Discussion on Potential NES and IOT Forum Merger

[Luckymoose]

The majority of votes are in favor, including over half of whom are NESers (returning to AA's observations). To deny the merger is to deny the silent majority.

To accept a merger blindly is to reject the vocal minority >1/3rd. Not to mention plenty of the YES votes agree with me on how to go forward, which reduces your position further.

 

[Nuka-sama]

I don't think anyone can and ever would try forcing a player to play in a game they don't want to play, and suggesting so is ridiculous.

@Mods, is it possible to get a rework of player inclusivity? Are player caps alright, for example?

 

[Luckymoose]

I don't think anyone can and ever would try forcing a player to play in a game they don't want to play, and suggesting so is ridiculous.

@Mods, is it possible to get a rework of player inclusivity? Are player caps alright, for example?

Yes, but it is entirely within the power of those mods to tell a game runner who they have to let play in their games, even if that hurts the game experience and produces work the game runner doesn't want to do.

 

[NinjaCow64]

I don't think anyone can and ever would try forcing a player to play in a game they don't want to play, and suggesting so is ridiculous.

@Mods, is it possible to get a rework of player inclusivity? Are player caps alright, for example?

Player caps are fine in IOT and IOT and NES are governed the same so...

 

[Ailedhoo]

To accept a merger blindly is to reject the vocal minority >1/3rd. Not to mention plenty of the YES votes agree with me on how to go forward, which reduces your position further.

My position? My position is strong... well strong after you started calling the merge potential 'genocide.'

O yes: the way to go forward is to cause hostility with the mods, which would definitely make them more likely to co-operate on demands regarding PDMA.

 

[Luckymoose]

My position? My position is strong... well strong after you started calling the merge potential 'genocide.'

O yes: the way to go forward is to cause hostility with the mods, which would definitely make them more likely to co-operate on demands regarding PDMA.

You said to force unity, punish dissenters, and erase cultural uniqueness. How is that not a terrible position? In what universe is that conducive of a happy hobbyist community?

 

[Ailedhoo]

You said to force unity, punish dissenters, and erase cultural uniqueness. How is that not a terrible position? In what universe is that conducive of a happy hobbyist community?

...you continue to project this on a hobby? Make me out as a brute as you may; where Plot finds it tragic your using "genocide" as a word on this affair I find it potential mocking material at your expense.

 

[Luckymoose]

...you continue to project this on a hobby? Make me out as a brute as you may; where Plot finds it tragic your using "genocide" as a word on this affair I find it potential mocking material at your expense.

Why do you mock us for taking our hard, artistic work seriously? Do you not understand how offensive you're being?

 

[Ailedhoo]

Why do you mock us for taking our hard, artistic work seriously? Do you not understand how offensive you're being?

May I quote Plot on your use of the term 'genocide?'

What I'm saying is that the dismissive attitudes, the vitriol, the flaming and trolling, and the ridiculously over-the-top language are utterly inappropriate. It's insulting to real victims of real genocides or communist oppression to use that kind of language about this. It's possible to feel very strongly about something, and genuinely disagree about it, whilst also maintaining both a sense of proportion and a civil attitude.

If you want me to stop offending you then please consider your language and the fact that I love to laugh at those who make a fool of themselves.
Moderator Action: Flame not please, lest we have to endure more of this exchange
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Anyway I though you oppose happiness is mandatory? Is not my offense to you something to be welcomed?

 

[Luckymoose]

May I quote Plot on your use of the term 'genocide?'



If you want me to stop offending you then please consider your language and the fact that I love to laugh at those who make a fool of themselves.

Anyway I though you oppose happiness is mandatory? Is not my offense to you something to be welcomed?

I literally have no idea what you're trying to say or if you even understand the things you've been saying here yourself.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Can someone explain to our friend that calling the mods "oppressive" with terms like "gunpoint" is sure a bad well to get the mods to listen to your complaints. As a supporter of PDMA I hope this does not taint the mods expectation of any future PDMA experiments.

 

[W|M]

If you want me to stop offending you then please consider your language and the fact that I love to laugh at those who make a fool of themselves.

I'm sure you do. You're not really helping your cause when you're mocking NESers.

 

[Luckymoose]

Can someone explain to our friend that calling the mods "oppressive" with terms like "gunpoint" is sure a bad well to get the mods to listen to your complaints. As a supporter of PDMA I hope this does not taint the mods expectation of any future PDMA experiments.

No, I was referring to you and your plan to force unity and destroy culture. I'm calling you out specifically on your posts, word for word, not making up or adding anything.

