OAS Discussion Continued

[Adanu]

It's true, I checked the logs and they both log in regularly (and yet find time to troll ).

I actually owe swift an apology for thinking he never logged in-

So consider that an apology.

And, ronan is correct- it's much easier to head off a bad applicant at the get go then to ban them later. Maybe we did run multiple sessions with folks back in the day but we also waved folks through with only one or two interactions as well. I still believe one live interaction is worth more than a bio- so I'm not sure we're really any worse off.

Fair enough. I apologize for giving them the 'you bitch about numbers, yet never log in' treatment.

[Ronan]

Back in the day the OAS was often more active than our servers. Its easy to throw adventures together for a bunch of level 1-3s who are all crammed into the same few areas, and that was the only server we were allowed "alts" on.

At one point I remember we gave full membership to an entire PW which had shut down. All of the players were very good RPers, and most were very good PGers too. Two I caught blatantly exploiting when they did not think a DM was on. RP and PG are not mutually exclusive, and a written app does nothing to filter out the PGers.

I think its most useful to observe a player when they think they're shielded from the consequences of being an asshat. i.e., how they act towards static content when they don't think anyone is watching them, how they treat PCs who are much less powerful, and tangentially how they treat DMs. Its pretty easy for a player to put on a good face and get through the app process, especially if its written-only.

What if we said player can be accepted by playing on MS for a few weeks with a DM sign-off, though in that time any DM may veto his membership? Or something similar to that.

[Regas]

Prospects can play up to third level with their pc without having to be a member so i dont see that we need to rush to accept someone. My issue is more about not requiring unicorns to be part of the process . Assuming we have good coverage and dms want to deffer judgement im fine with taking our time- i dont want to see anything too onerous required though.

[HEEGZ]

This has turned into quite an interesting discussion. I'm surprised by the reactions of people to what has been stated. This is the way the old OAS worked for many years, in NWN1 and NWN2, and there were no issues with the process that I can recall.

I believe that the observations of a prospective member in game is far better than an application in judging if someone is a fit for ALFA. Also, I don't like the 3 DM idea, as there are not enough DMs active right now to make it feasible.

[Ronan]

This has turned into quite an interesting discussion. I'm surprised by the reactions of people to what has been stated. This is the way the old OAS worked for many years, in NWN1 and NWN2, and there were no issues with the process that I can recall.

The only issue I can recall is ALFAns sometimes flooding out the applicants! Likely due to the OAS being the only place where alts were allowed.

[Swift]

This has turned into quite an interesting discussion. I'm surprised by the reactions of people to what has been stated. This is the way the old OAS worked for many years, in NWN1 and NWN2, and there were no issues with the process that I can recall.

The issue that sticks in my mind is that the old OAS ran as its own server and was 100% under the oversight of the PA whereas now it is a live server and the idea that every MS DM is now, by default, allowed to directly accept members into the community.

We still, to the current day, have had problem DMs on our teams. We have had DMs removed for various reasons only to be given second chances by another HDM, so giving every DM the authority to accept players into the community concerns me. What might have happened if Darkmystic had been given that authority? Or any other DM we have had to boot due to attitude/behaviour issues?

The fact it is much harder to remove a problem player once they are in compared to at the application stage makes this a concern in my mind.

[Adanu]

Moar DMs!

[Veilan]

Fair enough. I apologize for giving them the 'you bitch about numbers, yet never log in' treatment.

Apology accepted, and a tip of the hat - it's rare these days that people can look at reality and then revise their assumptions as gracefully.

Anyway, I'm still unsure where the notion comes from that the idea itself is unacceptable to me. As I said in the other thread:

I agree that observing people in actual gameplay situations is superior

That doesn't mean that we can't improve upon the system, as we did in other areas of the project. I know HEEGZ is well qualified to supervise the effort, but I think everyone would stand to benefit from a clarification of who actually is responsible. Are OAS DMs hired & fired by HEEGZ, or by Castano? What if the two may not agree about one MS DM at some point? Clarity is good, and it pays to develop procedures and structural improvements well before any possible (and hopefully unlikely) crisis emerges.

For instance, two kinds of MS DMs - those the OAS lead is responsible for, and the "normal" ones answering to the HDM - would clarify matters and eliminate overlap that could become problematic. Then again, it would complicate matters in case of a DM that is desired by both for their team.

And while I get the argument of few DMs as is, I still think involving more than one person - maybe a DM and then the OAS lead, or head app reviewer, for a total of two - would make the system more robust and less prone to any possible flukes. I realise that most of the time this will be a rubber stamping, but it gives a clear allocation of responsibility and, simply put, gives better appearances.

Neither of these suggestions invalidate the current system, do they? They're food for thought, and suggestions how the system could possibly be improved. I'd really appreciate if that was discussed on its merits.

And finally, a minor concern, is equal treatment of DMs / servers. This measure stands to make MS more attractive to DMs (extended powers, earlier contact with newcomers) and players (more DM and player activity), de-facto elevating one server above the others in standing. I believe things like this caused quakes in the past, so maybe we could come up with some good-will initiative to spread the love. Either by making all servers participate, in effect dropping our passwords (though that may cause other concerns), or perhaps by rotating the OAS on a reasonable basis - MS for a quarter year, then BG, then TSM, then WHL and so on. I for one am certainly keeping no thought barriers, as my musings are just my own.

