1306 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

Russ Bullock, on 16 September 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

Okay everybody.

I want to try and move this concept forward, obviously this is a tough one with no shortage of ideas. There are a decent number of people out there that still are opposed to the concept or at least are somewhat fearful of the outcome.

I want to again assure everyone that were going to take this nice and slow and see if we can't create something that works for MWO. I won't go out and commit to a system that is already out there like say EVE, perhaps we end up there perhaps we don't. I am more interested in finding a nice balance between PGI and it's community. That is the starting point I think we all agree.

Ideally I think it should be a small manageable number, 12 is likley at the very far end of managable, but we also want to make sure everyone is represented.

The only idea I have currently is to take this thread, invite everyone that has been nominated to a teamspeak server. The first order of business will be discussing together how we can widdle that group down a manageable size, vote on that group of players for perhaps a certain "term"?

Once they are in place we can focus on our first Subject whether that remains ECM or perhaps a softball or two out the gate.

Thoughts?

say when and where.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Russ Bullock, on 16 September 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

Okay everybody.

I want to try and move this concept forward, obviously this is a tough one with no shortage of ideas. There are a decent number of people out there that still are opposed to the concept or at least are somewhat fearful of the outcome.

I want to again assure everyone that were going to take this nice and slow and see if we can't create something that works for MWO. I won't go out and commit to a system that is already out there like say EVE, perhaps we end up there perhaps we don't. I am more interested in finding a nice balance between PGI and it's community. That is the starting point I think we all agree.

Ideally I think it should be a small manageable number, 12 is likley at the very far end of managable, but we also want to make sure everyone is represented.

The only idea I have currently is to take this thread, invite everyone that has been nominated to a teamspeak server. The first order of business will be discussing together how we can widdle that group down a manageable size, vote on that group of players for perhaps a certain "term"?

Once they are in place we can focus on our first Subject whether that remains ECM or perhaps a softball or two out the gate.

Thoughts?

Everyone nominated is a hell of a lot of ppl (99 actually by my count) still

but gime the TS an ill be there.

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 04:35 PM.

[DocBach]

Who's doing the voting? The nominated players in the ts?

Edited by DocBach, 16 September 2014 - 04:34 PM.

[Russ Bullock]

DocBach, on 16 September 2014 - 04:32 PM, said:

Who's doing the voting? The nominated players?

No I think once the larger group widdles down the numbers ( assuming were successful )

I think the smaller group is presented to the whole forums?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Its probably not much of a surporise but all of the people who are known to be critical got no (or very little) votes, so voting here is hardly impartial or ideal

For instance:

Colonel Pada Vinson 2

Vassago Rain 3

Andersbot 0


Roadbeer is the only one and he'd be at 11th or 12th place. IMO youd want to have a grouping thats split. If you have all but one people who are seen as knights then this whole thing will start out with ppl screaming about that and the message will be lost.

Or thats how Id see it anyways

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 04:41 PM.

[RobinSage]

I know Bishop Steiner has dipped out of the running. He was asking if I would get on here and nominate a few other guys to this council, but I will just offer my 2 cents. I think the "Town Hall" twitch was one of the most informative and important broadcasts to get these ideas out there and gain communication within the MWO community. With that, a "town hall" of many unit leaders, or their SME's (subject matter experts), and this council would help. 12 people is a large group but could disseminate those ideas to many people. ECM does need a major overhaul, and having a meeting on TS3 is probably the easiest way to hash out anything.

I would nominate any of the NA Comstar admins to set up an "official/unofficial" town hall channel on their server.....voice permissions could be set up and it could be ran as a "board/council" meeting, however only the designated reps would voice filtered questions from the MWO player base, to the development team. In a symposium. Maybe some Q & A on implementation, timelines, milestones, etc.

Because not everyone knows game development, but there are also many ill-informed gamers out there that want a lot of changes but don't understand the development time or resources to make things happen.....so even many bad suggestions would have to be sifted through. And then there is also feature creep....So having an informed and objective council, that is open to suggestion from POLLS, Q & A sessions, etc. is going to be crucial.

I would suggest quarterly terms...possibly 1/2 year terms. Depending on the extent of workload for gathering data, assessing polls and what not.

To be actually frank, my recommendation would be to issue a "problem" to these responsible individuals, and once their due diligence, research, and data is collected on the problem, as soon as a solution is presented to PGI as "viable"....then their term would end....and another chosen representative would rotate through the council for another task. (this keeps from any one person or group from establishing a privilege)

I don't know about voting....that usually boils down to a popularity contest that you then have to support. I would use the suggestions on this forum, draw from the top names on the list and continue to rotate people through, with the understanding that their focus is on the specific "problem".

An experienced Quality Assurance Lead could organize this team and could also do a pretty good job of identifying a good "councilman" with a small questionnaire.

