Hmm... I wonder where did you got that wonderful [but incorrect, however] insight on how the GM team works... The thing is that each GM can talk to Talad directly about certain urgent issues and all the other problems are discussed in meetings.
However, I don't see your point, you are suggesting to have a person who talks to the person that should talk to Talad when the person isn't talking to Talad in person? I'm really confused... How will this Liaison position help in fixing problems? And who is this Liaison "agent"? A GM? A player?
Your responce shows why this position is needed.Your answer is outstandingly clear. What is my "responce" showing? I was just asking some questions about what this Liaison possition means and who and how should be the person in this position since the post isn't very clear. And, of course I was pointing out that this whole thread started from a false assumption on how the GM team works.
| ______<_______ | | | Talad------Liason | ° | ° ° | | ° | ° ° | | ° | °° | |° | Rome | GM's | ° ° | | ° | ° ° | | ° | ° ° | | ° | ° °| | Master GM--Players | | |_____>_______| | -As you can see all the roads are leading to rome, well, most of them ;P -Gm's are free to speak to talad without speaking to GM master, it is as they wish -The GMs has direct impact what players may do and what they cant, they are like inquisition (http://www.thenoobcomic.com/daily/strip228.html), and only few are brave enoug to use their fingers and strike back!... -It is where Liasons come into the death game of survival. Players, through Liasons may hit back the GMs and police them the same ways! Viva revolution! welll, something like that ;P |
Want to invent positions and to create beurocracy? I bet that will fix problems alot faster ;)Micromanagement is worse, especially given how busy Talad's life is.
Hmm... I wonder where did you got that wonderful [but incorrect, however] insight on how the GM team works... The thing is that each GM can talk to Talad directly about certain urgent issues and all the other problems are discussed in meetings.The liaison can approach Talad if talking to the GM team leader doesn't fix things.
However, I don't see your point, you are suggesting to have a person who talks to the person that should talk to Talad when the person isn't talking to Talad in person? I'm really confused... How will this Liaison position help in fixing problems? And who is this Liaison "agent"? A GM? A player?
Actually, I'm just trying to understand what are these "problems" we are talking about.This is not about merely solving current problems. This is about solving problems in the future.
And, btw, trust me, I doubt that if a player has a problem and submits that problem trough a petition or talks directly to a GM, that problem will go ignored.It's nice that you doubt that, but from personal experience, problems can be ignored for months if not indefinately.
With the Liaison position, the situation will be like: I have a problem, I go to a GM, the GM ignores me [not likely, again], I go to the Liaison guy, the Liaison goes to Talad.No, you would go to the GM team leader or to Talad. The liaison would exist to monitor GM activities from the inside.
Besides, starting from the presumption stated in the opening of the thread, that the GM team leader, and the whole GM team are not impartial, what will be the guarantee that this Liaison person will be absolutely impartial?The liaison would not be a GM, not be subordinate to the GM leader, not be a peer among the GMs, not do any work for the GM team, and would not be responsible for unsolved problems. The GM team leader does not take orders from the liaison. Therefore the liaison would have no vested interest in the GM team being problem free, and therefore the liaison would have no vested interest in hiding problems.
And who then monitors the Liaison? a GM Liaison Leader?And who currently monitors the GM team leader? The difference is that the liaison has nothing to gain by hiding or inventing problems.
No worries, all's going well. No need to make a fuss about it.If you say so.
/me puts a pointless stamp on this thread.
Sorry, i don't play enough to have problems with GMs, but fact is the monarchy works well, as long everything is right ;P And if some GMs can't be honest (we are all humans) the player has a problem. and i gues its why the Liasons idea, so that they won't have personal reasons to ignore the harmed player... But, are GMs really that dishonest to not trust them? I really don't know and never experienced, but i didn't have much chances too"As long as everything is right" is the key. Problems can and do happen.
I think the problem is not so much with the GMs but with players who think they are always right and do not realize the being right is not always enough. They may very well be right in any given instance but if they are being right about something that should be different than it is, for example a policy such as GMs only teleporting players to the DR, but isn't officially the way that they want it, they want the ability to force their vision on the game hierarchy.I'm glad you posted this. Because in reality, the rules say that GMs are allowed to teleport players to places other than the Death Realm if the player is the victim of a verifiable bug. What you just said is a good example in support of my suggestion.
Think of zanzibar this way...every time he learns a new word, he makes a post of it.Aren't you banned yet? :lol:
Word of the day is *drumroll*...liaison!
If we have a problem as a gm it does not take more then a day to contact talad or another gm for advice adding another person would just make it slower. We do not need anyone else between the gms and talad and we do not need the players going to another person if they have a problem with the gms to get it fixed just go to another gm and explain the problem. We have a system in place and it works for us if we need another system we will make suggestions that work for us. Again we do not want to complicate the situation anymore then it is already.
Ok, I understand what the function of this liaison person is now. But, I don't see whow this position differs from the position of GM team leader.The GM team leader is in a conflict of interests because he or she is self-reporting. The liaison position would ballance this fact. The liaison has very different duties than the GM team leader; they are not at all the same position.
Besides this whole ideea starts from the assumption that the GM leader will be somehow sunbjective and will take the side of the GMs. But then again, who guarantees that the Liaison won't be subjective and take a side or another? We are people after all, and people _are_ subjective.It's not a matter of objectivity. It's a matter of problems inherent to self-reporting.
Some players just tend to have conflicts with any authoritiesPersonal attacks are unwarranted and irrelevant.
Ok, I understand what the function of this liaison person is now. But, I don't see whow this position differs from the position of GM team leader.The GM team leader is in a conflict of interests because he or she is self-reporting. The liaison position would ballance this fact. The liaison has very different duties than the GM team leader; they are not at all the same position.
