1306 replies to this topic

[Gyrok]

Apnu, on 12 September 2014 - 01:04 PM, said:

Have any of the people nominated here confirmed if they are willing to do this?

Also, there should be a good section of unit leaders.

The 3 Largest Clans in game are: Clan Ghost Bear International, Clan Wolf Delta Galaxy and Clan Wolf International.

The 3 largest house units were: Skye Rangers, HHoD, and Donegal Guards.

The 3 Largest Merc Corps were: Praetorian Legion, Aces Wild and Comstar Irregulars

Per Zeece's composed information on units posted on reddit: http://www.reddit.co...it_spreadsheet/


If you were looking for groups that represented the largest chunks of the organized player base, those would be good places to start.

Edited by Gyrok, 12 September 2014 - 01:56 PM.

[Prezimonto]

Koniving
Homeless Bill
TopDawg
Bishop Steiner
DocBach
Wispsy
Livewyr

A good mix of pug, unit, and comp players, each well known and respected for having organized, well presented, data driven ideas.

Edited by Prezimonto, 12 September 2014 - 01:58 PM.

[Tolkien]

Khobai, on 12 September 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

Yeah no. The council should have no real power. Because individuals always have biased agendas.

All decision-making need to be made by the community itself through polling. All the council should do is make sure the best ideas get added to the poll and the worst ideas get removed from it.

If the council doesn't have power, then PGI keeps doing this:

[Votanin FleshRender]

Tolkien, on 12 September 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

The council also needs to be able to override the developers past or future decisions. Seriously, otherwise we will end up with another 3pv where 90+% of the voting forum population was against it and it still got rammed through.

That's one of the most entitled things I've ever read here on the forums. Demanding that the player base gets veto power over the company? That's beyond ludicrous.

[MischiefSC]

Heffay, on 12 September 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

Well then, maybe we should have 2 councils? The House and the Senate. One is elected, one is voted in. Balance of power. And an executive branch to sign or veto the ideas they send forward.

We will - We'll have the house, which is the whole community, who vote on stuff we put up as a whole.

So we make an ECM only discussion thread where the ideas get put forward by the whole community. The '95% who never come to the forums' need to come to the forums. This needs put in the splash page when you open the launcher 'Community voting on changes to ECM', link them to the ECM discussion.

So the ECM discussion goes for a week or two until it's got a few ideas hashed out pretty well. Those go to the council. They refine those down to 3 or 4 options, which come back to the community as a vote. The winner of that gets taken by the council to PGI.

Make sense? We, as a whole, express ideas. The council collects and refines them down into something that isn't total static and can be viably voted on. We pick what we like best. That goes to PGI.

[Gas Guzzler]

Tolkien, on 12 September 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

If the council doesn't have power, then PGI keeps doing this:

I thought IGP had a direct hand in making 3PV happen?

[AssaultPig]

the 3PV argument is a great example of the collective 'wisdom' of this forum being dead wrong. Folks thought it would be a huge deal ruin the game etc.; it was a major sticking point on this forum for a month. Then they implemented it... and nothing happened. Nobody competent uses it, it's a total non issue.

If there's going to be a 'player council' that has actual input on anything, membership should be based on something other than who can make the most posts or trawl for the most likes on the official forums.

[Training Instructor]

Khobai, on 12 September 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

Yeah no. The council should have no real power. Because individuals always have biased agendas.

All decision-making need to be made by the community itself through polling. All the council should do is make sure the best ideas get added to the poll and the worst ideas get removed from it.

I agree, giving any elected council the power to create their own agenda will only end badly, as well as fracturing the community even more. Because they WILL CREATE THEIR OWN AGENDA, despite their best intentions not to. Most of them won't even be able to honestly acknowledge that they're acting on an agenda, because self-deception is a skill practiced by most people who are "trying to do what's best for everyone." What's best for everyone usually is whatever best fits that players prejudices and preformed conclusions.

[ThisMachineKillsFascists]

Khobai, on 12 September 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

Yeah no. The council should have no real power. Because individuals always have biased agendas.

All decision-making need to be made by the community itself through polling. All the council should do is make sure the best ideas get added to the poll and the worst ideas get removed from it.

this.

First of all the role of the council needs to be discussed .

Also its not offically meantioned that how many council have to be elected. One council would be a very bad idea.

How will the council be elected? Which method? Are the council nominates are going to make a statement before the election in order the audience and the electors understand their standpoint?

Will the banned ppl (banned since a few month ) have a chance to participate into the election in order to have a Fair election?

Many many questions to sort out before throwing popular names in

Edited by ThisMachineKillsFascists, 12 September 2014 - 02:03 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Gyrok, on 12 September 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:

The 3 Largest Clans in game are: Clan Ghost Bear International, Clan Wolf Delta Galaxy and Clan Wolf International.

The 3 largest house units were: Skye Rangers, HHoD, and Donegal Guards.

The 3 Largest Merc Corps were: Praetorian Legion, Aces Wild and Comstar Irregulars

Per Zeece's composed information on units posted on reddit: http://www.reddit.co...it_spreadsheet/


If you were looking for groups that represented the largest chunks of the organized player base, those would be good places to start.

The struggle there is, who speaks for each group? Hence better to do an overall vote. Obviously leaders from those folks will get high on the list specifically because their membership is big.

Better to just have an open nomination, then the nominations get culled by who actually is willing to do the job, then those people go up for public vote. There are a few people who run large groups who are not well respected as people in the community I'm sure.

The question is, can those groups leverage their membership? Nothing wrong with that - they've got a voice, use them.

Here's the shot for everyone to do that.

[WarHippy]

I can think of several people off the top of my head that I would nominate, however without more details as to what the position truly does or represents I would have to hold my vote until at the very least I could sleep on it. It is an interesting idea none the less.

