Jump to content

Electing A Player "council" Of Sorts


1306 replies to this topic

#201 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:47 PM

View PostBishop 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.




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.


You don't get a choice in the mater.

Leader you want is the guy that doesn't want the job but has the integrity to see it through once he has it.

Once the ECM change is enacted you can step down. Until then. Your Star nation needs you.

#202 Malleus011

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,854 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:48 PM

BTW, since I haven't seen many other Rangers around this thread, I dropped a note in our forums. Hopefully our leadership will weigh in sometime soon.

#203 Heffay

    Rum Runner

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Referee
  • The Referee
  • 6,458 posts
  • LocationPHX

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:48 PM

View Postlockwoodx, on 12 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:


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


Going to add you to my list of Urbie haters then.



#204 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:48 PM

View PostHoax415, on 12 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:


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 believe them.

No, they wouldn't. I asked Sandpit once, to chill a bit on the twitter tirades, because I was getting 30 rambling posts a day, and that sets him off on a persecution complex tirade about me blowing it out of proportion for another 20 plus tweets.

And he has reacted the same way when anyone disagrees with one of his stances, or he disagrees with theirs, multiple times, on the forums. That is the complete opposite of handling responsibility and BS".

#205 A banana in the tailpipe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,705 posts
  • Locationbehind your mech

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:49 PM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 12 September 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:


You don't get a choice in the mater.

Leader you want is the guy that doesn't want the job but has the integrity to see it through once he has it.

Once the ECM change is enacted you can step down. Until then. Your Star nation needs you.


Social generals rarely make strong leaders.

#206 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:50 PM

View Postlockwoodx, on 12 September 2014 - 02:49 PM, said:


Social generals rarely make strong leaders.


Good thing it's a council and not a tyranny.

#207 A banana in the tailpipe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,705 posts
  • Locationbehind your mech

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:51 PM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 12 September 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:


Good thing it's a council and not a tyranny.


Emperor Palpatine was on a council once....

#208 1453 R

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 5,578 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:51 PM

The notion of a Player Council is an unfortunate catch-22, to me at least.

In theory, it’s a great idea for cutting out noise and putting forth concise ideals that the developers, who have very limited time and attention for community input as it is, can get real data as opposed to a faceful of smoke. Developers want player feedback and ideas, even Piranha (I think… :ph34r: …), but anyone who posts here knows full well that any idea thrown out in GD is pretty much a p!ss in the ocean, insofar as actual relevance or attention goes. This sort of work is supposed to be a big part of what an official Community Manager does, though I have no information whatsoever on how much time Niko spends collating and proposing player ideas.

That said…if a Player Council goes through, and you’re not on the player council, it’s incredibly easy to say to yourself, “Whelp, I may as well stop posting altogether because I’m not one of the Chosen Ones.” When the player base voluntarily signs away all their feedback rights to a subset of less than a dozen players, it’s awfully hard to still feel invested in what those players are doing. Alternatively, those players will be hounded night and day by people desperate to get their ideas heard and who’re convinced that the only way to get those ideas heard is to badger a Player Councilman until the PC gives them a personal response. After all, the sheer act of creating and voting in a Player Council means that we’ve effectively agreed to surrender our right to be heard by Piranha directly to that Council. Whether or not the PC hears us, on the other hand, is still pretty fiercely up for debate.

While I support the idea, as well as any idea that might get the players some more pull with Piranha, I’m afraid it won’t work nearly as nicely as even the mildest of expectations in this thread are hoping for. There’s no way in Hell a forum-elected Player Council will have any sort of veto or other development say whatsoever, for example. None. Nada. Not even remotely happening, and for very good reason.

As well, I can’t think of a better way to ensure that respected figures in the forum community become reviled villains hated by all than to give them extra pull with PGI. I mean come on, just look at what happened to Niko. I don’t even know what he did, but I know for a fact that people are bellowing for his head when, like, this time last week he was The People’s Champion. Most of the dozen or so names frequently brought up for nominations here are already fairly controversial figures on the board; give them what amounts to a community manager’s position akin to Niko’s and I can guarantee you that these folks will be worse than Hatlor, in the eyes of the community, by the end of the year.

If they’re willing to make that sacrifice to try and improve MWO, more power to them. We need to do something. It will simply also be incumbent upon them, and upon the rest of us, to make sure that the community isn’t overworking these councilors to death clamoring for attention, and that these councilors are doing the work of the community and not the work of the councilors. This whole thing comes apart in flames and recrimination if people start figuring that the council’s not paying any more attention to them than Piranha was.

Us plebian non-Councilors need to do our part too if this is going to work, and for the love of all things decent in this world, we need to stick a goddamned cork in the venom and vitriol. If we can’t talk to our own people civilly and with cool heads, then none of us are allowed to be surprised when our ideas don’t get anywhere.

