(09-05-2016, 09:48 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 09:30 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ]...
Personal feelings are the seeds of bias and thus of abuse. They should have no place in the decision making processes of anything staff related.
...
So, do you think that giving the smallest number of people possible the most amount of power, it will decrease the possibility of bias and abuse? In the opinion of many smarter people, that is not the case.
I have just one word for you - Igiss.
First-admins are human...or atleast i like to think so since my current job is as an administrator.You cant run away from personal feelings,but you can always switch out with another member of the admin team who does not have said feelings,or atleast that was the procedure i use to follow.
Second-we do not want a pvp fixated person in the admin team,we want someone who can be objective about both aspects of the game and be able to balance them out
Third
(09-05-2016, 09:52 PM)Riess Wrote: [ -> ]> People aren't popular members of the community when they fail to contribute to the server or improve people's experience in game.
Hanibal ?
First, I do not know Igiss, so I cannot judge the weight of your one word.
Second, because of anecdotal evidence one some failures (I'm assuming Igiss was a bad experience), it does not mean the that system itself is flawed or broken. No system is flawless, but by having the best administrative contingencies, we can mitigate the effects of a bad decision. The current system, in some of our opinions is highly flawed, with many "failed" admins. Since my joining (I see your anecdotal evidence, raise you mine), I've pretty much only seen complaints of the admin team. That, and the rebuking of those who do not want to maintain the status quo,.
EDIT: So, apologies to
(09-05-2016, 10:21 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ]First, I do not know Igiss, so I cannot judge the weight of your one word.
Second, because of anecdotal evidence one failure (I'm assuming Igiss was a bad experience), it does not mean the that system itself is flawed or broken. No system is flawless, but by having the best administrative contingencies, we can mitigate the effects of a bad decision. The current system, in some of our opinions is highly flawed, with many "failed" admins. Since my joining (I see your anecdotal evidence, raise you mine), I've pretty much only seen complaints of the admin team. That, and the rebuking of those who do not want to maintain the status quo,.
No, you misunderstood it.
Igiss was the founder of this community, and the point I'm trying to make revolves around the idea of a lead figure. It's not just Igiss, there have been other instances where this approach has worked quite well, you just don't see it, most people don't, until that figure vanishes of course.
(09-05-2016, 10:27 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:21 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ]First, I do not know Igiss, so I cannot judge the weight of your one word.
Second, because of anecdotal evidence one failure (I'm assuming Igiss was a bad experience), it does not mean the that system itself is flawed or broken. No system is flawless, but by having the best administrative contingencies, we can mitigate the effects of a bad decision. The current system, in some of our opinions is highly flawed, with many "failed" admins. Since my joining (I see your anecdotal evidence, raise you mine), I've pretty much only seen complaints of the admin team. That, and the rebuking of those who do not want to maintain the status quo,.
Igiss was the founder of this community, and the point I'm trying to make revolves around the idea of a lead figure. It's not just Igiss, there have been other instances where this approach has worked quite well, you just don't see it, most people don't, until that figure vanishes of course.
Ah, yes, you're right, sometimes a autocracy/dictatorship works very well. However, you have to admit that democracies (the full range, not just all the people have a voice) generally work better.
(09-05-2016, 10:32 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:27 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:21 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ]First, I do not know Igiss, so I cannot judge the weight of your one word.
Second, because of anecdotal evidence one failure (I'm assuming Igiss was a bad experience), it does not mean the that system itself is flawed or broken. No system is flawless, but by having the best administrative contingencies, we can mitigate the effects of a bad decision. The current system, in some of our opinions is highly flawed, with many "failed" admins. Since my joining (I see your anecdotal evidence, raise you mine), I've pretty much only seen complaints of the admin team. That, and the rebuking of those who do not want to maintain the status quo,.
Igiss was the founder of this community, and the point I'm trying to make revolves around the idea of a lead figure. It's not just Igiss, there have been other instances where this approach has worked quite well, you just don't see it, most people don't, until that figure vanishes of course.
Ah, yes, you're right, sometimes a autocracy/dictatorship works very well. However, you have to admit that democracies (the full range, not just all the people have a voice) generally work better.
Semi-democratic approaches somewhat work in very large communities, pure democracy doesn't. But in small communities such as this one, I don't think either of both would do any good.
