A Land Far Away

Self Nomination:

I'm primarily a DM now, not a player. I've been providing a significant amount of DM time to players on BG and I've seen the server begin to attract more players, new and old. I've also been a very active content builder on BG recently.

I want ALFA to grow, rather than to decline, and I believe that I can showcase the BG server as an example of how to grow ALFA's population. I believe that a philosophy of growth and development across all servers will keep veteran ALFAns active and can potentially bring retired ALFAns back.

With so much of the LA responsibility being public relations, we need to actually have content to showcase. We have a wealth of such content, but not all of it gets the credit or attention that it deserves; the Tech team is working constantly on great ACR improvements that benefit all ALFA servers, and I believe that the infrastructure we have here is extraordinary. The sheer amount of customization within ALFA is staggering, and that will lend itself well to ALFA publicity. Furthermore, some servers have more active development than others.

I believe that I can use that to highlight ALFA in general and I believe that I can encourage the HDMs and DMA to take a proactive role in content development to further showcase ALFA.

I believe that the role of LA should require very little administrative action in terms of discipline or exercise of the LA veto, as I have full faith in the PA, DMA, and IA positions to handle administrative actions impartially and with tact. (TA and HDM are related as well.) I believe that the administrative powers of the LA position are something best used only when absolutely necessary, and with the utmost in objectivity and impartiality. My intent in running for the position is almost entirely focused on growing and retaining ALFA population through publicity and through diligent oversight of elections.

I am committed to faithfully following and enforcing ALFA's Pillars, Charter, and Rulebook.

shad0wfax wrote:I am committed to faithfully following and enforcing ALFA's Pillars, Charter, and Rulebook.

Are you familiar with the expression "Evolve or die"?

Are you open to changing the pillars, charter, or rulebook to allow ALFA to be a more dynamic animal, and thusly... being able to better respond in a pragmatic and realistic manner to current challenges to ALFA's longer term future?

How many squat jumps can you do in a row?

What sort of PR activities do you have in mind?

Rumple C wrote:

shad0wfax wrote:I am committed to faithfully following and enforcing ALFA's Pillars, Charter, and Rulebook.

Are you familiar with the expression "Evolve or die"?

Are you open to changing the pillars, charter, or rulebook to allow ALFA to be a more dynamic animal, and thusly... being able to better respond in a pragmatic and realistic manner to current challenges to ALFA's longer term future?

Spoiler:

How many squat jumps can you do in a row?

I am entirely open to change. However, all change must be done in accordance with the existing framework of the rules that we have. If the proper procedures are followed to change our ruleset, charter, or pillars, then I will support those change, so long as they are for the good of ALFA.

HEEGZ wrote:What sort of PR activities do you have in mind?

• Search Engine Optimization
• Social Media and Networking
• Regular Home Page Updates
• Home Page Overhaul (more IA than LA)
• Rekindling Relationships with Veteran ALFA 1 and ALFA 2 Players

I intend to do regular updates to the main page of the website. As of this morning, 2014-05-01 the last update to our front page was sometime in 2012; that makes us look stagnant as a community. That is the first place I would start. (FoamBats4All did update the page today, but prior to that, the lat update was in 2012.

I also intend to work with the current IA to implement changes to our website that will be more attractive and also increase our traffic when people search for "Neverwinter Nights 2 server" in google, bing, and the various search engines. There are ways to increase search results without violating google's ToS. I'd like to work with IA on having our website show up as one of the first results when people search for a NWN2 server.

There's also a chance that Facebook would help our exposure, as social media does tend to be a multiplicative animal. Reddit is a possibility as well, but I am hesitant to do anything with Twitter, unless we have a player-base that is highly connected to twitter and wants updates on rumor threads. It might work.

Lastly, there are folks here that know the old ALFA NWN1 crew and have contact with the ALFA NWN2 players who have faded away. I'm willing to try e-mailing them or delegate another PR rep to contact old players and bring back our veteran core from days of yore.

shad0wfax wrote:I am entirely open to change. However, all change must be done in accordance with the existing framework of the rules that we have. If the proper procedures are followed to change our ruleset, charter, or pillars, then I will support those change, so long as they are for the good of ALFA.

