1306 replies to this topic

[Heffay]

Carrioncrows, on 12 September 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

1. He cares. This isn't a game to him. it's a legacy.
2. He backs up his ideas with common sense, proof and/or logic.
3. I trust his bad idea's over anyone else's good ideas because of the the above 2 reasons.
4. Unwavering support and dedication for all things Urbanmech.

Fixed it for you.

[SilentWolff]

Perhaps the people that actually want to be on the counsel can do something similar to what HoA's do. A small paragraph explaining their qualifications and their motivations for wanting to be on the counsel and let the community decide based on that.

[Gas Guzzler]

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

This thread (how I feared) is turning into a circle jerk of friends supporting each other for nominations. It didn't take much... just pointing out a few of the rotten apples and watching them reply. That's how they would treat this game vs those that disagreed with them too. The whole process should be scrapped imo, but at least it's better than NGNG running the show like they have.

I can nominate myself to be supreme chancellor of the council to shake things up a bit if you would like.

I'm sure all those in this thread can attest to my fairness, wisdom, and completely unbiased opinion when it comes to MWO balance.

[Metus regem]

Carrioncrows, on 12 September 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

1. He cares. This isn't a game to him. it's a legacy.
2. He backs up his ideas with common sense, proof and/or logic.
3. I trust his bad idea's over anyone else's good ideas because of the the above 2 reasons.

Carrion, you pointed out the three reasons why I'm behind Bishop getting a slot, I've been fallowing his posts here for the better part of a year now, and they seem the most ballanced and well thought out. By the by Bishop, why did you stop your art work? I loved the redesigns you were doing of the WHM-6R....

[Bhael Fire]

Agelmar, on 12 September 2014 - 02:27 PM, said:

Except the level of noise prohibits anything from being accomplished.

I completely disagree.

Good ideas pick up traction and begin to stand out. When you have a council and or any smaller group filtering out ideas, then you get what is known as the "Gatekeeper" effect.

I maintain that we all should be voting for good ideas, not players.

That's my vote.

[Bishop Steiner]

Hoax415, on 12 September 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

There is no point to this exercise if you only include people who have shown no history of being willing to stand up for the players regardless of the brow beating of Russ Paul or Niko.

Both of those people have done more for the discourse on this board than you could do in 100 lifetimes Heffay.

Perhaps you feel so, but the fact is that neither are remotely good candidates, either. If anything, if you find me and Heffay objectionable (and I got no issues with that) then you go and nominate the opposite side of our coin. Priceless, man, just priceless. The only difference is you agree with their agenda, hence it does not seem objectionable to you.

[Agelmar]

#savemwo was a failure.

Anyone spend time longer than "PGI's FAULT!" on why it failed? Who actually listened to the hours of people complaining about crap thought anything would come of it?

[Heffay]

Agelmar, on 12 September 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

#savemwo was a failure.

Anyone spend time longer than "PGI's FAULT!" on why it failed? Who actually listened to the hours of people complaining about crap thought anything would come of it?

[Zyllos]

I could nominate Homeless Bill, but I think that is because we see eye-to-eye on a lot of various issues.

[Metus regem]

Heffay, on 12 September 2014 - 02:39 PM, said:

How did you find a picture of me!

[Ultimax]

While a lot of the people I've seen nominated are active and knowledgeable, the only one who I've seen make fully fleshed out, well reasoned and balanced proposals is Homeless Bill.

So I'd vote for him for council.

[Bishop Steiner]

Carrioncrows, on 12 September 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

There are lots of issues Bishop and I don't see eye to eye on. LRMS, SHS, endo.ect ect. But I have changed his mind on a few issues or at the very least broadened his perspective. He doesn't doggedly stick to a bad idea because it's his, nor cater to a single aspect of play. Which is what we need.

I see lots of other respectable people as a possible representative, some of those people I feel are merely concerned with their own narrow focus of what they play MWO for. For instance pugs at the cost of competitive or visa versa.

The reasons I support Bishop is because:

1. He cares. This isn't a game to him. it's a legacy.
2. He backs up his ideas with common sense, proof and/or logic.
3. I trust his bad idea's over anyone else's good ideas because of the the above 2 reasons.