[Training Instructor]

MischiefSC, on 12 September 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

We will - We'll have the house, which is the whole community, who vote on stuff we put up as a whole.

So we make an ECM only discussion thread where the ideas get put forward by the whole community. The '95% who never come to the forums' need to come to the forums. This needs put in the splash page when you open the launcher 'Community voting on changes to ECM', link them to the ECM discussion.

So the ECM discussion goes for a week or two until it's got a few ideas hashed out pretty well. Those go to the council. They refine those down to 3 or 4 options, which come back to the community as a vote. The winner of that gets taken by the council to PGI.

Make sense? We, as a whole, express ideas. The council collects and refines them down into something that isn't total static and can be viably voted on. We pick what we like best. That goes to PGI.

Yeah, and then Paul says "Nah brah, that's not what I had in mind."

Sarcasm aside, the idea makes sense in theory. But if most players can't be bothered to come to the forums for fear that they'll miss the Nash Bridges marathon on TBS, PGI will get to veto suggestions they don't like by saying that the council doesn't represent the true player base.

[Khobai]

Quote

That's one of the most entitled things I've ever read here on the forums. Demanding that the player base gets veto power over the company? That's beyond ludicrous.

It is beyond ludicrous lol.

[Votanin FleshRender]

Isn't everyone getting a little ahead of themselves here?

Russ was not offering to listen to every idea the player base has about everything, or having a council from the player base that he can collaborate with. He's talking about one single issue. That's it.

It would be wonderful if this lead to a permanent counsel from the player base that PGI felt comfortable collaborating with. But let's not put the cart in front of the horse.

A discussion about ECM is the only thing on the table at the moment.

[Tank]

Many people are posting this picture:

Spoiler

But yet many fail to see that on this picture we have most fair, simple and efficient solution. I say - we don't need representative and we don't need council, let PGI post voting poles. That's it. But this time they will listen to the results, if they really decided to give us the power of choice.

[MischiefSC]

ThisMachineKillsFascists, on 12 September 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

this.

First of all the role of the council needs to be discussed .

Also its not offically meantioned that how many council have to be elected. One council would be a very bad idea.

How will the council be elected? Which method? Are the council nominates are going to make a statement before the election in order the audience and the electors understand their standpoint?

Will the banned ppl (banned since a few month ) have a chance to participate into the election in order to have a Fair election?

Many many questions to sort out before throwing popular names

Unless you want this to take a year you do it all at once.

Get a list of names.

Cull that list for who is actually willing/able to volunteer time to mess with this.

The council isn't going to have any power - how could they?

The only reason to have a council is just a few well respected names to cull the general forum static into a understandable and well reasoned point or idea.

Then those ideas get chewed both by the council and the public.

The results that the council agrees upon for X number of viable ideas gets put up for community vote.

This way you get less skewing of results, there's no power to abuse. The council exists to take our 40-100 pages of mostly ranting BS with a few nuggets of great ideas into a list of complied great ideas, which they'll debate in public and we'll debate in public (with the benefit of seeing the opinions of people who are generally not window-licking stupid just together with each other, smart people debating smart topics with other smart people instead of lost in the noise).

The results of that go up in a PGI vote. Winner goes to PGI.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tolkien, on 12 September 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

You only think this is a bad idea because you think the forums are too hard on PGI. Wake up, the entire internet understands PGI has failed with MWO so far and that is why their space game has made less than 3% of the targeted goal in the last 24 hours.

PGI needs to start listening to people who will tell them like it is (e.g. Anders, Standing Cow, Vassago Rain) not the hugbox from NGNG. Otherwise we will get more of this:


When considering the above, the council obviously needs the power to veto additions or removals of features. Seriously. Otherwise what is the point of the council other than to be ignored when convenient.

so a group of Forum Blowhards should be given the power to Veto decisions made by an IRL Company using IRL Dollars? Yeah, never going to happen in a million years. Advisory is just that. Advice. If it is ignored, then it is obviously a sham. But giving Veto power to people playing a game, that affects the potential livelihood of actual employees? Insanity. And then you also favorite a post nominating 3 of the people with the most vested interest in tearing PGI down to the ground, and a 4th who is none too favorable.

Yeah, that would go well.

3rd World got it right about this.

3rdworld, on 12 September 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

That is who should be balancing the game. Random scrubs.



And people wonder why this forum is a complete waste of time.

Different approach, same results.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 12 September 2014 - 02:09 PM.

[MischiefSC]

This is also only about ECM - that's very important. If this leads to a process for prodding PGI in specific development directions that's awesome but -

PGI is a business, not a community project. This needs to never become a 'We want X, here's how we want you to do it, GO DO IT'. It's more about PGI saying 'We're willing to let you tell us how you want X to work if you can come to a consensus. If it's doable, we'll do it that way.'

That's awesome and great and more than you get from 99% of businesses of any sort. Let's not blow this and be stupid.

[AssaultPig]

the best way to create a 'player council' would be to have niko or whoever the community person is these days solicit players from the most active/competitive clans or groups; that's not a perfect method but it's probably the best way to find members who will contribute useful feedback.

A player council is not going to replace or have veto power over the dev team; at best they can throw their collective body in front of changes that the playerbase really hates. Having one is a good idea insofar as it provides a conduit for amalgamated player feedback to reach the devs, not because we'd want them making actual balance decisions.

[Bishop Steiner]

SilentWolff, on 12 September 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

I see alot of people posting what cant be done/ wont work. That gets us no where. If you dont like the idea of a counsel, then give us other constructive ideas on what you think might work.

Removing bad ideas from the table is just as important as advocating good ones.

Some of us are better troubleshooters and devils advocates, and thus at finding the "why it wont work" out, then giving the solution itself.

Both are needed.