the specific gap Story Continuations is trying to explore.

Thirdly, I think the scale of this is being overestimated a little. This is not going to be a bulldozer mowing through the archive. It is not “open season” on every unfinished story. It is not us handing out abandoned works like Oprah giving away cars.

It is four stories per year.

Four.

Out of the thousands of stories on the site, and the many, many, many unfinished ones among them, only four Story Continuations would run in a year. That means being selected would be extremely rare. The point is not to mass-process unfinished stories. The point is to occasionally spotlight a story where there is unusually strong demand, a strong case for continuation, and a genuine opportunity for the community to rally around something special. That rarity is part of the point. It should feel like an honour. It is effectively saying: “Of all the unfinished stories on this site, this is one the community has not forgotten.”

Now, onto the consent point, because that is clearly the big one.

The intention is absolutely not to take anyone’s work away from them. The original chapters remain the original author’s work. Their name stays on it. Their writing is not erased, replaced, or claimed by someone else. If an original author returns and wants to continue their story themselves, their continuation would be recognised as the original/canon branch. The Story Continuation branch would become an alternate recognised branch. The original author does not lose their story, their credit, or their ability to continue it.

What Story Continuations would do is allow the community to continue engaging with a dormant story in cases where the author is inactive, unreachable, or has not responded after repeated contact attempts and a long notice period. I understand why “lack of response as consent” makes people nervous, but the practical reality is that some authors have completely left the site. Some have been gone for a decade or more. Some may never see an email or message from us again. If we treat non-response as an eternal veto, then a vanished author can unintentionally freeze a story forever, even where they clearly set it up to continue and readers have clearly been asking for more for years.

I do not think that serves the site, the readers, the archive, or the story.

And, to be very clear, this is not me saying authors do not matter. They absolutely do. That is why contact attempts, notice periods, refusal rights, credit, and return rights matter. However, I do disagree with the idea that an author should be able to permanently lock away the unwritten future of a story they have abandoned, especially where the story itself was clearly presented as something to be continued. An author owns what they wrote. They do not, in my view, own every possible chapter that was never written.

That is not an argument for disrespecting authors. It is an argument for balancing author respect with reader engagement, community creativity, and the long-term health of the archive. The original work remains protected and credited. The continuation is a continuation branch, not a theft of the original work. If the author returns, they remain the original author and their own continuation takes precedence.

I also want to stress that feedback like this is genuinely useful. The language around “canon,” “Story Steward,” “continuation branch,” and author return rights probably does need to be clearer than it was in the initial announcement. That is exactly the kind of thing this discussion is helping identify. So no, I do not think the idea should be walked back entirely. I think the idea is worth testing precisely because it addresses a problem that has existed on the site for years: brilliant unfinished stories with clear demand and no path forward.

But I do agree that the safeguards, terminology, and author-rights side of it need to be stated very clearly.

The goal is not to disrespect original authors.

The goal is not to take stories away.

The goal is not to declare open season on the archive.

The goal is to very occasionally, very carefully, and very visibly say:

“This story still matters to people. Is there a way for the community to help it live out its intended life again?”

That is what we are trying to find out.

1 Like
9

First impression has definitely been a “oh I hope one of stories that I found super hot and super cliff hung will be continued”, so the idea is good to me. The other comments have shared my concerns better than I can. But one piece of the puzzle is why needing a story steward at all? Are we assuming that if they win, they’ll want to keep making more chapters than the winning entry? On a site like this, I feel like there’s no need to specify “this branch is the canon”. When I first read the announcement, I wondered why it couldn’t just be a story challenge and everyone gets to pick which story they want to try continuing, but reading this thread means that I’m glad such thoughts have went into it.

Thank you also for expanding the details for the sub challenge’s plans. I was definitely wondering if the stories chosen will be more of the author disappeared route or the author’s still active but just not continuing a beloved series.

1 Like
10

There is no rule, anywhere in this world or on this site, that prohibits a fictional universe, setting or story from being extended or continued by an author other than the original author.

There are restrictions on the use of registered character names, such as Harry Potter, for financial reasons. But that still doesn’t prohibit fan fiction stories, for example, as long as they’re not used for commercial purposes.

So let me make one thing clear:

It is perfectly fine to extend or continue another person’s setting or story on this site!

What is not ok is to copy an existing story, in part or fully. But that’s something completely different.