The gm leader is trusted more then any gm on the team why would they have a problem bring issues to others or having issues brought to them? i dont see a problem or need for anyone else in the system. The leader would not know they need to report themselves another gm might hear of a problem bring it to the team or go to talad.
Personal attacks are unwarranted and irrelevant.
As the Planeshift project grows, more and more people will be involved in things such as developement, moderation, and the game masters. Talad simply cannot do everything by himself and it's unfair to ask him to monitor and take care of everything. Micromanagement will become only more problematic as time goes on.
I'm sorry if you take everything as a personal attack.*laughs out loud* You do realize that saying I take everything as a personal attack is, itself, a personal attack? :lol:
Right now the PS team, both devs and GMs, is small and also the player base is small. Any problems should be possible to solve by just talking to GMs or devs. If that doesn't help, how would a liaison help?Would you agree that Talad has a busy life?
When the project gets larger, things may change and there might be a reason to have somebody who is acting as a liaison between players and GMs (or devs).If a liaison position would be useful in the future, then it might be good to establish the position now. And even though the community here is small, the GM team still has its problems (from time to time).
If a liaison position would be useful in the future, then it might be good to establish the position now. And even though the community here is small, the GM team still has its problems (from time to time).
Well, I have my own little company. I have just me and one more person working for it, but it may grow in the future. Should I hire a lawyer and a financial manager now, perhaps even a board of directors just because the company may grow and I will need them in the future? Sure, there have been times when I wished I had a lawyer and a financial manager, especially when I got some cryptic requirements from the tax office that only they could understand, but I have managed without them so far :D
You hire new people and introduce new positions when there is a need for them, not when you think that you may need them in the future. Unless you have a clear picture that you will have 100.000 players and 1.000 GMs in the next one year and you have to plan now how to manage them. Otherwise you proceed step by step and do whatever is needed now.
COMPLAINTS AGAINST GMS[/b]
If you have any complaints about GMs, whether you feel they are abusing their powers or treating someone unfairly, please read the following.
You can join the #PlaneShift channel on IRC and speak directly with a developer or administrator. This requires an IRC client; if you do not have one, download mIRC. Use IRC to connect to the following:
server: chat.freenode.com
channel: #planeshift
Speak with either Vengeance (Venge), Acraig or Talad. Venge primarily, if you can find him - they are the only three people who have access to do anything about GMs.
When speaking with Vengeance or any other dev about the problem, give as much information as possible, and provide chat logs that can back up your claims. Chat logs are located in your PS folder's "logs" directory.
If a developer is there but doesn't respond, please don't bug them. In this case you can either wait until they are not idle (they're all extremely busy people!) or email Acraig and he will get back to you about the problem. Acraig's email address is acraig at planeshift.it
YOU MAY NOT POST THREADS OR REPLIES ON THIS FORUM OR DISCUSS PUBLICALLY IN IRC WITH THE INTENT OF ARGUING OVER GM DECISIONS, RULES, OR ACTIVITIES. THESE ARE NOT VALID TOPICS OF DISCUSSION FOR ANY PUBLIC AREA. YOU MUST DISCUSS THE MATTER IN PRIVATE WITH THE GM(s) INVOLVED AND/OR GAME ADMINS ONLY. MODERATORS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DELETE OR EDIT ANY POST OR THREAD DISCUSSING GM ISSUES.
Just for the record most of the gms on the team today were not on the team in 2005 there was a reorginazation of the team and many that did stay after that time have since left or changed what they do for the team. Please do not judge us by something someone that might not be on the team did in the pastYes, this is true. However, there have been problems since Jan. 2006.
I am not joining this pointless discussion...Which disussion are you calling pointless? Krann Omins' was but one post. The rest of the thread is about the dangers of self-reporting.
Agreed. If you have a specific issue with the gm team, follow those rules above. The rest of this thread is fine. I'll just delete any more posts like Kranns from this point forward.
How can someone properly and convincingly defend the creation of a new position to keep check of the GM Team if no one is allowed to present evidences of abuses to defend that such thing is needed for its betterment?
I know that GMs watch out for each other. Not like we're all watching to see when another screws up, but believe it or not, some of us believe we have a sort of duty to help out the players and only the players. If someone is thought to be making mistakes, or purposely abusing something, then they are talked to.
I propose we suspend debate on this private members bill and send it off to the rules and procedures committee who should report their findings to the ways and means committee to make recommendations to the chairman of the committee of the whole before it is brought back for second reading and to be put to a vote. All in favor say "Aye".
Which all is to say how much bureaucracy do we really need? I have never had a problem with a GM, perhaps because I rarely do anything that would attract their notice, rarely take offense from and generally do not raise a stink all over the game when things do not go my way. I do sometimes get a little worked up on these forums but that is a different topic.
I propose we suspend debate on this private members bill and send it off to the rules and procedures committee who should report their findings to the ways and means committee to make recommendations to the chairman of the committee of the whole before it is brought back for second reading and to be put to a vote. All in favor say "Aye".
Which all is to say how much bureaucracy do we really need? I have never had a problem with a GM, perhaps because I rarely do anything that would attract their notice, rarely take offense from and generally do not raise a stink all over the game when things do not go my way. I do sometimes get a little worked up on these forums but that is a different topic.
Technically, you would have to make the motion that we end discussion on the current agenda item, and then yes move it forward in the process as you describe. Before it can be put by a vote though, which would be done by the speaker not by yourself, you would have to have the motion seconded.
Your post has me laughing though, I appreciate the humour.:) I'll only say that Robert's rules is a way of running meetings - but it itself is not bureaucracy. Fascism, perhaps, but not bureaucracy.