P.S.: I motion that at least one seat on this council be filled by someone who is not, and ideally has never been, part of an active unit in this game. There needs to be at least one voice speaking from the experiences and viewpoints of Puglandia, someone who sticks up for us solo-dropping pug-queueing scrubs everyone else ignores. I…don’t actually know who to nominate for that position :ph34r:. There’s not a lot of respectable and well-known folks who’re also true lone wolves. I almost want to volunteer for it myself, but I’m neither particularly well-known nor respected by those people who do know me, so that leaves that right out :P Nevertheless, if there isn’t any Voice of the Masses in this particular council, then it’s a council which was assembled incorrectly.

P.P.S.: Koniving, IraqiWalker, Bishop Steiner Homeless Bill, Adiuvo, and Roland. I have my differences with the last two – a lot of them, some of them pretty deep – but both of them have made a real effort to be calm and reasonable spokesmen of the ultracomp crowd who’ve also actually acknowledged that the rest of us have a right to exist, and that makes them the men for the job in my book. Koniving is the undisputed lord of New Player Help which means he’s plugged in to what new players’ concerns and FAQs are in a way few other people are, and Walker and Bishop are both pretty good barometers of what the general opinion in GD is. No solo Puglandia player in there (I’m personally in favor of 9 over 5, simply because it’s really hard to get a proper sampling of the playerbase in 5 guys), but it’d at least be a start, and I figure Bishop isn’t so far removed from Puglandia that he couldn’t keep his finger on it if he had to. Walker's a good barometer of how the general forum public is thinking who also has a rock-solid head on his shoulders, and frankly I feel really stupid for not thinking of Bill in the first place. That guy's one of the smartest and most capable folks I've seen on this board; I almost hesitate to nominate him as I honestly think he'd be of more use generating proposals for modifying ECM, but we need some serious Jimmy power behind this task force if people are going to buy it, and Bill's definitely put in the work.

Edited by 1453 R, 14 September 2014 - 07:56 PM.


#209 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:52 PM

View PostMalleus011, on 12 September 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

BTW, since I haven't seen many other Rangers around this thread, I dropped a note in our forums. Hopefully our leadership will weigh in sometime soon.

they're probably too busy in game snail stomping one of my units with totally NON.Lyran Mechs. :lol:

#210 TB Freelancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 783 posts
  • LocationOttawa

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:52 PM

View PostBishop 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.


I think you've got the temperament Bishop, but I understand where you're coming from all to well :(

#211 Kaijin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,137 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:52 PM

I suggested a player council long ago. The thread was disappeared. :D

I nominate the player quoted in my signature. Is he still around?

#212 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:53 PM

View PostBhael Fire, on 12 September 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:


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.


I get that and agree. The problem is that it's easy to miss a lot of good ideas in the static of personal insults and other garbage that fills up a regular thread.

A debate between Konving and Homeless Bill on the relative merits of 1 specific ECM suggestion without sorting out the interjections? That is useful as hell.

You have the public debate going on elsewhere and when something seems to gather traction there you kick it up to the council to be worked over.

The votes and decisions are all being made by the public; the point of a council is just having selected people who are good at arguing their point have a serious back and forth on it just between them.

There is always a degree of Gatekeeping. There has to be; half the conversations going on in a debate on ECM are about the best flavor of cheese. You need to sort the useful stuff out and condense it.

#213 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:54 PM

View Post1453 R, on 12 September 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:



P.S.: I motion that at least one seat on this council be filled by someone who is not, and ideally has never been, part of an active unit in this game. There needs to be at least one voice speaking from the experiences and viewpoints of Puglandia, someone who sticks up for us solo-dropping pug-queueing scrubs everyone else ignores. I…don’t actually know who to nominate for that position :ph34r:. There’s not a lot of respectable and well-known folks who’re also true lone wolves. I almost want to volunteer for it myself, but I’m neither particularly well-known nor respected by those people who do know me, so that leaves that right out :P Nevertheless, if there isn’t any Voice of the Masses in this particular council, then it’s a council which was assembled incorrectly.

P.P.S.: Koniving, IraqiWalker, Bishop Steiner, Adiuvo, and Roland. I have my differences with the last two – a lot of them, some of them pretty deep – but both of them have made a real effort to be calm and reasonable spokesmen of the ultracomp crowd who’ve also actually acknowledged that the rest of us have a right to exist, and that makes them the men for the job in my book. Koniving is the undisputed lord of New Player Help which means he’s plugged in to what new players’ concerns and FAQs are in a way few other people are, and Walker and Bishop are both pretty good barometers of what the general opinion in GD is. No solo Puglandia player in there (I’m personally in favor of 9 over 5, simply because it’s really hard to get a proper sampling of the playerbase in 5 guys), but it’d at least be a start, and I figure Bishop isn’t so far removed from Puglandia that he couldn’t keep his finger on it if he had to.