Out of respect for the original author, we will honor their explicit request not to allow a story to be continued by another author. But not because we are required to, only because we want to respect that person’s wishes.

Also, out of respect to the original author, I’d always ask that the original story that gave the inspiration for a continuation to be linked to from any related story. That’s just fair and works in favor of the original story, because it puts that story back into the attention of the audience.

So, no, I don’t see any obligation to ask the original author if their story can be extended or continued.

In general, I’d ask you to mind your tone. It’s ok to disagree with @AsisAsio’s idea, of course, or state your unhappiness with my stance on the issue. But please stay civil. Terms like “ghoulish” or framing this as stealing (which is factually wrong) are not appreciated.

Thank you.

2 Likes
11

I have two thought processes on this and they are diametrically opposed, but as humans, we are capable of multitudes, great depths, aaaand sometimes cognitive hypocrisy.

First. As an author who has not updated or posted in several years for personal reasons, I do not want my stories to participate in this. (Understanding that my account is fairly young and my stories are likely not old enough to qualify is beside the point. I am here. I know I am not currently updating and I just wanted it said.)

Second. I fucking LOVE Baralai’s Himringyo series and have made a personal side project that I never posted on my own version of Himringyo and so I am an active, if private, participant in story continuation and I understand the reasoning for the proposal.

Some well spoken critique has come up on possible lack of forethought, but there comes a point in the planning stage where you have to acknowledge that no plan survives contact with reality and you need to execute action and adapt and refine processes or simply abandon the endeavor. I personally understand this and beg that all actions possible be taken to ensure the original authors do not feel negatively towards this possible sub-genre of story challenge. Above all, its their IP, and in this age of AI scraping and suddenly finding your whole work or your distinct style in a piece you did not make or authorize, the sanctity of the IP of even a freely posted smut fic on a niche kink litrotica site is important. I appreciate this post for its forthright candor about keeping strong tabs on community feelings on the project. That aspect is, in my opinion, the most crucial. We need to state our standards of conduct and adhere to them faithfully. GKS is not for everyone by design, but those who want to be here need to know that their feelings matter, and the rules set forth are real and govern the community away from chaos and lawlessness. That this project will take multiple months to reach out to authors of these pics, that community engagement will be monitored, and that there are rules to protect participants and original authors is vital.

I hope this endeavor goes well; road bumps are likely inevitable, but we cannot let one or two loud bad actors take away what is a good thing for the community overall.

3 Likes
12

I’d like you to consider that it would be unfair to claim total ownership of a generic idea.

Let’s take Baralai’s Himringyo, because you’ve used it yourself.

If you think any kind of story that uses the idea of a board game that pulls you into some kind of sexual fantasy setting would be stealing from Baralai would mean that a whole genre would be blocked. And for what?

And that is even more questionable if you consider that Himringyo itself was more than inspired by the movie Jumanji.

So if you explicitly don’t want your stories to be used as inspiration for new stories, @Mind_Labyrinth (or any other author), we will respect that wish. Because we respect our authors.

I’d still like to ask you to reconsider. We, as authors, have ownership rights to our stories. But not on our general universes and broad story ideas. That would be too much and would basically limit any kind of future creativity.

Even just using hypnosis or reality change is a trope that is copied from one story to the next. Where do we start to see it as ‘stealing an idea’?

1 Like
13

I’ll preface by saying I am a lurker, not an author, so I acknowledge I don’t have much of a say here. Still, to me, a lot of the most problematic parts of this idea are in the terminology. I think the idea of these challenges is good, but the framing is all wrong. If you had announced “we’re making a section of the site for fan continuations of old works and occasionally we’re going to encourage it for specific works”, I don’t think you’d have gotten pushback.

I think there are four parts to this plan and some issues are arising by treating them all as one thing:

  1. Create an official way to encourage fan continuations of old works
  2. Periodically host contests for fan continuations of certain stories
  3. The contest winner’s entry is acknowledged by the site as “official” and its writer becomes a “Story Steward”
  4. After some period of no response, an author’s silence is taken as consent for this to occur.

I think few people would have problems with parts 1 and 2. To me, though, you could have one of parts 3 and 4, but having both is an issue. With an author’s consent, everything is fine, but if you want to treat silence as consent for the purposes of community engagement, treating anything as official is a dubious proposition. Having an official anything means attaching the original title and contents to the new version, which is very different from using a generic idea. Many of the points made by site officials are true in a general sense but not when there is an official site endorsement. To answer your question, it becomes 'stealing an idea’ as soon as someone tries to make it official and disregards the difference between fan created works and original online ones. “Inspired by” is one thing, “back from the dead” is another.