While I appreciate the support, I honestly have no interest to be on any such counsel. I come to MWO to relax, play a game and enjoy myself. It's why I refuse to take officer positions in either unit I represent. Been there, done that. Watch all the joy of the game sucked out of it because the Game became a second job.

I'll be more than happy to play devils advocate, act as a sounding board for ideas from anyone who does want to be on it, should they desire, but that is about as far as I would take it. I have neither the time, desire, nor temperament for doing so.

Metus regem, on 12 September 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

Carrion, you pointed out the three reasons why I'm behind Bishop getting a slot, I've been fallowing his posts here for the better part of a year now, and they seem the most ballanced and well thought out. By the by Bishop, why did you stop your art work? I loved the redesigns you were doing of the WHM-6R....

See above...burnout. The childish entitlement on the forums leaves me with little creative energy. But I feel it important, if I want this game to stay afloat to maintain a presence to counteract the lies, propaganda and rumor mongering of certain individuals, and the absurd idiocy of certain other ones. But my creative desire, in regards to Btech/MW have suffered greatly as a result.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 12 September 2014 - 02:45 PM.

[Malleus011]

I find I agree with Koniving and Bishop fairly often - though not always. I believe they have a good grounding in Battletech lore, and the best interest of the title at heart.

There are a number of other excellent posters on these boards, but I'm the most familiar with their work, and think they'd do well.

[Zyllos]

Ultimatum X, on 12 September 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

While a lot of the people I've seen nominated are active and knowledgeable, the only one who I've seen make fully fleshed out, well reasoned and balanced proposals is Homeless Bill.

So I'd vote for him for council.

Well, I have some very fleshed out proposals in the Feedback forums but you don't see me getting any praises.

Been here since the beginning but did disappear from the December 2013 to August 2014 period.

But, I give a "hear hear" for Homeless!

[Heffay]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

While I appreciate the support, I honestly have no interest to be on any such counsel. I come to MWO to relax, play a game and enjoy myself. It's why I refuse to take officer positions in either unit I represent. Been there, done that. Watch all the joy of the game sucked out of it because the Game became a second job.

I'll be more than happy to play devils advocate, act as a sounding board for ideas from anyone who does want to be on it, should they desire, but that is about as far as I would take it. I have neither the time, desire, nor temperament for doing so.

What makes you think refusal is an option?

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Heffay, on 12 September 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

Fixed it for you.

Thanks for supporting my notion of cronyism, and we can tack fanboism onto that list now.

[MischiefSC]

Hoax415, on 12 September 2014 - 02:27 PM, said:

So far I've seen the following names mentioned that are absolutely in no way fit to be on any council:
- homeless bill
- egomane
- bishop steiner
- stjobe
- mischiefSC
- heffay
- mudhutwarrior

No offense to the rest of you for being on a list with mudhutwarrior and heffay.

I don't mean that as a personal attack or that those people are bad apples or bad posters. Hopefully they would all contribute along the way to the proposals themselves. Just they aren't exactly impartial judge material.

Many of those people are forum warriors who like to win forum battles far too much or are the types who once they have staked their position don't really care what anyone else has to say. That's my feeling based on my interactions or reading their posts.

You want flexible people who can look at proposals and critique them not just declare them good or bad. You also want people who aren't begging to get some of this power and notoriety.

konivig should be asked if he thinks he would be better as a council member or someone doing the hard work of coming up with the early proposal draft(s) that the council would be looking over, refining and eventually presenting to the community at large / PGI.

TheMagician and DocBach are both level headed listeners who are suited to what will be a thankless series of compromises and edits. Of the people I'm familiar with they are the two best choices I'm seeing mentioned.

Sandpit and/or Vassago might be good. Both represent the more level headed and well reasoned side of the "PGI has gotten a ton of this wrong" position. And you know what, PGI has. Or we wouldn't even be having this ridiculous discussion. This "make a council" proposal is only happening because PGI has failed over and over to keep their word, has alienated countless players and has made some pretty large design errors along the way.

But in reality the simplest way to figure this out is to split the community up a little and get a representative from those groups.