You know the basics:

When they started MWO, how long been playing Battletech Universe games, digital or TT. How committed they are to MWO success, not just their own success within MWO....etc. I'd say setting up that initial "interview" with ALL of the suggested names should happen. There were some on that list that are banned on the forums.....some of those same people are banned on NAComstar comms as well. There is a reason for being banned.....those people should NOT be allowed to be on this council FOR ANY REASON. Allowing dissention, while creating a positive community building program here would ultimately backfire. The MWO players deserve good, honest, outgoing and compassionate gamers.....ones that are remembered for being contributors and helpers, who have a history in MWO for helping....not for being forum opinion trolls.

I believe Russ and PGI will find the right crew for this job.....but voting other than nominations I think would lead to favoritism. No one really wants that.

Edited by RobinSage, 16 September 2014 - 04:56 PM.

[Livewyr]

Critical is good, when it comes with constructive purpose.

"Golds!" or "Because PGI" is not constructive.. and therefore logically would not be recommended for a spot on a team designed to be constructive.

[Bishop Steiner]

RobinSage, on 16 September 2014 - 04:44 PM, said:

I know Bishop Steiner has dipped out of the running. He was asking if I would get on here and nominate a few other guys to this council, but I will just offer my 2 cents. I think the "Town Hall" twitch was one of the most informative and important broadcasts to get these ideas out there and gain communication within the MWO community. With that, a "town hall" of many unit leaders, or their SME's (subject matter experts), and this council would help. 12 people is a large group but could disseminate those ideas to many people. ECM does need a major overhaul, and having a meeting on TS3 is probably the easiest way to hash out anything.

I would nominate any of the NA Comstar admins to set up an "official/unofficial" town hall channel on their server.....voice permissions could be set up and it could be ran as a "board/council" meeting, however only the designated reps would voice filtered questions from the MWO player base, to the development team. In a symposium. Maybe some Q & A on implementation, timelines, milestones, etc.

Because not everyone knows game development, but there are also many ill-informed gamers out there that want a lot of changes but don't understand the development time or resources to make things happen.....so even many bad suggestions would have to be sifted through. And then there is also feature creep....So having an informed and objective council, that is open to suggestion from POLLS, Q & A sessions, etc. is going to be crucial.

I would suggest quarterly terms...possibly 1/2 year terms. Depending on the extent of workload for gathering data, assessing polls and what not. I don't know about voting....that usually boils down to a popularity contest that you then have to support. I would use the suggestions on this forum, draw from the top names on the list and continue to rotate people through, with the understanding that their focus is on the specific "problem".

An experienced Quality Assurance Lead could organize this team and could also do a pretty good job of identifying a good "councilman" with a small questionnaire.

You know the basics:

When they started MWO, how long been playing Battletech Universe games, digital or TT. How committed they are to MWO success, not just their own success within MWO....etc. I'd say setting up that initial "interview" with ALL of the suggested names should happen. There were some on that list that are banned on the forums.....some of those same people are banned on NAComstar comms as well. There I a reason for being banned.....those people should NOT be allowed to be on this council FOR ANY REASON. Allowing dissention, while creating a positive community building program here would ultimately backfire. The MWO players deserve good, honest, outgoing and compassionate gamers.....ones that are remembered for being contributors and helpers, who have a history in MWO for helping....not for being forum opinion trolls.

I believe Russ and PGI will find the right crew for this job.....but voting other than nominations I think would lead to favoritism. No one really wants that.

I disagree with you to one point.

They should be there for the duration of that ONE specific issue. Once the problem has been handed back to PGI, the "council" is dissolved. Period.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Livewyr, on 16 September 2014 - 04:48 PM, said:

Critical is good, when it comes with constructive purpose.

"Golds!" or "Because PGI" is not constructive.. and therefore logically would not be recommended for a spot on a team designed to be constructive.

But at the same time negating all people because theyve ever had that opinion woulndt be a great way to go forward either. Ive had that opinion in the past but Im trying this new start thing with PGI as well. Should I be exempted because of my history?

Then youre setting yourself up for a "knights only" club and thats how people WILL see it.

Im not trying to be contradictory, Im telling you how I think it will be recieved

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 04:56 PM.

[Roland]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 September 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

Its probably not much of a surporise but all of the people who are known to be critical got no (or very little) votes, so voting here is hardly impartial or ideal

I don't think anyone has ever accused me of pulling any punches when it comes to PGI or perceived problems with the current state of the game.

[DEN_Ninja]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 September 2014 - 04:52 PM, said:

I disagree with you to one point.

They should be there for the duration of that ONE specific issue. Once the problem has been handed back to PGI, the "council" is dissolved. Period.

