1306 replies to this topic

[SilentWolff]

So what we do is have a thread where people can list their candidates. After that we make another thread listing the candidates where we have our vote. It doesnt matter how many candidates we have, what matters is the top 9 people who get the most votes will become the new MWO Counsel.

[MischiefSC]

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

Konivig, Adiuvo, Joseph, McGrawl, SgtJobe, and Roland for sure.

Bishop would be a terrible candidate tho due to his agenda driven posts, quick to personally attack those that disagree with him, and massive ego.

I disagree with him a lot. He does speak reasonably well for a lot of people though. I disagree with most the highly competitive groups a lot - I still think they need a strong voice because they're a big piece of the community. IMO the best way to approach this is a 'up-votes only' take on candidates; you talk about the people you like not the people you hate. No negative press approaches or it'll all go toxic.

It's cool you don't like Bishop. You don't need to and probably shouldn't like all 9. That would mean it wasn't a good representation of peoples interests. If we all say 'I like this guy, hate this guy' the conversation will quickly turn to who hates who as negative press effectively sells better than positive. We don't want that, it's toxic.

Up votes (as in who you want) only IMO.

We should really codify how we're going to do this.

Bhael Fire, on 12 September 2014 - 12:43 PM, said:

No offense to anyone, as I personally like the nominees so far, I just am not a fan of "councils" in general. Seems way too much like a popularity contest.

There are a lot of great ideas floating around out there and no reason to preclude any of them just because they didn't come from the prom king/queens.

In a scenario like this, ALL members of this forum should be considered part the "council" if they post and contribute here on a regular basis.

Just my 2 c-bills.

The point of the council is just the be the people who talk to PGI for us. It's all the community, everyone has an equal voice and say, just that 10,000 people can't convey a single idea to PGI. We create and assemble our decision as a community, we give it to the council who turns it into a presentation, we all look at it and agree 80% that's what we want, they take it to PGI.

The idea being that instead of 1,000 people all trying convey their opinion on something they've got a guy on the council they put their opinions to who, in turn, condenses it to a single post.

It's about efficiency, not exclusion.

[Apnu]

Garandos, on 12 September 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

So, for the Dialog about ECM, we should elect a "council" of spokesmen, i would suggest we use this thread to get some nominees up.

After, the guys and gals we decide on, should organise a different thread, to discuss the Topic of ECM in itself.

This is, just to be seen as suggestion thought

i would think, 5 people would be a good start for a "council team"

My personal choice for nominating people would be:

- IraqiWalker, reason, i see him posting a lot, he has solid ideas and a broad knowledge about the game

-Konivig, for about the same reason

and as a third nominee, i would suggest Egomane, as he is in touch with the Devs anyway in one way or another, as he is a mod.

I would say, we do our nominations over the weekend, and on Monday, we simply count who got the most voices.

Better ideas? Lets her them

One person? No. A council of game elders. I suggest we form a group of unit leaders who will gather data from their units as well as a few people willing to collate data from the lone wolves and have this group come to a consensus and present a proposal to PGI.

Its the most democratic way.

[EyeOne]

Adiuvo, on 12 September 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

Ideally this council would have people from various backgrounds on it. 2 comp, 2 casual, 1... random I guess.

What this can't turn into is a popularity contest if actual, substantial changes have any hope of being implemented.

These are both very important points. Popular forumites aren't necessarily good at balance and the solution has to work for comps and casuals.

[Apnu]

Who are the unit leaders? Lets start working on this. Should we encourage them to meet on a TS and get this thing going?

[Livewyr]

Aside from myself. (I would like to be included, but will not go ****poster if I am not.)

Koniving
Docbach
Homeless Bill
Aduivo
Bishop Steiner

(not necessarily in order of priority)

[A banana in the tailpipe]

MischiefSC, on 12 September 2014 - 12:49 PM, said:

I disagree with him a lot. He does speak reasonably well for a lot of people though. I disagree with most the highly competitive groups a lot - I still think they need a strong voice because they're a big piece of the community. IMO the best way to approach this is a 'up-votes only' take on candidates; you talk about the people you like not the people you hate. No negative press approaches or it'll all go toxic.

It's cool you don't like Bishop. You don't need to and probably shouldn't like all 9. That would mean it wasn't a good representation of peoples interests. If we all say 'I like this guy, hate this guy' the conversation will quickly turn to who hates who as negative press effectively sells better than positive. We don't want that, it's toxic.