Example:
- 1 person /r/mwo picks
- 1 people mwomercs forums pick aka the popularity contest
- 1 person /r/hpg picks
- 1 person the goons and/or /vg/ pick (lets be real, those voices of dissent might have made for a better game if they were listened to).
- 2 people picked by the competitive community, I don't know if that means RHOD or something else these days as I'm not a part of it.

That's the simplest and fastest way to do this. It splits the onus of getting the right people up over lots of sub sections of the community and has the best chance of not completely failing.

Here's the thing - the people with strong and inflexible positions tend to represent a big chunk of people. They also make their own points pretty effectively. These people are making the decision they are refining down the various community ideas into a cogent point for the community to then vote on.

I'm strongly against any other forum community having an independent 'vote'. They're the same players; I've got a couple of reddit accounts can I use them to vote in both major Reddit forums?

The vote and decisions need to happen here. This is the official MW:O community. Not to belittle any of the other sub-communities out there but this is where it all needs to go down. This is PGIs forum, this is where you go to talk to PGI.

[Hoax415]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 September 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Perhaps you feel so, but the fact is that neither are remotely good candidates, either. If anything, if you find me and Heffay objectionable (and I got no issues with that) then you go and nominate the opposite side of our coin. Priceless, man, just priceless. The only difference is you agree with their agenda, hence it does not seem objectionable to you.

Heffay is on another level of shitposting troll.

But I would conceed that Vass and Sandpit could be considered a yin to your yang. But the reality is your "side of the coin" as it were will be represented no matter what because the other side of the coin has been mostly driven off.

Say what you want about those two but they stuck around and were still here for some constructive if mean criticisms until they were banned.

AND WHEN WERE THEY BANNED?

To clear the way for PGI's announcement of several things that you know they would have been mocking and smack talking pgi for:

1. the announcement of Transverse
2. the announcement of 90 days til CW we promise part 3
3. the announcement of another clan mech grab deal

Everyone who was banned "for actions on another forum" in those weeks leading up to those 3 announcements should be reinstated. If they come back flaming and trolling fine ban them again but those bans were BS to try to silence people who they knew wouldn't just open their wallets for another clan pack and praise yet another blueprint of CW with no proof of actual work on it.

I also think that if Vass or Sandpit said they were willing to handle the responsibility and bs that will come along with trying to make this work I'd trust them to do it.

Edited by Hoax415, 12 September 2014 - 02:47 PM.

[TB Freelancer]

Agelmar, on 12 September 2014 - 12:48 PM, said:

I've spent a lot of money on this game. I've been as angry as anyone. I didn't come post belligerently and get myself banned. Doing that shows that the person doesn't have the ability to handle adversity in a healthy way and would be a POOR choice for representing the player base. The "council" would just be a new avenue for that type of personality to flip out and act immature.

Heffay, on 12 September 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

This, a thousand times over. All a council position will do for someone who can't articulate their thoughts in a proper manner will do is give them a pulpit to be a grade A tool for whatever imaginary, perceived transgressions they find themselves in.

The absolute minimum requirement for a council position is never been banned.

x another thousand.

MischiefSC, on 12 September 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

However, do you really think either would blow a chance to come back and actually have a useful voice in getting something done and changed? That's what they both flipped out over the most. They had ideas, saw and shilled for new ideas, and felt like it was ignored.

I don't think they'd blow it. I know they'd blow it. Its in their nature.

Anyway, some of the names I see getting passed around are good people that show the ability to be reasonable and open minded. Guys like Bishop, Heffay, UBCSlayer. Then there's Koniving who shows pretty deep understanding of how game mechanics work and more importantly some notion of how it would work in reality as opposed to the all to common fantasy thinking most have, I've debated with Koniving on a few issues back when I still saw some intelligent talk about certain game mechanics.

I can think of a few other names, but I'll restrict it for now to guys who are engaged in this discussion, and Koniving because he's just one of the guys who stands out to me.

[AgroAlba]

I've always thought Homelss Bill had a reasonable head on his shoulders, nor have I ever had any problem with Bishop.

What I wouldn't want is someone bullheaded on the counsel. Someone who isn't willing to constantly examine their own viewpoint for flaws. I want someone who can see the flaws in their own logic when they are presented to them. I've no clue if the two above had said problem, but if they do I never saw it.