Continuing the example above, Himringyo is arguably based on Jumanji but an important distinction is it never claims to be part of the Jumanji universe. When something ends abruptly (TV series cancelled, author dies before finishing a series, etc.), fans frequently continue it through fanworks and that’s great - but they don’t claim to be a true canon continuation. There is a difference involved in you doing this as the hosting site than by having users do it on their own. Even for works in the public domain, derivative works are not advertised as part of that canon by the publisher.

What you’re really proposing doing is encouraging works inspired by certain existing works. That’s fantastic, but don’t call it literary necromancy and don’t use the term canon. Also, from a contest-design perspective, why on earth does there need to be one ‘official’ version if all versions get kept? Just treat this like any other contest and say who wins without making a whole policy over it. I would argue you are very much overcomplicating this. At least half of the issues people have raised go away if you don’t try to make one branch official.

As the site that hosts the stories, I’d argue you have a (moral, not legal) responsibility not to change the terms after things have been posted. If you want to do this going forward and make a site policy about it, that’s a separate thing. But there are problems declaring there is an official continuation when authors can’t have considered that being an option when they decided to post the initial story. As far as I know, there has never been the policy anywhere about endorsed official continuations. I don’t think anyone so far is arguing you can’t do this (you definitely can), but that there are serious ethical concerns to doing so (insert Jurassic Park meme of could vs. should).

Various sites do have data steward policies for when a user dies, but they are always established by the user, not appointed by the site after the fact. “Succession planning” (as you call it in the initial post), by definition occurs beforehand when the person being succeeded has a say. After the fact, it is no longer planning.

There is also a concern that some people do post their works behind paywalls (e.g. Patreon) and once you start continuing other people’s work, anything involving money does actually become legally (not just morally) dubious. If you ignore everything else in this post I still think if you go ahead with this as planned, you would need a site policy that official continuations can’t make money. Also, you use the term ‘eligible stories’ in the initial post. What makes a story eligible? I don’t recall you ever defining this.

TLDR: encourage fan continuations of stories, great; make claims beyond that without explicit authorial consent, skeevy (but technically allowed).

4 Likes
14

I have some concerns about the way the site team is responding to this feedback. I am sure it’s just miscommunication but I think it’s important that you are aware that some aspects of your replies right now feel like they are talking about points that haven’t been raised or coming across as dismissive and disingenuous. (e.g. Disney, calling out things not actually said).

I could be mistaken, but I did not read Mind_Labyrinth’s reply as saying they didn’t want their stories used as inspiration and your comment, Corin, suggesting that is what they mean comes across very poorly and as a bad-faith argument. Even passive-aggressive. I’m sure that wasn’t your intention, but that comment leads me to think that the site team thinks they’ve said one thing where the community is reading something else.

I believe we’re talking about inspiration in the sense of continuing the work but unlike what normally happens, it’s going to be posted under the original works’ series posting. Granted, you all have made a bunch of improvements on the site so I might be murky on how things work, but…

The way the challenge reads as posted on the front of the site comes across that the site will use works that haven’t been finished without talking to the author, take over the story and make a new canon continuation and essentially giving that story to another author to ‘steward’ as a nice way to say new owner.

I don’t think that’s your intention but, again, that is how the message comes across and that is what I believe most of this thread is replying based upon. Reading this thread already disrupts some of that perspective on the intentions. Author consent has been addressed in this forum post. This feels like a very important point and I’m surprised it’s not in the main announcement.

I want to highlight that how that announcement describes this challenge isn’t lining up for me with the way Corin and AsisAsio are replying about the project, so something isn’t working here.

Taking Corin’s mention of inspiration, I’m going to make a few assumptions.

The “Canon Continuation” is probably the major sticking point. This does not support the idea that not agreeing is refusing others to take ‘inspiration’ because the challenge (as written on the main page) can be seen as talking about essentially taking over the project ownership, not just being inspired by previous works.

Things are getting muddled with Corin’s reply talking about original stories be linked as the source of inspiration. I agree wholeheartedly but this is again, inspiration. Inspiration suggests to me of using an idea for one’s own story. NOT writing within another author’s series posting.