Agreed, it is a temporary position created for need.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 September 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

Its probably not much of a surporise but all of the people who are known to be critical got no (or very little) votes, so voting here is hardly impartial or ideal

For instance:

Colonel Pada Vinson 2

Vassago Rain 3

Andersbot 0


Roadbeer is the only one and he'd be at 11th or 12th place. IMO youd want to have a grouping thats split. If you have all but one people who are seen as knights then this whole thing will start out with ppl screaming about that and the message will be lost.

Or thats how Id see it anyways

I respect critical and well voiced arguments. I don't back arguments that feel to need to be insulting or hateful. I am all for the 'critical' guys for being in because I understand their frustration. Somehow I feel like this sentiment is shared even among the 'white knights'.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tichorius Davion, on 16 September 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

Agreed, it is a temporary position created for need.




I respect critical and well voiced arguments. I don't back arguments that feel to need to be insulting or hateful. I am all for the 'critical' guys for being in because I understand their frustration. Somehow I feel like this sentiment is shared even among the 'white knights'.

One also needs to demonstrate the ability to be a Team Player. Some of these cults of personality may have good ideas, but are completely incapable of teamwork and compromise.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tichorius Davion, on 16 September 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

Agreed, it is a temporary position created for need.




I respect critical and well voiced arguments. I don't back arguments that feel to need to be insulting or hateful. I am all for the 'critical' guys for being in because I understand their frustration. Somehow I feel like this sentiment is shared even among the 'white knights'.

But not among those who are voting.

The problem being that people arent forgiving the past for the people who are being unbanned like we are supposed to be doing. The voting is going in a way where the banned seem to bew being assumed we'lkl just be as negative and screwqed up as we were when we got banned and we'll be rebanned again shortly because none of us can learn. Isnt that counterintuitive?

And its not me im talking about here. I was never expecting to get nominated, much less voted for, I havbe too much history (ironically).

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 05:14 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 September 2014 - 05:07 PM, said:

One also needs to demonstrate the ability to be a Team Player. Some of these cults of personality may have good ideas, but are completely incapable of teamwork and compromise.

and some are. But their history will say they arent is that it? How about we give thwem the chance to prove themselves before prejudging them one way or another?

[DEN_Ninja]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 September 2014 - 05:10 PM, said:

The problem being that people aremnt forgiving the past for the people who are being unbanned like we are supposed to be doing. The voting is going in a way where the banned seem to bew being assumed we'lkl just be as negative and screwqed up as we were when we got banned and we'll be rebanned again shortly because none of us can learn. Isnt that counterintuitive?

And its not me im talking about here. I was never expecting to get nominated, much less voted for, I havbe too much history.

Here's my totally subtle and not blunt at all response to that Buddah.

They can go [redacted] off. The past is over and done. As long as y'all are responsible I could careless for any slights or bouts that have been between us.

Make it known that the entire purpose of this player council and its nominated/voted for members are purely there to help us forward community interaction. It is a chance for us to proactively change the game because Russ is sitting right there ready to listen.

Moral: People be needing to get off that high horse.

Edited by Tichorius Davion, 16 September 2014 - 05:18 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tichorius Davion, on 16 September 2014 - 05:18 PM, said:

Here's my totally subtle and not blunt at all response to that Buddah.

They can go [redacted] off. The past is over and done. As long as y'all are responsible I could careless for any slights or bouts that have been between us.

Make it known that the entire purpose of this player council and its nominated/voted for members are purely there to help us forward community interaction. It is a chance for us to proactively change the game because Russ is sitting right there ready to listen.

Moral: People be needing to get off that high horse.

I was backwards my bad

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 05:29 PM.

[DEN_Ninja]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 September 2014 - 05:22 PM, said:

Nice, tell the unbanned to [redacted] off cause theyre not the targhet audience of this plan? Yeah that doesnt sound like history repeating itself at all.

Thats why you dont forget history. Because if you do; you repeat it

?

I mean to the people who are writing you off Buddah. If Russ saw fit to unban people I will not disagree.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 September 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

and some are. But their history will say they arent is that it? How about we give thwem the chance to prove themselves before prejudging them one way or another?

How about we give them a chance to prove their "changed nature" before handing them the key to the city?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 September 2014 - 05:26 PM, said:

How about we give them a chance to prove their "changed nature" before handing them the key to the city?

I think I just said that but without the insinuation that they wouldnt change

Tichorius Davion, on 16 September 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

?

I mean to the people who are writing you off Buddah. If Russ saw fit to unban people I will not disagree.

Oh whoops I saw that backwards

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 16 September 2014 - 05:28 PM.

[DEN_Ninja]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 September 2014 - 05:26 PM, said:

How about we give them a chance to prove their "changed nature" before handing them the key to the city?

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 September 2014 - 05:29 PM, said:

I think I just said that but without the insinuation that they wouldnt change



Oh whoops I saw that backwards

I am sensing a lot of context and tone being lost in translation here. Lawl.