Rule Changes: Main Factions

[Brandon Rhea]

Wait. We have to earn removing a bad rule?

When people are constantly being hostile towards one another on this site, then I think that's reasonable. Because given how people treat one another here lately, preventing people from being even worse towards each other is not a bad call IMO.

Everyone just chill out. This thread has become unnecessarily tense.

 

[GABA]

What i would be interested in are the reasons that convinced the admins not to make that decision of deleting the rule. I know it is asked of us to just accept it, and i'm totally fine with it, but if we could keep things cool and just hear what is the reasoning that led the admins to that...
Now i am fairly new and still not always good with english, i apologize if i somehow sound mean to someone or anything, it is really not my wish. I don't truly care about the rule myself since i only got one character and not planning others. I'm also not experienced enough to get a proper opinion on who's right and who's wrong, but I remain interested in following the debate around it.
So, dear admins, why is it that you do not want to delete the rule ? What is it that we do not see ? (I'll include myself because of reasons.)
​

So we would like to try this first before we do a big change such as what was discussed in the suggestions thread. Something to keep in mind, that once one thing is changed, then there is a domino effect, it opens a lot of what ifs which eventually turns into some major overhauling in the rules. We want to make sure things are gradual and not taking a 180 turn like we saw at the beginning of the timeline when we did have a major overhaul of the rules. I can't tell you how many times I still refer back to the rules because I still don't necessarily know all the changes that we've made.

We also need to keep in mind that this site is still a game and we need to make sure there is still a competitive edge. Star Wars is what it is: a War, and breaking it down to a more relatable level, lets compare it to dodge ball. You have your teams (site wise Jedi vs Sith) and those sides are going to have to work with their designated members in order to overcome the other side. So thinking about it on that level, if you start to let players play for both teams, is that game going to get anywhere? Probably not, it'll probably get stagnate and then members will get bored, and then that's it, there's nothing else.

But Gaba, that's the whole 'us vs them' mindset, Ok, so any competition you enter, any game you enter, its going to be the us vs them mindset. Players who want to do their own stories are going to have the 'us vs them' mindset, its unavoidable, but it doesn't need to be as negative and generalized as members are throwing it around. It is what you guys make it to be. See it as negative, it will be a negative thing, see it as a positive, it can become a positive thing. Just because there's competition, doesn't mean everyone can't work together; going back to the dodge ball example, both teams have to get together to even decide to play the game, they have to work together to keep the rules fair, they have to work together to set up the game, etc, etc. So if it were this us vs them negative mindset as many are portraying it to be, to be honest, this place would be dead and nothing would be happening.

So going back, why did we decide to compromise on the rule, because it creates competition for now. I think we would be up for looking at getting rid of it once we start seeing members working together to create something that pushes story, but that could be months from now. Change in attitudes are progressive, not instantaneous and it takes practice, so once the team starts seeing more members investing into best interests of the factions they are in and the story as a whole, we can probably revisit this.

 

[Outlander]

When people are constantly being hostile towards one another on this site, then I think that's reasonable. Because given how people treat one another here lately, preventing people from being even worse towards each other is not a bad call IMO.

Considering there's an argument to be made that the 1mf rule has been a cause of a lot of unnecessary strife with dividing the membership essentially in half, I disagree.

 

[Elijah Brockway]

#thisthread

 

[Prudence]

#thisthread

like this?

Tension cut.

Now this thread shall be dedicated to posting vaguely related memes.

 

[Braden]

So we would like to try this first before we do a big change such as what was discussed in the suggestions thread. Something to keep in mind, that once one thing is changed, then there is a domino effect, it opens a lot of what ifs which eventually turns into some major overhauling in the rules. We want to make sure things are gradual and not taking a 180 turn like we saw at the beginning of the timeline when we did have a major overhaul of the rules. I can't tell you how many times I still refer back to the rules because I still don't necessarily know all the changes that we've made.

We also need to keep in mind that this site is still a game and we need to make sure there is still a competitive edge. Star Wars is what it is: a War, and breaking it down to a more relatable level, lets compare it to dodge ball. You have your teams (site wise Jedi vs Sith) and those sides are going to have to work with their designated members in order to overcome the other side. So thinking about it on that level, if you start to let players play for both teams, is that game going to get anywhere? Probably not, it'll probably get stagnate and then members will get bored, and then that's it, there's nothing else.

But Gaba, that's the whole 'us vs them' mindset, Ok, so any competition you enter, any game you enter, its going to be the us vs them mindset. Players who want to do their own stories are going to have the 'us vs them' mindset, its unavoidable, but it doesn't need to be as negative and generalized as members are throwing it around. It is what you guys make it to be. See it as negative, it will be a negative thing, see it as a positive, it can become a positive thing. Just because there's competition, doesn't mean everyone can't work together; going back to the dodge ball example, both teams have to get together to even decide to play the game, they have to work together to keep the rules fair, they have to work together to set up the game, etc, etc. So if it were this us vs them negative mindset as many are portraying it to be, to be honest, this place would be dead and nothing would be happening.

So going back, why did we decide to compromise on the rule, because it creates competition for now. I think we would be up for looking at getting rid of it once we start seeing members working together to create something that pushes story, but that could be months from now. Change in attitudes are progressive, not instantaneous and it takes practice, so once the team starts seeing more members investing into best interests of the factions they are in and the story as a whole, we can probably revisit this.

I'm happy with this. But I would comment that putting this on the first post n stead of just a this happening fyi would probably cut out a lot for the hostility. As you have openly said twice in this post that this may only be temporary and that things could change again.

 

[Prudence]

The tl;dr i'm getting from this is

Though like I said in my first post in here, it is positive steps, just a small step.

