Planetouched DM vote result

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:34 pm

Eh, I was gonna do the opposite! After making this nutmeg soup, of course.

indio · Post by **indio** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:36 pm

Agreed (with what Twiggy said).

I'm personally loving the whole' we're too lazy' argument. It's an argument that somehow seems to overlook that we, the very few who remain, are still the ones doing the work, being told what we should think by those that aren't.

Is that personal?

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:39 pm

Inny - thank you for clairfying your comment regarding me and what you termed the player review process.

Rotku · Post by **Rotku** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:39 pm

I agree with Inwintersshadow completely. If it were up to me and me alone, I would have allowed Planetouched. While I do not personally like them, I feel that players should be given the choice to play them, just as DMs should be given the choice to DM them. However, it was not up to me. The community does not just rest on the shoulders of the Lead Admin, nor the Admin body as a whole, for that matter.

I'm not going to directly address every post out there, as there's many of them, most of the arguments repeated ten times over, but to make a few general comments about why I chose to head down this path, as that seems to be the main solid discussion here.

Planetouched in ALFA has ALWAYS been a decisive issue. With the release of MotB, we perhaps saw the strongest push for their inclusion that I have seen to date. Now, as noted in the charter, it would be the Admins decision whether or not to include them. However, of the three Admin domains that the issue cut into (TA, PA & DMA) one of them sat fairly strongly on each side of the fence, so I decided that we would need to find a way to solve this.

The easiest way out would have been simply to have a straight cut poll of the Admin - a yes or no vote. However, to me, that is a cope out method. Compromise is the key to any situation like this - not a simple blanket method, of which I could probably predict the results without even bothering with the poll.

An alternative to that would have been to seek some compromise within the Admin body, and them come out with a call that would effect everyone. I have my doubts about whether this would have lead us anywhere - I feel it would have lead to countless of weeks argument and further strained tensions within the Admin body, which isn't helpful to anyone at all.

Just to point out, that one of these two ways has been the major way nearly all decisions like this have been made in the past. Show me one other time that people have been polled about such a big game effecting change and I will honestly be quite surprised.

Anyhow, I read through all the arguments for and against planetouched. And really, none of them were stronger than the other. The best argument For was simply choice is good, with the best argument against was the increased work load for DMs.

So, we needed to find a middle point somewhere - some way of deciding that people on both sides could agree with, which did (unfortunately) have to involve a few votes. The method I decided to go with I felt, and still feel, was the best on available. Disagree here, if you will : my answer will be run for Lead Admin - elections are in just over a month.

The method itself provided a lot of means for compromise. The first vote, set down in order to see if the majority of CURRENT DMs would accept Planetouched, would either support or weaken the argument against Planetouched. I made it VERY clear to anyone who read the post before voting that a no vote would mean that they did not wish to see playable planetouched in any shape, size or form; where as a yes vote covers the spectrum from Yes-with restrictions, to Yes-free for all. And for those who didn't read the post before voting, all I can do is roll my eyes.

The second vote was to see if the majority of ALFA wanted planetouched. Obviously if the majority of active ALFA was against planetouched there would be no point in going ahead with it. Once again, there was a range of options, from No-not in any form, to Yes-free for all.

So once we'd established whether or not people would be willing to accept planetouched in some manner, the compromise was to be sought.

Consider it this way : Parliament/Congress/[insert legislative body] (ie. the DMs) first vote to put forward a referendum to the populas (ie. the players). The referendum would have first asked "Do we want change or should we stick to the status quo?" If change was wanted, the next question would have been "what change?"

This form, from my experience, seems to be the generally accepted means of creating a relatively unbiased poll. Of course, I'm sure some psychologist or statistician could point out all the flaws, but I'm reminded of a phrase which I think it was Inaubyrn use to use a lot "it's only a game".

So this is the method I believed was best and was agreed upon by the Admin without any descent. As such, even though the outcome wasn't as I (and many others) had hoped for, it is something that will stand as long as I remain Lead Admin.

Nyarlathotep · Post by **Nyarlathotep** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:45 pm

I hardly think I'm berating anyone, I'm not even debating the NPC/PC rule. The decision was made and I'm not involving myself in it at all. I am however trying to lay out what they actually are as opposed to what people want them to be as that is an issue effecting both NWN and NWN 2 as its a general canon question as opposed to a PC status question.

JaydeMoon · Post by **JaydeMoon** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:47 pm

Well, I felt berated, Nyar. You were totally harsh and it made me sad.

