AJT17
Veteran
You could probably post a summary of what you've discovered/discussed here, and that should be enough. It doesn't need to be too long, just enough to cover what progress you've already made.
My Own Method????
- Thread starter Adnylzz
- Start date
AJT17
Veteran
Not really. The Method Development thread was created for this reason. If unpolished methods are in dozens of different threads then its much more difficult to get feedback and have them improve. So posting it in the mlMethod Development thread will be a lot better for both the method, and the forums themselves.Lazy,i dont like writing summaries,its fine right i keep it in the general cubing discussion?
AJT17
Veteran
Yes, post a short summary, really not that difficult, then continue posting in there with any developments. It won't get drowned out by other methods if you actually care about it, there aren't that many other posts. And nobody is looking through every single post there, just the more recent ones, so it's not gonna be difficult to find.
If you're too lazy to even write a short summary of the progress you've made with this method, then you were never going to make a good method in the first place.
Also, you've even called it a joke method, and not a speedsolving method, so what even is your goal for improving it?
AJT17
Veteran
No, the explicit point of the method development thread is to stop threads like this one from clogging up the rest of the forum. If everyone that created a "method" made a new thread for it, then that would make up a very large portion of threads on the homepage. Which isn't good for the viewing experience, as most people don't want to see another "improvement" to belt, or trying to make a better LSLL, or solving cross after F2L. All of these ideas are mentioned in the common ideas section of the very first post in the Method Development thread. And your method hits every single one of these points, which means it definitely doesn't need to be its own thread, and it almost certainly won't ever become good.
So please, for the sake of keeping the forums less cluttered, post method ideas in the Method Development thread as is intended. The entire reason it was created in the first place is because people got tired of seeing the same recycled ideas. So don't be part of the problem, and if you actually care about making this a better method, which I doubt as you yourself called it a joke method, get feedback on the Method Development thread and people can try to make it better there.
You're not the first to invent a method like this, or with similar steps, and you certainly won't be the last. And as has been discovered from all the previous attempts, it won't ever be a good method. If you want to make joke methods that are bad, then by all means go ahead, but don't clutter the homepage with useless threads about them. And if you don't really care about method development, then make a thread in the off topic forum so it doesn't clog the Method Development thread with useless posts.
I'm all for people exploring methods, but if you're not going to do the necessary precautions to make sure your "ideas" are actually original, like cross after F2L, which is one of the most commonly thought of "methods" then you shouldn't be looking into method development yet. If you're too lazy to even write up a short summary, then method development definitely isn't the right thing for you, as it requires a lot of actual effort to make something good and original. Now if you're actually serious about trying to make a better method, then post those ideas in the Method Development thread, get feedback, tweak it, and maybe it will eventually become good enough that it deserves its own thread. This has happened before, though it is rare as not many people are willing to put in the work to get their method that optimised. One example is this thread from @Caleb Valenzuela where he didn't just think up this idea overnight, but instead he was serious about creating a good method. There was a lot of forethought put into it to make sure it wasn't just another Belt "method" and it got positive feedback because of that. But if you're not willing to go that in depth into your ideas, then method development might not be the right thing for you.
Similar threads
