Dropping Out of the Race

psycho_leo · Post by **psycho_leo** » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:07 am

Inaubryn wrote:
FanaticusIncendi wrote:
Rick7475 wrote:In 6 months time, givertake a month, when we have a server live, the issues of planetouched, crafting, server selection, etc, will be more prevelant with the new LA elections.
Didn't we already have a vote on planetouched? They lost.
Bad, FI! Bad, FI! Who is this, "They" you speak of?

I assume planetouched. :F

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:40 am

Not to belabour the sub-topic, but I suspect planetouched are an inevitability. They only have to win the vote once to be in forever, since once allowed a planetouched PC gets made and that's the end of that. They're *in.*

Anyway, good on ya Rick, we need servers more than we need admins.

FanaticusIncendi · Post by **FanaticusIncendi** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:12 am

Mulu wrote:Not to belabour the sub-topic, but I suspect planetouched are an inevitability. They only have to win the vote once to be in forever, since once allowed a planetouched PC gets made and that's the end of that. They're *in.*

Yeah you're right. Every other vote doesn't count. We'll just keep having votes until they finally win, THEN call it case closed.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:50 pm

As I said, once a planetouched PC gets rolled up, it becomes vested. You can't just take away their PC. Prior to that, it's an academic excercise. Given the rate at which admin and DM's turn over here, all it takes is a single instance of a majority in favor of planetouched for it to become a permanent win due to vesting.

I personally don't care one way or the other, I'm just calling it as I see it.

psycho_leo · Post by **psycho_leo** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:37 pm

Mulu wrote:Given the rate at which admin and DM's turn over here, all it takes is a single instance of a majority in favor of planetouched for it to become a permanent win due to vesting.

Or we can act like grown ups and accept a decision once it's made instead of looking for loopholes at every turn. But that's just my own personal delusional fantasy.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:50 pm

Not that I consider planetouched to be one of them, but some of the decisions made around here turn out to be pretty loopy. Just look at the server selection process that chased away half our builders, or the ban if you look at us cross-eyed policy Squat tried to put in. Change can be corrective too, and there is nothing grown up about staying a bad course. As long as ALFA is a community project, it will change according to the prevailing whims of the community. Democracy in action.

Veilan · Post by **Veilan** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:30 pm

Omg instigators the lot of you

.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:01 pm

Well, and to soften my post up a bit, at the time those and other decisions were made, I'm sure they made sense. The server selection process was to prevent too many NWN2 servers and the low density it would create (and you have to admit, it worked). The ban you if I feel like it policy was in response to two players whose names I have honestly forgotten who were cheating and gaming the system. But, with the passage of time, those decisions and many others have been shown to be unwise. The flexibility to change course is a good thing. Imagine being saddled with every bad policy decision ALFA has ever had. Even if the planetouched ban isn't technically a "bad" decision, there is no reason to be saddled with it in the future if the prevailing sentiment changes. The difference is that once in, it becomes nearly impossible to change back.

FanaticusIncendi · Post by **FanaticusIncendi** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:04 pm

Planetouched in, planetouched out, I honestly don't give much of a damn. What ticks me off is that the Lead Admin set up a way for us to decide the matter, once and for all, but apparently that's not good enough. The losers cry foul and claim 'bad decision' and somehow that's enough to overturn the vote? This is why we need a formalized process of decision making as discussed on page 3 of Wynna's questions thread.

Next time there's a vote, don't look for me to bother voting until there's a formalized process with clear deadlines for admin ratification. Otherwise, what's the point? Why should I waste my time? Don't answer that because I don't want to hear it. I voted in good faith. Let the decision stand.

Oh and for the record, I voted yes to planetouched.

fluffmonster · Post by **fluffmonster** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:13 pm

I can live with either result irregardless of my personal preference. However, I don't feel that vote was legitimate. I am not alone in thinking that way. I'm sorry if this opinion upsets people, but I won't be browbeaten or berated into thinking otherwise.

FanaticusIncendi · Post by **FanaticusIncendi** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:20 pm

I hear you, Fluff. And if the vote is deemed to be illegitimate by admin, let them say so. And if that's so, let them have one that is legitimate, and let there be a process created and documented, so that this doesn't have to continue to be a repeated theme. No more rezzes for dead horses!

I'm fine with whatever they decide, but I want them to decide, not waffle, and I don't want it to resurface in six months so that we can have yet another 10 page discussion on the matter!

psycho_leo · Post by **psycho_leo** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:22 pm

fluffmonster wrote: However, I don't feel that vote was legitimate.

FanaticusIncendi wrote:This is why we need a formalized process of decision making .

Until we do have such a system in place I'm afraid we're going to be stuck with revisiting every single decision that causes a major division whenever something goes wrong or Admin changes.

BlakOrkz · Post by **BlakOrkz** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:32 pm

I'm an ALFA njub and don't care much for politics - but the fact that some members of a community are classified as "losers" for voting one way- when the vote is purely based on personal preference, would explain to me a lot of the h8 I have read during my few months reading these forums. It seems like everyone feels obligated to show the other guy up instead of saying : "Hey, neat idea. Have you thought of this problem?"

Perhaps a change in perspective for the community would be more helpful than saddling people with angst of being classified "losers", or overly-empowering them because they're "winners". Winners at the expense of the losers, it sounds vaguely like highschool and far from adult to me. And we all know that picked-on highschool losers end up shooting people or playing too many video games.

I am no elf, but I promote peace and love.

Compromise works everywhere outside Iran; we should try it and have group hugs.

JaydeMoon · Post by **JaydeMoon** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:40 pm

I am no elf, but I promote peace and love.

If you're not an elf, then you're a loser!

Only losers promote peace and love!

FanaticusIncendi · Post by **FanaticusIncendi** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:41 pm

Geez! It wasn't an insult. By "losers" I meant planetouched. Planetouched lost the vote, therefore they are the losers. Yes, that was not the most concise assignation since technically, those who supported planetouched lost, planetouched themselves didn't actually lose. I probably could have said "those who did not get a majority of the vote who supported the inclusion of planetouched". But I didn't. Can we move on?