 

[GABA]

I'm happy with this. But I would comment that putting this on the first post n stead of just a this happening fyi would probably cut out a lot for the hostility. As you have openly said twice in this post that this may only be temporary and that things could change again.

I thought about breaking down everything and putting it in a scavenger hunt then posting it all randomly on the site to find. ;D

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

When people are constantly being hostile towards one another on this site, then I think that's reasonable. Because given how people treat one another here lately, preventing people from being even worse towards each other is not a bad call IMO.

Everyone just chill out. This thread has become unnecessarily tense.

Im confused why hostility is being seen as negative. PvP is the focus of this timeline, is it not? The very nature of asking people to pick sides against one another, and work for the benefit of said side over the benefit of themselves is the oldest and most tested way of breeding "hostility". The very nature of conflict is hostility, and the very nature of two people versus each other is conflict. There is nothing containing competition that doesn't become a conflict, and there is no example of non-hostile competition one can point to in the world, that is simply how human nature is. Once people are told they must pick 1 side, and go against another, they either become hostile to the side against their choice, or they do not participate within said choices at all.

This isn't to argue about pvp being bad, nor is it to argue that there needs to be no conflict. What Im saying is, why are you and others who defend this choice surprised that there is hostility in a us versus them game, when that is the very point of this particular game in the first place?

 

[Elijah Brockway]

I think what he means is in-character hostility versus players openly being at each other's throats like they have been many times throughout this timeline

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I think what he means is in-character hostility versus players openly being at each other's throats like they have been many times throughout this timeline

Correct.

Considering there's an argument to be made that the 1mf rule has been a cause of a lot of unnecessary strife with dividing the membership essentially in half, I disagree.

And I don't agree with that. The nice thing about taking this in steps, though, is that the admins will be able to evaluate that more.

SWRP has always been run a little more structurally and managerially than a lot of other fan sites, so I can see why a lot of you may find this particular way of doing things odd. That's 100% a byproduct of me being Head Admin for a decade. My job is very diverse in terms of the things that I do, but at the core of it I'm a professional community manager at a big entertainment media and community outlet. We're run in a very data-driven way. We want to quantify results.

So what I would want to see, if I was still Head Admin, was something quantifiable. Aka, does changing this rule to the extent that it has change other things on the site, for better or for worse? One way or another, I would then know if we should go back to the stricter rule or get rid of it completely.

Absent that, we just have two competing schools of opinion. Both believe pretty strongly what they're saying, but without being able to observe how this one rule change impacts the site, all that's out there is belief.

So if you're right, we'll know over the coming weeks. The admins can then evaluate and make a decision based on those results.

 

[Dmitri]

Im confused why hostility is being seen as negative. PvP is the focus of this timeline, is it not? The very nature of asking people to pick sides against one another, and work for the benefit of said side over the benefit of themselves is the oldest and most tested way of breeding "hostility". The very nature of conflict is hostility, and the very nature of two people versus each other is conflict. There is nothing containing competition that doesn't become a conflict, and there is no example of non-hostile competition one can point to in the world, that is simply how human nature is. Once people are told they must pick 1 side, and go against another, they either become hostile to the side against their choice, or they do not participate within said choices at all.

This isn't to argue about pvp being bad, nor is it to argue that there needs to be no conflict. What Im saying is, why are you and others who defend this choice surprised that there is hostility in a us versus them game, when that is the very point of this particular game in the first place?

Because being competitive and being a dick are two separate things

 

[Elijah Brockway]

Because being competitive and being a dick are two separate things

weiss would know

he's really good at the latter

(<3 u fam)

 

[Clayton]

Considering there's an argument to be made that the 1mf rule has been a cause of a lot of unnecessary strife with dividing the membership essentially in half, I disagree.

Member behavior is one thing, and that's a discussion in and of itself. But I think in this instance it can be said that trash-talking because you're on the opposite team does not equal trash talking because I hate your guts on a personal level. Last timeline I had the notion that my Sith should hunt down and exterminate the entire Renelo family line, just remove it from history entirely. This wasn't because I didn't like the players, but because it was an amusing, evil thing that my dude would reasonably do. I actually had a blast writing the thread that kicked it off, and enjoyed writing with the "opposing" player.

Like I said, the issues with the site's social behavior are many, and while competitive trash-talking might contribute, it isn't the root cause of the problem. Keep in mind, the site demographics seem to be trending younger, and it may be difficult at first for some of the younger members to interact normally online. I missed so many social clues in person when I was in my early teens, I can't imagine what I missed online where tone is even harder. So I wouldn't label the 1mf rule as the cause of strife, more accurately it's an effect that's easy to see/latch onto.

 

[The Captain]

Wait, doesn't this just mean Jedi and Republic players can make Jedi and Republic characters at the same time? Kind of leaves the Sith out in the cold...

 

[Elijah Brockway]

welcome to two pages ago

 

[The Captain]

welcome to two pages ago

Oh good, other people noticed. Maybe there's a way to include them? Like you can't have a Republic character with an SBZ member, but you can have a Jedi? Or you can have a Republic character and a Sith but not a Jedi or SBZ?

 

[Gaiaverse]

When people are constantly being hostile towards one another on this site, then I think that's reasonable. Because given how people treat one another here lately, preventing people from being even worse towards each other is not a bad call IMO.

Everyone just chill out. This thread has become unnecessarily tense.

How does this prevent people from being hostile to one another?

 

[Dmitri]

weiss would know

he's really good at the latter

(<3 u fam)

Gaba's the hero here. I voted merging factions. All hail the Mango Jedi Republic, led by @Sreeya

 

[Elijah Brockway]

#TheReturnofAndraste