Never said I disliked him. I base my opinion on his posting habits and reactions to posts he doesn't agree with. He's not a level headed mediator I'd want having influence on a council that impacts the game. A self admitted "jaded white knight". I listed the names of those I have much more respect for in that department.

Edited by lockwoodx, 12 September 2014 - 12:53 PM.

[Ngamok]

Koniving
Homeless Bill
Bishop Steiner
Adiuvo
Sturm Wealth
Roland
Livewyr
JagerXII

[Pendraco]

Perhaps we could also dig up old posts that disscuss how ECM should be handled and vote on which one is best? Or at least see if we can get some of those guys on the counsil?

Currently searching....don't suppose anyone has saved links to such a disscussion?

[MischiefSC]

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.

Then they get banned again. A big mistake we can make here though is to go through all this work and create something viewed as an echo chamber. You need to make room for dissent, so long as it's done respectfully. There are a few banned people who are as a given rule intelligent, thoughtful and productive folks with a lot to add - just sometimes (with a bit too much to drink most likely) they venture into territory inappropriate for this forum. Do that too often and it's the ban hammer.

The goal though is to rope people in from as wide a group as possible. One guy helping share the voice of the far-flung diaspora from MW:O isn't bad, so long as it's intelligent and productive. Hence why I say Roadbeer and/or Sandpit would be awesome for that. Vassago is a laugh riot and good people but to put him at a table with Bishop, Roland and several others... someone would get shanked.

If we're going to do this though (and I've been vocal about saying 'eff Reddit and everyone who got banned and wants special treatment') we still need to give them a voice. This is a kick-ass opportunity and we need to grab it by its haunches and hump it into submission.

[Votanin FleshRender]

If the community can't even agree how many members the "council" should be... bodes ill for getting any results.

This may have been the point of Russ offering this... making it blatantly obvious to everyone how hard it is to get anything done amidst an ocean of voices.

FWIW, I wholly support the idea. Not sure how much my extremely casual and mediocre play ability opinion is worth, but...

Yes, the casual and comp crowds must both be represented.
Yes, the reddit crowd should have a reasonable voice. I haven't been around long enough to know who most of them are, but Sandpit always seemed pretty reasonable to me.
Yes, a pilot who specializes in lights should absolutely be involved. Adiuvo seems alright, despite being in HoL.

[Heffay]

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.

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.

[MischiefSC]

Okay. Let's start making more refined progress. What we need is a heavily moderated thread where people just say who they vote for. We run it for a week. Anything other than a list of names (call it a cutoff of 10) gets removed from the post.

We tally it in 7 days and make a poll out of, say, the top 20.

I get the desire to make it 'unit leaders' and such but unit leaders can just be the guy who runs the teamspeak; sometimes a unit isn't run by their most reasonable member, etc.

If a unit wants their leader they should all vote for him.

Does this sound good to folks?

[Pendraco]

I nominate MischiefSC as Precentor Martial in command of said counsil.........just to keep things civil.

Edited by Pendraco, 12 September 2014 - 12:58 PM.

[Heffay]

Hehe, look at us all come to a consensus already.

This is going to be fantastic.

[Almeras]

No thank you.

People start to talk on behalf of the community what they really mean is their friends/unit which often means views/opinions/misconceptions become fostered.

I rather see polls send out to active players (either all or just a selection across the elo bands); multiple choice with a comment section on popular forums topics.

[Agelmar]

Popularity won't work. PGI knows who they'd listen to. People have been posting here, building relationships, offering help on balance issues for years. Let them decide IF it is what they want to do.

[MerryIguana]

Mudhutwarrior

[Bhael Fire]

SilentWolff, on 12 September 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:

I prefer to call it democracy.

Having an elected council makes it technically a republic. Basically strips it down to an elitist community where only a few select ideas get voted on instead of the full spectrum.

A true democracy would be allowing each player to make suggestions and have it voted on. Once you introduce a political structure you introduce political games...and with it a blanket system where only a prominent few get their ideas heard.

There's nothing wrong with our current system of allowing each player start a poll for their ideas and having the entire community vote on it. That is true democracy.

[DocBach]

I'd love to be a part of something like this.