A later comment about an original author being able reclaim a series with their official continuation and the challenge version becoming a branch might be a better way of looking at this. If we do away with canon wording, reiterate that authors retain their ownership and rights to their stories but this challenge is encouraging existing and new lovers of a series to engage with it further. Using fan/writer engagement with their world to write one possible continuation of the tale as a branch, we might address a lot of the concerns from the authors responding to this challenge.

Sure, absent the original author submitting the ‘true canon’ continuation, functionally the winning challenge submission becomes the only events known to the reader and is canon in all but name. A shared head-canon, certainly. But recognising an alternate author writing chapters in the original series stream as canon brings with it connotations I don’t think anyone wants. That their submission will be the default “next chapter” doesn’t imply taking over ownership.

Functionally, it will be the same, but how it’s communicated. Reinforcing the original author’s ownership might help.

Likewise, I might suggest something more like Storyline or Continuation Contributor over ‘steward’ to further distance the perspective of taking works from others.

I’ll reiterate, I’m talking about the impressions of the framing and wording, not intention. You’ve already said you don’t like the word stealing but I’d encourage you to view the use of that word by others as a measure of how the challenge description is coming across rather than an accusation.

I feel a lot more comfortable about the idea of inspiration and “unofficial” (by the original author) but sanctioned continuation possibilities as part of this challenge than the original framing using words like canon. With the winner’s continuation being default (rather than canon) and others being available to read as additional alternate branches.

Edit: On further reflection, I have some conflicted feelings about the inspired continuation being under the original works’ entry rather than their own submitted story under their own headings as would normally be the case for an inspired story.

The other side of that is that it is directly intended to continue that story in de facto to the original author not being able to continue it right now and having it pop up as a “next chapter” option in lieu of any further ‘official’ chapters achieves the continuation I think the challenge is aiming for.

3 Likes
15

I honestly didn’t expect that this would open such a can of worms. When Asis proposed his idea to me, I genuinely thought it was a good opportunity to finish some of the abandoned stories lingering on the site, many of which are fan favorites.

This is not meant to hurt the original authors. It’s meant to honor their idea and to bring their work back into the limelight.

But it seems like many people see this as a violation of the original work, even theft of their creative property.

The word “canon” seems to be an important point. I get that if an author has a certain outcome for their characters in mind and someone else continues their story, that outcome will be altered, maybe even turned completely around. A character they’d like to develop in a certain way may turn out completely different from how the original author intended.

So this would then violate their original “canon”. Like someone is taking your personal fantasy and turning it around, warping it into something else the author never intended.

But no one is ever keeping anyone from fixing that, from telling their original idea. The story is still theirs, and no one will take it away from them.

There are two options for dealing with this:

Opt-In or Opt-Out.

Opt-In means we only consider stories where we have explicit consent from the author.

Opt-Out means that an author has to actively object to keep their work from being considered.

Opt-In would be the safe way, no doubt about it. But as many authors are no longer around or never bother to come to this site anymore, and cannot be reached, as their email address is no longer working (or never worked to begin with), this would practically kill off the idea before it even started.

In contrast to what Asis has proposed, I wouldn’t touch the original stories (like adding visible branches or any other kind of link to their continuations). Because I actually don’t want to alter the original work in any kind of way without the author’s consent.

My idea would have been the other way round: Start all new series with a link back to the original series and a clear marker, as this is just a “what-if” continuation, or a fan-fic, and not canon, and it’s not meant to taint but to honor the original material.

And again, if the original author comes along and objects, we will take that continuation down (or ask the author to alter it in such a way that it can stand on its own with no relation to the original).

I’m genuinely conflicted and a bit sad that this sparked such an emotional discussion. This was meant to honor old material, not to violate it. But I get the feeling that some people immediately blame us, as if we were trying to take advantage of other people’s work. As if we are some bad mega company trying to steal other persons’ intellectual property for our own advantage.

It feels like a bite reflex to me.

1 Like
16

I’m not too keen on that idea either. I don’t want to alter existing series in any way. So branching off the original series sounds like a bad idea to me.

I’d only link from the completely new series back to the original one, while making it perfectly clear that this is a new interpretation of a possible outcome which might or might not be in line with what the original author had in mind.

2 Likes
17

I will think of this a fanfic about a story, for me many fanfics can be a great continuation to originals stories, these fics may not be the original work but many of the fandoms they are related won’t have a continuation even if many fans are waiting for more

2 Likes
19

It feels like a bite reflex to me.

