Discovery Gaming Community

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122

About Ageira perk request:

Does the staff really think that giving ability to demand cargo from specific faction in six systems after months of roleplay conducted is worse than Sirius-wide blanket bounty against same faction, lobbying Liberty Government and even FR5, which we now know would not pass because staff is protecting said faction from roleplay consequences?

I am disappointed that months of roleplay, hours of interactions and few sleepless nights are being discarded while other factions are receiving much much better perks without showing any plausible roleplay to support it. There's no fairness in this regard, that much was obvious long time ago and yet I feel that nothing has changed.

Whilst there's definitely the possibility Protégé was exaggerating about how taking away that line took away reasons for his faction to log, I do have to point out that we've had niche factions reach officialdom before.

For example JM got official focusing on it's piracy line. That was the part of Junker roleplay we focused on. But we didn't just so that, we did smuggling as well as handle supply contracts.

Same with Wisp. The part of RP they focused on was anti-cardamine. They hunted Outcasts and their allies. But I think you are very misinformed to say they don't roleplay other qualities of a Cryer faction. They've set up medical clinics, they've made a POB, they even asked Core for research materials. All it takes is a glance at the roleplay they've done to see they do defiantly roleplay the qualities of a Cryer faction.

And well, like I said in the moment it's entirely plausible Protégé was exaggerating. If at the time of it's officialdom request the Admins removed the Junker piracy lines, I definitely would have been inclined to say JM lost it's reasons to log.

Whilst it's fair to argue that Wisp may have started out as a revenge faction, over time it clearly stepped away from that and became something worthy of officialdom. The OC and Co hunting line they had was hardly abusive, but at the least I would have nerfed it to just being able to hunt OC Sirius wide. After talking to the leaders of some of the factions Wisp shot, I do think some of the fault lies in their enemies just being a bit upset at being unable to kill their opponents and not doing anything about it, and just taking their upset to the admin team instead.

I think it's highly unfair for Wisp to get shelved when they are officialdom requests of much lower quality that have had so much more leeway and have even been approved (including the approval of requests built on a generic ID). Even some of the factions Wisp interacted with bullied Wisp and continues to bully factions that try to give them raid activity into not logging, yet I don't see their names coming onto the admins desks.

I've always been informed that officialdom is about how much of a positive impact and contribution a faction can make both forum and in game wise. I don't see how Wisp don't satisfy that requirement.

But then again, I'm not sure if it's fair to say Protege put up a good defense for himself or not.

Interspace got official while ignoring banking/loaning/insurance RP and concentrating on trading. Wisp got denied for concentrating on PvP and research RP more. Double Standards at its worst.

You have loan/insurance faction that only traded gaining official status.
You have research/trade faction that PvPed/researched/traded denied official status.

The flimsy and ever fluctuating standards for officialdom these days are terrible. I could probably pick a random ID, make a request and sit on activity time alone and it'd pass provided we weren't that vocal.

Dear admins.

This is exactly what you reap when you allow for transparency.
You will get people at the end just criticizing how inconsistent' the team is and their expectations are that it should be a machine response. Not a human one.

transparency will just deliver more criticism about every move you do. It is like living in a house made 100% with transparent glass.

I like that admins explain things but it should be done towards the people that matter and not out in public. Whatever you say out here people will be separating appart.

(04-13-2016, 04:49 AM)aerelm Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-12-2016, 09:15 PM)Protégé Wrote: [ -> ]For the record, I sent this PM to four admins - I believe those were Drrobe, Shinju, aerelm and St.Denis.

I was going to reply to you in PM, but since you said you'll quote it here figured I might as well just post it here. So, for the sake of transparency here's as transparent as the reason for not getting any answer to the PM you sent me 6 hours ago gets:

There's this thing called a pillow, which I obviously prefer to you.

Now on a more serious note, to the reason why Wisp did not get greenstamped:

You yourself admitted to me during a discussion last Friday that the now-removed line from Cryer ID was the sole reason you had for picking that ID for Wisp. During the same discussion, I pointed out that the whole point of playing a NPC group is to at least remotely resemble the established structure of that faction (sure, you can make a faction and freely do absolutely whatever you want. That's what generic IDs are there for). Reasonably and logically, Cryer can and might try to do things like actively and aggressively going after Cardamine convoys and whatnot, but through a third party such as BHG or a PMC (as the ingame infocards and rumors support), and as I've already pointed out to you, the concept of Wisp perfectly fits such a PMC but it would in no way imply Wisp represents Cryer as a faction in any form, and hence why it would not be a suitable official group representing Cryer NPC faction.

Each NPC faction, based on their individual background and lore has a particular roleplay element as their focus and generally a few other elements on the side, and any official group should do their best reflecting that in their playstyle. Whereas certain factions like house military, BHG, etc are by nature PvP-centric factions, or average corps which are focused on trading/mining, factions like Cryer, Planetform, Orbital, etc each have their own unique RP element to work with and try to portray ingame. Wisp was not a "bad faction" per se, but the choice of ID was in no way a good one, because Cryer is one of the few NPC factions which has an extensive and unique lore of it's own, and the official faction representing it which should be an example of how creatively the faction can be played is not meant to be played as "BHG who also trade when bored".