I'm going to go cry now.

<- See? I needed consoling. You're mean.

psycho_leo · Post by **psycho_leo** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:49 pm

Although it's mildly amusing watching people throw fits over this, I have to say it's not very healthy. I certainly had no objection against including planetouched. Nevermind the improper graphical representation from Obsidian. It could be corrected by simply making a good job on your PCs description instead of leaving a big blank field. And once we actually have better head models it would be fixed entirely (and someone is bound to do it someday even if we don't). The only argument against them I found somewhat compelling was Marklo's when he says most of us don't really have a good idea on how to react to planetouched. We could adjust though.

The thing is, we had a discussion in which every single member of this community had a chance to give their imput and to try and convince the others. The Admins then agreed as a whole to Rotku's decision of polling DMs and builders and a decision was reached.

Do I agree with the final decision? No. But I believe the opinion of the others was just as valid as mine, so for me to come here and berate them for voting like they did is to put it lightly, disrespectful.

Also,

The_Phoenyxx wrote: Solution 1 is not a viable solution, for me, in a persistant world.

This already happens in a sense. Never seem a DM come to a player and say " I won't DM you cause your PC is a dorf". But I know DMs that don't like to DM evil PCs or good PCs. They just don't go to public forums and say they hate some sort of PC and won't touch them.

Ideally every DM would play with any PC, but truth is every DM has a preference of their own and will more often than not hover around teh sort of PCs they like.

Inaubryn · Post by **Inaubryn** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:55 pm

indio wrote:Agreed (with what Twiggy said).

I'm personally loving the whole' we're too lazy' argument. It's an argument that somehow seems to overlook that we, the very few who remain, are still the ones doing the work, being told what we should think by those that aren't.

Is that personal?

Somebody else and Jayde made the "you're too lazy" argument. Wasn't me. As far as doin' the work... well there are people doin' some work, and some of us will actually complete what we start and we'll make sure what we build is in working order. But, I'm sure each member of our community that elects to build will do those same things. I mean, wouldn't you?

As to the irony in your sig, Indiot... I merely stated that I should be able to vote. Lead says I shouldn't, and it wouldna' made a difference anyway, so I was like, ok. I left it at that. I mean some people would've taken it to the forums with post after post, rantin', ravin', and cursin' everybody and their grandmamas and lobbyin' for a recall of the Lead Admin, and threatenin' to leave ALFA if it didn't get cleared up.

But, I didn't find somethin' like that necessary and I certainly hope any of our good community members wouldn't ever find it necessary to do anything along those lines. Don't you?

JaydeMoon · Post by **JaydeMoon** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm

Hey...

HAY!!!

I want an ALFA nemesis! Some people have two or three! I don't even get one!

This is totally unfair.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:58 pm

Firstly, the Usergroups are maintained by me, not Lead, so he is not to blame for you not voting.

Secondly, less personal stuff please.

Inaubryn · Post by **Inaubryn** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:00 pm

I was just relayin' what Rot basically told me in a PM. He said that you said it. Nobody is to blame for anything. The usergroups are what they are. Either way I was ok with that. That's really not that big o' deal.

Rotku · Post by **Rotku** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:11 pm

Inaubyrn and indio : I don't want to see any more of this crap directed at each other. I have no idea what has caused it, but it is stopping HERE.

psycho_leo · Post by **psycho_leo** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:15 pm

The_Phoenyxx wrote:Hey...

HAY!!!

I want an ALFA nemesis! Some people have two or three! I don't even get one!

This is totally unfair.

Shadap n00b! Stop stinking up the joint! And.. uh.. go build a server or keep your opinions to yourself.

That good enough for you?

indio · Post by **indio** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:17 pm

This is OT, but can't I have this as a sig?

First of all... I should be able to vote and wasn't able to, so no the matter isn't settled.

It's funny, not offensive (I mean, is it?), and it's the first thing I've seen on the boards that I want as a sig besides Fionn's The Sky is Falling....Your Mileage May Vary (TSIF YMMV). I like seeing it every time I post.

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:31 pm

PL:

Never seem a DM come to a player and say " I won't DM you cause your PC is a dorf".

This is a case of YMMV - for example, I have, in fact, seen a case where a DM says in effect "I/we won't DM you because your PC is a drow." And though I never liked it when it happened, I respect it in the sense that I accept that is the DM(s)' decision and they get to make that decision.