I don’t think that’s fair. I think this is a miscommunication or lack of clarity with how it will work. As it stands, it seems like even you and Asis have different ideas on how it will be implemented. Is it any wonder the messaging has gotten confused and some of the elements are triggering surprise and uncertainty around what’s happening?

I wouldn’t touch the original stories

I agree, embedding inspired works under the original author’s stuff does feel intrusive but that’s the impression I’d gotten as the official plan for this challenge. These few words clarify a very different sense of what this challenge is trying to accomplish and how it will affect departed or busy authors who haven’t finished a series.

It’s meant to honor their idea and to bring their work back into the limelight.

This is a wonderful idea. I wish your comment above had been part of the announcement of this challenge because I think it circumvents a lot of the confusion and uncertainty that leads to concerns about the state of the original works.

I won’t speak for others but I was not looking to blame. The messaging originally raised an eyebrow and I dug into the forum to get more info because I wasn’t expecting anything malicious, but I won’t lie that the way it was conveyed did not clearly reinforce the intention behind it and raised questions and concerns.

What you’ve just explained above sounds great. An honouring of the original series that were well-loved but unfinished for whatever reason. Leaving that work as it is with a link to it from the inspired continuation is respectful and allays many of the concerns around ownership.

Because I actually don’t want to alter the original work in any kind of way without the author’s consent.

This addresses so many of the worries I’ve seen in this thread. As for consent. Opt-in vs Opt-out makes sense.

I also appreciate the compromise will be an opt-out model simply because opt-in only reinforces the state we’re already in that prompted the challenge in the first place and, as you said, would essentially shelve the project immediately. It’s not ideal, but opt-out is likely the only feasible option with the understanding that opting out is not a one-time possibility so if an author returns, communication can happen.

I’d like to think the way you’ve conveyed the honouring and communicated the intention of execution, plus not touching the original work archive series would make objections less likely anyway. Each author is their own being, however, so that isn’t for me to say.

Thank you for talking through this.

I’d also like to extend my appreciation for all you and the team do to keep the site working. It is often likely a thankless task and this unexpected reaction likely hasn’t helped that feeling. I do regret it didn’t go over as well as you expected, but I would encourage you not to take it as blame or an accusation but misunderstanding and look at the response as a measure of community passion around respecting one another and their work and an opportunity to be able to tailor announcements in future to underscore that respect shared by the site and the authors alike.

3 Likes
20

I think calling this a bite reflex is a bit disrespectful. People have written long, thoughtful, and - from what I’ve read - intentional responses to a complicated new system. No one has said the entire idea is bad or needs to be thrown out, but have pointed out areas in which it can be improved. Just because people are uncomfortable with the creation of a system that could create ownership issues does not mean they think you plan to misuse it - just that they would rather reduce the potential for it to be misused. This idea was presented as a work in progress, so people are giving feedback they think will make it better. This idea touches on some sensitive topics in the current digital environment so it was never going to be simple.

I agree the opt-in system wouldn’t work, but people have written real suggestions on how to address concerns. I particularly agree with @Evan_Jackson that this is a labeling issue and changing some word choices would go a long way. You could also look at how other sites have handled similar things for inspiration - AO3, for example, is a big deal in this area, has actual copyright law experts on staff, and has infrastructure supporting works inspired by other works. You don’t necessarily have to reinvent the wheel to do this.

2 Likes
21

As somebody that has been a member of this site for over 15 years with a couple of my own stories but I never got around to updating or doing more beyond the two stories that I wrote. I feel that this is a very good idea.

I think the site admins have all throughly thought out a lot of the logistics and yes there will be some lurkers that will push back just to make waves; but they will most likely be even more Community involvement and more people that will enjoy this new chapter in the website development of past stories.

And if the admin are reaching out to the author and the author does not want their story continued. Then I am all for not doing theirs; but as people have pointed out if they posted the story in a public forum like this, then anybody can run with it and continue it themselves. As long as they give credit to the original author and also decide to continue it in their own concept or way.

Because, as a public domain story there is no intellectual property being held so the author even though they created the concept and the initial story does not actually have the right to stop anyone else from continuing them. However the owners of this site and the other admin have generosly decided to reach out to them and choose not to continue their story in this challenge if they say no.

So I personally don’t see anything wrong with this and think that it was thought out extremely considerately even if some others on here don’t.

4 Likes