 

[Thlayli]

Guys, let's calm down. Plotinus doesn't want to destroy our forum or its traditions. He likes us.

If our rights are going to be infringed on, let's act at that time, but we can't expect the moderators to make any changes if we're constantly, constantly attacking them. Let's level the criticisms and then give them a little breathing room to make changes.

Then, if they don't make changes, we can come back and talk about it again. But it would be a mistake to just keep piling on and expect them to break under the criticism. They can simply resort to closing the thread.

 

[Luckymoose]

Why wait for infringement? Why back down when the debate is still ongoing? I see no reason to let people meander off and forget the talking points. It just undermines the whole process.

 

[Jehoshua]

A merger in theory I think is not inherently a bad idea. However as Lucky and spry note, a merger which ignores the sentiments of the groups involved and which involves intrusive meddling in either groups self-developed norms in favour of artificially imposing strictures of the kind which in the past have manifestly been proven to be problematic, would be very ill-advised. Particularly given that in the past when the community has complained of moderation issues and other problems involving the staff at this site, the staff reaction has been hardly conductive to equanimity and respect of the communities interests. Suspicion then that a merger would just serve to stifle the communities interests under a generalist diktat is understandable.

This being so, if a merger is to proceed and the existing issues regarding moderation are to be resolved. I think the suggestion that a community approved moderator be put in place, and an avenue for public appeal of moderator actions (presumably this feedback forum could fulfil that function) be established is a reasonable one. Likewise I think the principle that a game moderator has absolute control of how he manages his own game, including the right to expel or exclude persons he thinks unsuitable for the serenity and well-being of his project, is entirely reasonable (afterall playing in an NES or IOT is a privilege the gm allows by his voluntary hard work, its not some inviolate right) and should be from the start considered sacrosanct.

These basic principles which spryllino noted and I repeat here, I think would satisfy the core interests of the aggrieved parties and clear a space within which any other more peripheral problems can be gradually worked out.

 

[Civ'ed]

Right, I've thought about it, time to come up with my own, horribly done, proposal.

1. We merge the forums into NESIOT
2. We keep WWW and Argentina separate - WWW as more serious and Argentina as, well, Argentina. WWW has a link to #nes and Argentina to novaiot.chatango.com.
3. A unified map thread, divided into NES and IOT maps.

This is the easy part, really. Next comes the somewhat hard part.

1. One person from NES and one person from IOT will be selected as moderator with player input - not direct election, but not just picking a random account out of a hat either. The mods should also be capable to address grievances of their communities.
2. Relaxation of the inclusivity rules - right now I can see loopholes for player caps, but running a game with more than 20 players will slow down and be a source of stress rather than enjoyment. Allow reasonable player caps, and then also ditch the "first come first serve" - rather allow for the more interesting ideas than the bland recyclings done to quickly signup.

It's not much but hey.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Right, I've thought about it, time to come up with my own, horribly done, proposal.

1. We merge the forums into NESIOT
2. We keep WWW and Argentina separate - WWW as more serious and Argentina as, well, Argentina. WWW has a link to #nes and Argentina to novaiot.chatango.com.
3. A unified map thread, divided into NES and IOT maps.

I concur.

This is the easy part, really. Next comes the somewhat hard part.

1. One person from NES and one person from IOT will be selected as moderator with player input - not direct election, but not just picking a random account out of a hat either. The mods should also be capable to address grievances of their communities.
2. Relaxation of the inclusivity rules - right now I can see loopholes for player caps, but running a game with more than 20 players will slow down and be a source of stress rather than enjoyment. Allow reasonable player caps, and then also ditch the "first come first serve" - rather allow for the more interesting ideas than the bland recyclings done to quickly signup.

It's not much but hey.

I feel new appointments may provide additional management logistics for the united sub-forum, as well as aid in redeveloping another PDMA experiment via the easing relations.

Player caps are very reasonable. The "first come first serve rule" may have to be considered as a potential game to game basis; depends on the game and whether the GM would see it suitable to not have FCFS placed or otherwise.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I concur.



I feel new appointments may provide additional management logistics for the united sub-forum, as well as aid in redeveloping another PDMA experiment via the easing relations.

Player caps are very reasonable. The "first come first serve rule" may have to be considered as a potential game to game basis; depends on the game and whether the GM would see it suitable to not have FCFS placed or otherwise.

You require additional pylons.

 

[erez87]

4 moderators for a single forum dedicated to games played through storytelling? Now that would be something. The current moderators are fine, no need to get carried away.