Disco has a limited player base, everyone knows everyone and thus bias will be an inevitable part of any vote process that has a major impact on the community.
(09-05-2016, 10:39 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:32 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:27 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:21 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ]First, I do not know Igiss, so I cannot judge the weight of your one word.
Second, because of anecdotal evidence one failure (I'm assuming Igiss was a bad experience), it does not mean the that system itself is flawed or broken. No system is flawless, but by having the best administrative contingencies, we can mitigate the effects of a bad decision. The current system, in some of our opinions is highly flawed, with many "failed" admins. Since my joining (I see your anecdotal evidence, raise you mine), I've pretty much only seen complaints of the admin team. That, and the rebuking of those who do not want to maintain the status quo,.
No, you misunderstood it.
Igiss was the founder of this community, and the point I'm trying to make revolves around the idea of a lead figure. It's not just Igiss, there have been other instances where this approach has worked quite well, you just don't see it, most people don't, until that figure vanishes of course.
Ah, yes, you're right, sometimes a autocracy/dictatorship works very well. However, you have to admit that democracies (the full range, not just all the people have a voice) generally work better.
Disco has a limited player base, everyone knows everyone and thus bias will be an inevitable part of any vote process that has a major impact on the community.
But the bias already exist with those that have all the power. We already know that the Dev / Admins do not have the same ideas & outlook. This kind of differences could be enough to reinvigorate the community.
(09-05-2016, 10:43 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:39 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:32 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:27 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:21 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ]First, I do not know Igiss, so I cannot judge the weight of your one word.
Second, because of anecdotal evidence one failure (I'm assuming Igiss was a bad experience), it does not mean the that system itself is flawed or broken. No system is flawless, but by having the best administrative contingencies, we can mitigate the effects of a bad decision. The current system, in some of our opinions is highly flawed, with many "failed" admins. Since my joining (I see your anecdotal evidence, raise you mine), I've pretty much only seen complaints of the admin team. That, and the rebuking of those who do not want to maintain the status quo,.
No, you misunderstood it.
Igiss was the founder of this community, and the point I'm trying to make revolves around the idea of a lead figure. It's not just Igiss, there have been other instances where this approach has worked quite well, you just don't see it, most people don't, until that figure vanishes of course.
Ah, yes, you're right, sometimes a autocracy/dictatorship works very well. However, you have to admit that democracies (the full range, not just all the people have a voice) generally work better.
Disco has a limited player base, everyone knows everyone and thus bias will be an inevitable part of any vote process that has a major impact on the community.
But the bias already exist with those that have all the power. We already know that the Dev / Admins do not have the same ideas & outlook. This kind of differences could be enough to reinvigorate the community.
You can't know that. You can only speculate based on what you see on forum.
I'm saying that, because I'm not talking about differences in ideas, views or approaches, that's not bias, it's simply individuality.
Bias is staff decisions/opinions being influenced by factors not dictated by rules or common sense, and tend to benefit a third party. Or in other words - decisions/opinions that lack neutrality and are based on feelings.
(09-05-2016, 10:50 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:43 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:39 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:32 PM)Sorrontis Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 10:27 PM)Tarator Wrote: [ -> ]No, you misunderstood it.
Igiss was the founder of this community, and the point I'm trying to make revolves around the idea of a lead figure. It's not just Igiss, there have been other instances where this approach has worked quite well, you just don't see it, most people don't, until that figure vanishes of course.
Ah, yes, you're right, sometimes a autocracy/dictatorship works very well. However, you have to admit that democracies (the full range, not just all the people have a voice) generally work better.
Disco has a limited player base, everyone knows everyone and thus bias will be an inevitable part of any vote process that has a major impact on the community.
But the bias already exist with those that have all the power. We already know that the Dev / Admins do not have the same ideas & outlook. This kind of differences could be enough to reinvigorate the community.
You can't know that. You can only speculate based on what you see on forum.
I'm saying that, because I'm not talking about differences in ideas, views or approaches, that's not bias, it's simply individuality.
Bias is staff decisions/opinions being influenced by factors not dictated by rules or common sense, and tend to benefit a third party. Or in other words - decisions/opinions that lack neutrality and are based on feelings.
Point taken. I'll still champion a partial-democracy, but if the admins could clearly demonstrate impartiality, I would quiet down, as many others (I would think).
It's certainly possible, but it takes the right people.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Spoiler