Again, appreciated, but declined. Thank you though.

View PostKaijin, on 12 September 2014 - 02:52 PM, said:

I suggested a player council long ago. The thread was disappeared. :D

I nominate the player quoted in my signature. Is he still around?

Hope he is. Haven't seen him in some time though. Good member of the community though.

#214 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:55 PM

View PostHoax415, on 12 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:


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.


I think that it would be a very good thing to have someone from that group who is willing and able to be mature and responsible come be a significant part of this discussion.

Again - this is why this situation is special and worthwhile. The developer has said 'Okay, so people are upset that it doesn't seem like we listen to them and their suggestions. Get together, get a consensus, bring it to us and we'll try to make it work'.

Isn't the biggest part of this the chance to wrap back in those people who have been upset by a sense of not being listened to or included?

#215 Heffay

    Rum Runner

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Referee
  • The Referee
  • 6,458 posts
  • LocationPHX

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:55 PM

View PostKaijin, on 12 September 2014 - 02:52 PM, said:

I suggested a player council long ago. The thread was disappeared. :D

I nominate the player quoted in my signature. Is he still around?


I like Mustrum. I'd support him.

#216 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 02:58 PM

Addendum -

IF (big if) this works and PGI wants to try it again, how about the whole 'player council' is only for that one subject that one time? You get on the player council, you help push forward that particular idea, and that's it. You're done. Not eligible for the next one either.

This prevents any sort of class system or cliques.

Remember - the idea is that the council is just there to condense the ideas from the public in general. They're not there to make decisions. Just debate it and refine existing ideas to be put up for public vote.

#217 Argann

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 281 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 03:00 PM

Elect me.

if elected I I will give everyone 5k mc, and have community warefare next week.

I have a paypal

#218 A banana in the tailpipe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,705 posts
  • Locationbehind your mech

Posted 12 September 2014 - 03:00 PM

Bishop's even handing out likes like candy, as any good politician would.

A council will change nothing other than who the Dev's pretend to listen to. PGI will still act the way they want, and a "council" makes the perfect scapegoat for bad decisions. Pugs will see no benefit to tryhards speaking out for them. This is truly a disaster if PGI allows the community to choose a few disconnected individuals caught up in their own agendas to speak for whole.

#219 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 12 September 2014 - 03:00 PM

Tyranny has it's benefits- that is, things actually get done, aka the ol' Mussolini making the trains run on time.

Make it seven people. Never an even number, because if you're voting, that means ties happen far too often.

Those seven vote for a head. If there's a need for a tiebreaker, the head calls it.

Here's the killer. How do you vote those seven?

I would suggest, quite simply, that the only players allowed to do so have forum badges that show they spent money. This is proof that they're not F2P troll accounts. Yes, I know the concept of linking property to voting rights may sound primitive, but this is someplace where we could in theory generate all the accounts/votes we like otherwise.

Elitist? No. Realist. Unless you can figure out some way to easily split the freebieclones from the real people,of course.

And games like EvE do show that player-dev communication can work in an organized manner.


http://community.eve.../community/csm/


Quote

community to choose a few disconnected individuals caught up in their own agendas to speak for whole.


If they do so, it's their own fault. Or better still, vote them out if they fail at their jobs.

You want someone to jump on the grenade, or you can all eat the constant rains of shrapnel as PGI shreds the game. Pick people and let them try, or not.

Edited by wanderer, 12 September 2014 - 03:05 PM.


#220 A banana in the tailpipe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,705 posts
  • Locationbehind your mech

Posted 12 September 2014 - 03:03 PM

View Postwanderer, on 12 September 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

Tyranny has it's benefits- that is, things actually get done, aka the ol' Mussolini making the trains run on time.

Make it seven people. Never an even number, because if you're voting, that means ties happen far too often.

Those seven vote for a head. If there's a need for a tiebreaker, the head calls it.

Here's the killer. How do you vote those seven?

I would suggest, quite simply, that the only players allowed to do so have forum badges that show they spent money. This is proof that they're not F2P troll accounts. Yes, I know the concept of linking property to voting rights may sound primitive, but this is someplace where we could in theory generate all the accounts/votes we like otherwise.

Elitist? No. Realist. Unless you can figure out some way to easily split the freebieclones from the real people,of course.

And games like EvE do show that player-dev communication can work in an organized manner.

http://community.eve.../community/csm/



You can spend 1000s on MC and never get a single badge. PGI doesn't reward whales, just preorders.





6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users