Cheers,

[Castano]

you have your logic backwards: OAS DMs are squares, MS DMs are rectangles.

every OAS DM must be approved also as a MS DM

This is done for access reasons.

[Castano]

Veilan: I would be incredibly happy if all the other servers dropped their passwords and implemented the current open until level 3 system to attract new players. That's seriously not going to happen as many in ALFA prefer gaming in a the closed system. But I'm not standing in the way.

As for elevation of one server over the others, any DM can sign up to DM MS (as I stated many times even before Open MS was even proposed (and upthread here too). Some won't because they have PCs there, though most of our players are not DMs anywhere. If there is any minor disparity in the system, it is more than outweighed by having a full server as the OAS.

If you want to look at server disparity look at active DMing and loot awards, that is what drives server popularity.

[Veilan]

Veilan: I would be incredibly happy if all the other servers dropped their passwords and implemented the current open until level 3 system to attract new players. That's seriously not going to happen as many in ALFA prefer gaming in a the closed system. But I'm not standing in the way.

Well, at this point in NWN 2's development, I'm not even opposed to it if we had some decent safeguard system and clear paths of responsibility that require the PA's involvement somewhere.

As for elevation of one server over the others, any DM can sign up to DM MS (as I stated many times even before Open MS was even proposed (and upthread here too).

I got that, but that only validates my argument, doesn't it? MS is more attractive to sign up to as a DM now, and having more DMs makes a server more attractive to players. It, in effect, makes MS special and elevates it above the other servers. That's not a terrible thing if noone gets jealous, but it is something that can cause ill-will and disgruntle other DMs and server teams who do not have their efforts on behalf of ALFA rewarded in an equal fashion. Obviously, the hope is that it doesn't happen, and that some of the love will trickle down, say, by new members getting the urge to travel or MS DMs making an effort to hatch cross-server entertainment. Or, if feasible, rotating the OAS server on some timeline.

If you want to look at server disparity look at active DMing and loot awards, that is what drives server popularity.

Daggerford showed us that it's a main factor, yeah, but I'd argue that DM concentration is at least as powerful. Everyone prefers getting DMed to not getting DMed, and the server with the most active DMs usually starts a virtuous circle of attracting players, and more DMs. This is, by the way, the prime philosophical underpinning about all those debates about "concentration" that we had.

Anyway, I think by and large the effort is a good one, but I hope that suggestions to fine-tune, tweak and think about problems before they arise are appreciated rather than discouraged.

Cheers,

[Swift]

That's seriously not going to happen as many in ALFA prefer gaming in a the closed system.

It is not so much that people prefer to be in a closed system, but the damage that can be caused by a couple of rogue players logging in with no actual interest in joining ALFA (and the DM Team resources required to deal with it) tends to weigh against the knowledge that if you have been accepted into ALFA, you aren't really going to cause problems. Passwording (along with requiring applications) keep such issues to a minimum. The only time in the past I can recall having large issues with players was the Something Awful crew that came in and (most, but not all) just trolling us for the Lulz and that was nobodys fault.

Is it such an issue these days when NWN2 seems to peak out at around 300 users per night total? Perhaps not, but I am not sure the threat is so minimal that more than one server should be opened.

[Adanu]

I'd feel less concerned if we went with a 'DM stamp speeds up' process deal with OAS applicants. No bad blood, and DM approved apps get priority since they've been observed by someone who we should be able to trust.

[Swift]

I'd feel less concerned if we went with a 'DM stamp speeds up' process deal with OAS applicants. No bad blood, and DM approved apps get priority since they've been observed by someone who we should be able to trust.

This.

Player shows they can RP and, seeing as XP for Bios is likely to come it, the app shows that they can craft the basics of a well thought out character bio PLUS it alleviates pretty much all the issues that have been raised. Multiple people see the players app (both written and live) while still being processed in a timely manner. It also takes the weight off the DMs shoulders if the person they recommend turns out to be a less than good addition to the community (I have no doubt White Warlock regretted my admission more than a couple of times during our arguments back in the day )

[Khazar Stoneblood]

This has turned into quite an interesting discussion. I'm surprised by the reactions of people to what has been stated. This is the way the old OAS worked for many years, in NWN1 and NWN2, and there were no issues with the process that I can recall.

The issue that sticks in my mind is that the old OAS ran as its own server and was 100% under the oversight of the PA whereas now it is a live server and the idea that every MS DM is now, by default, allowed to directly accept members into the community.

We still, to the current day, have had problem DMs on our teams. We have had DMs removed for various reasons only to be given second chances by another HDM, so giving every DM the authority to accept players into the community concerns me. What might have happened if Darkmystic had been given that authority? Or any other DM we have had to boot due to attitude/behaviour issues?

The fact it is much harder to remove a problem player once they are in compared to at the application stage makes this a concern in my mind.

As a brand new DM who hasn't even logged in to MS to DM yet, I can say I have no problem if the admins only want certain DM's to have the authority to accept players. Frankly, I don't plan on ever accepting a player. I'll shoot a note to Heegz or Castano or whoever to let them know if I found someone who looks promising, but quite frankly I don't want the responsibility of deciding who comes or goes. I have no desire to be part of the administration, I'm just looking to have some RP fun as both a player and a DM while on ALFA. No skin off my back at all if we just set a list of the authority figures who make the call... we already have someone making the call on applications I assume.

I do have a question though. In the last 6 months or a year, how many written apps have we gotten, and how many of those have been rejected?