Here's a two and two for you to put together:
- A particular line was removed from Cryer ID, because it was proven to be abusable in a way Cryer faction was never intended as.
- According to yourself, that particular line was the sole allowance Wisp depended on and to quote your exact words, with that line removed Wisp has "no reason to log".

tl;dr - The team did not approve Wisp to officially represent Cryer faction, because Wisp hardly portrays any of the qualities of a Cryer faction.

So, despite the impressive quantity of work put into Wisp since it applied for official status, it's failed to make up for the quality it should've had to begin with, and this reasoning is something you already knew (and you can't say you didn't know, since I practically just c/p'ed this post from that same skype log), so PMing not one, but four admins the moment you see your official request was not approved, and coming in here to complain about "not getting any answers" less than two hours after sending those PMs only implies you're not interested in knowing the actual reason, and are only interested in being told something, anything, that you can use to argue with for hours until you yourself get bored of arguing.

This pretty much nails it on the head, you cannot come back from this. why dont try to reapply for officialdom with the original rp your group intended but instead go down the avenue of a PMC and request your own ID?

Looking back at the above, I mean if you really did say that there was no point logging if a specific line in the cryer id was removed means you pretty much tombstoned your groups officialdom request.

(04-13-2016, 01:12 PM)nOmnomnOm Wrote: [ -> ]Dear admins.

This is exactly what you reap when you allow for transparency.
You will get people at the end just criticizing how inconsistent' the team is and their expectations are that it should be a machine response. Not a human one.

transparency will just deliver more criticism about every move you do. It is like living in a house made 100% with transparent glass.

I like that admins explain things but it should be done towards the people that matter and not out in public. Whatever you say out here people will be separating appart.

It depends. People can now argue if reasons which admins used were right or no. It is okay to disagree, if done in civilian manner. It is up to everybody to decide whose arguments are more right.
If there won´t be aerelem´s post, all it would happen is usual speculative talk all around forums and skype chats about personal bias, conspiracy and lack of transparency.
Thus I would say the former is still better. Admins are not made of sugar, they can handle that somebody disagree with them and sometimes it can even give them feedback to reconsider stuff.

(04-13-2016, 01:12 PM)nOmnomnOm Wrote: [ -> ]Dear admins.

This is exactly what you reap when you allow for transparency.
You will get people at the end just criticizing how inconsistent' the team is and their expectations are that it should be a machine response. Not a human one.

transparency will just deliver more criticism about every move you do. It is like living in a house made 100% with transparent glass.

I like that admins explain things but it should be done towards the people that matter and not out in public. Whatever you say out here people will be separating appart.

There is some truth to this. Every decision made by the Staff brings forth questions as to why it was made. This is particularly true if there is a perceived inconsistency in their decisions. Inconsistency, at least to a degree, should be expected among the Admins due to the turnover we have had with the group over the life of Disco. Each Admin has his own take on matters, his own personality. It is natural that rulings will vary over the course of time.

Speaking for myself, I do not always agree with every decision that comes out of a vote. I don't agree with every decision made by Admins in the past. If I were completely honest, I have made decisions that I have regretted later on. Regardless, they were decisions that, at the time, were made with the best interests of Disco in mind.

If we have to explain the reasoning behind every decision made, so that 250 people that peruse the forums are thoroughly convinced, we would get nothing done. There are times, for the sake of our own amusement, we will reveal our discussions on matters, however this should not be viewed as the norm. We would like to care for our day to day responsibilities as Admins. We want to stay on top of Violation reports. We want to run fun events for the Community. We get dragged away from these things when we get embroiled in endless arguments with disgruntled people.

Will you agree with every decision? It would be unreasonable to expect so. Every time a decision is made, particularly one that involves a specific player or faction, they have to ask themselves, do I still wish to play this game? If you decide not to, that is your right. If you feel the Staff is incompetent and incapable of making sound decisions, please find another game to play, for the sake of your own happiness.

Bottom line, there are reasons for every decision we make. Normally, we provide a brief explanation as to why a particular decision was made. We realize these decisions may be hard to swallow for some, but they are not made without reason or thought, no matter what an individual might think.

In reference to the last few posts regarding transparency and admin criticism:

The question isn't if the admins care what we say, the question is if in the face of overwhelming community dissatisfaction if the admins will review their decision and possibly overturn or adjust it. Though this isn't a democracy so that's that.

So Garrett freed my Odin from the gates of hell.

Big thank.

However I'm still wondering why my ship in particular was Bastilled with no notice seconds after a staff member died to me.

Thanks.

SnakThree

Lythrilux

SnakThree

Lythrilux

nOmnomnOm

Black Widow

Laura C.

Garrett Jax

Vulkhard Muller

Wesker