I like Akhlut's idea about the wiki, although I do not think it strictly necessary.
Also, Akhlut, it is my sincere belief that I
do not shoot messengers- can anyone think of an exception to that rule? So all I can promise is that I personally will do my best to make airing grievances safe, and I seem to have migrated into primary mod position more or less by default.
Darkevilme wrote:We can't exactly police these things no one has the time. An ideal procedure would be to give someone a smack if they go silent for a few weeks in the IC thread while producing dozens of wiki commits. But how the hell does one spot this beyond use of ridiculously exhaustive policing?
In extreme cases (Shinn, by his own admission, is probably the most extreme case), it would quickly become obvious what was going on, and we could apply pressure easily.
In borderline cases, it honestly doesn't matter, in my opinion.
The "waste time on wiki" problem is fairly easy to solve, now that we have decided we need
to solve it.
Siege wrote:Now, I'm not necessarily saying we shouldn't have a wiki - I'm probably more amenable to Simon's position of not bothering with the really pointless shit - but I don't want to make ad-hoc assumptions that could come to bite us in the ass later either. It's not just a website with a bunch of articles on it, it's also a time-sink. And the last game demonstrated amply what happens if too much time is sunk: the game dies on you. So there.
I think the answer is: have a wiki, avoid creating or tolerating the creation of pointless encyclopedia pages, avoid excessive duplication of information, and have the mods poke, prod, or possibly hammer people who really do
waste some meaningful amount of time and energy on the wiki, without contributing.
I spent a lot of time writing an over-elaborate page for my own navy at one point, but it hardly kept me from being a decent participant in the game. Shroom did a massive amount of wiki material for the Bragulans, but he did an even more massive amount of game material in them, so that didn't do any harm. And so on.
We're just going to have to trust each other and rely on the moderators to watch out for stupid behavior
. If you want to join the Stupidity Police and criticize people for wasting time on useless things fine, but ultimately you cannot force people to be good players if they don't want to play. All you can do is exert moral pressure on them to up their game.
And to be equally frank as you, I think that being constantly on high alert about how other people are being "BAD PLAYERS!!!" will kill the fun of the game even faster than time-wasting wiki articles. If we keep harassing people about their bad habits as players, before we know it we'll have driven away everyone who dislikes being shouted at while playing games. The only ones who'll be left are the perfectionists and the masochists.
You've got to trust people eventually; otherwise, what's the point?
Darkevilme wrote:We definitely need offsite communications of a sort.
Okay, but how do you propose to guarantee that it won't devolve into the same 'let's all whine about designated meanie X and see if we can't "humiliate" him' as before?
Human beings talk to each other. Sometimes they badmouth each other. This is the Internet, so we all have a lot of privacy and freedom to decide which
of us will talk to each other, and where, and when.
We can't make it physically impossible to abuse private communications. That's an infinitely harder problem than preventing anyone from trying to game the rules to 'win' the game. The closest we could come would be some stupidly draconian policy of "if you talk about the game outside the forum, you're banned," which I will not
be a party to because it would utterly kill the game, probably before it even started, and you know it as well as I do.
As long as conversation about the game is possible, people will grouse sometimes. I, personally, can undertake to keep it civil and productive to the limits of my abilities. You, personally, can do the same. I'm sure we can find other people who will undertake more of the same. But there are limits: you cannot make people get along with each other without their consent, it's as simple as that. We're just going to have to trust each other and do our best not to let our own
conversations lead us in stupid directions.
Is a thread for designated 'what the fuck, dude' posts enough? I specifically want the opinion of the people who were incensed at Fin (you know who you are) on this: would, in their opinion, a thread where they could ask clarification and air their grievances have been sufficient to put a stop to the griefing?
Would you be willing to hear my opinion on this? I was not one of the people with a primary grievance, but I was at least peripherally involved in events.
If you don't want my opinion, I shall withhold it for the time being, of course. I suspect you don't want it, and if you don't, I dcan't blame you.
...Anyway. That said, a dedicated "what the fuck, dude" thread would probably be overspecialized. BUT these things should definitely be said to a player's face, not their back. I'll say the same to anyone who says them privately in my presence.
Because it's real easy to say now that sure, it will, but if folks are fully convinced that the target of their grievances isn't going to be reasonable in response, as I suspect some believed, then would it have really? And if not, then how would you prevent the situation from escalating that way next time we have a player perceived to be unreasonable or whatever?
Take it into the open in OOC. Get some discussion about it. If no amicable or grudging resolution can be reached, it becomes a mod problem.
Simple as that, really. That's how we should have done the SDNW4 stuff all along; the main reasons it didn't
1) There were too many mods. A 'council' of five or six people acts to diffuse responsibility and makes any one mod reluctant to act on their own initiative, which makes coming in to mediate a dispute much harder. Though that wasn't the biggest problem. The biggest problem was...
2) Both of the main disputants in the original round of griefing were
technically mods, and two other mods were involved at least peripherally. The only intellectually honest thing we could have done would be to recuse the entire damn mod council and throw it into the hands of whoever wasn't involved... and the only players who weren't
involved were the ones who almost never showed up in the game anyway.
Those are easy problems to fix- fewer mods, and a clearer line of responsibility when a mod has to recuse themselves from an issue that directly involves them and that they've got their temper fired up about.
PS: And make no mistake, I want your opinion only on the mechanics of the situation. I don't give a wooden nickel about who did what when or why, because that's water under the bridge, and if you come at me with accusations over the way the whole clusterfuck went down I will personally reach through the Internet and beat you with a dead camel.
OK. I feel much the same way about the details, myself.