Who should decide what is good for ALFA? It is almost impossible to get changes pushed through when it is done by "consensus". Suggestions tend to be argued over until people lose interest. Do you believe in a strong authoritarian style of leadership? Making tough decisions for the good of the ignorant plebs.

Who is your favorite ex-LA, and why?

How many squat jumps can you do in a row? - Please answer this question, otherwise I will start to think you have something to hide.

Rumple C wrote:

Spoiler:

shad0wfax wrote:I am entirely open to change. However, all change must be done in accordance with the existing framework of the rules that we have. If the proper procedures are followed to change our ruleset, charter, or pillars, then I will support those change, so long as they are for the good of ALFA.

Who should decide what is good for ALFA? It is almost impossible to get changes pushed through when it is done by "consensus". Suggestions tend to be argued over until people lose interest. Do you believe in a strong authoritarian style of leadership? Making tough decisions for the good of the ignorant plebs.

I will try to answer these questions within the scope of the LA's classification.

LA powers that are not directly relevant to your first question are here: I believe that, apart from public relations and the elections, that the LA does not exercise many of the LA powers often, and that a good LA will be impartial and use moderation when exercising any of these powers. I am not an authoritarian style leader, but rather, someone who listens to input objectively and comes to a decision after careful consideration of all available facts.

The role of the LA that directly relates to your first question is here:

Only the Lead Administrator may make formal proposals for amendments and revisions to the ALFA Charter. Proposals from the Lead Administrator must be approved by at least three Admin, and at least ? of a combined vote of the HDMs, vote-eligible Administrator Staff as defined in section 3.5, and DMs casting votes, for the matter to be implemented.

I'm not sure what the "?" represented, it's probably a 2/3 majority that didn't copy and paste correctly from the drupal page to the wiki. I'll get IA to look into that.

By definition, this group of the administrative, staff, and DM team are the ones who should decide whether a proposed amendment or revision to the Charter or Pillars is for the good of ALFA.

I do not take changes to the Charter lightly, nor is the Charter structured in such a way to make rapid changes to the Charter without deliberation by the staff. That said, I believe that requests for amendments and revisions to the charter can come from anyone who is a part of ALFA.

Unanimous consensus is not the reality; by definition, the procedure outlined above is the procedure that must be used to determine what is a good proposal for change and what is not. Arguing is not productive for anyone, but meaningful debate can be constructive.

I am not opposed to change, nor am I an authoritarian leader.

Rumple C wrote:Who is your favorite ex-LA, and why?

My favorite former LA is Veilan, simply because he was the LA who was active when I was most active as a player. Although you (Rumple C), SSM, and CD have all been LA since then, I have not had much interaction with you while you were (or are, in CD's case) LAs. What interaction I have had, has always been positive with SSM and CD. Your jump-squat questions have me concerned, however, and I wonder if perhaps I have found myself at a dangerous crossing.

Humor aside, the players are largely distant from direct dealing with the LA in an official capacity, thus my decision is simply one of coincidence, as I had more time on ALFA while Veilan was LA than any other LA.

Rumple C wrote:How many squat jumps can you do in a row? - Please answer this question, otherwise I will start to think you have something to hide.

Ah, and now I must cross the Rubicon. I've never tried this before. Lactic acid burn kicked in at about 30. Clearly, I'm highly qualified to run ALFA elections from my tablet while jump-squatting.

Would you end your term early if you felt you could no longer give the role your full attention?

Rumple C wrote:Would you end your term early if you felt you could no longer give the role your full attention?

Absolutely.

Hypothetical situations:

1) The DMA and TA disagree on an what scripted content should remain or be put into ACR. How do you settle this dispute? Who is in charge?

2) The IA and TA disagree what content can be included in hak files. How do you settle this dispute? Who is in charge?

3) The DMA does not punish/moderate an inappropriately behaving DM (alternatively: PA does not do the same with a player). Do you intervene and oversee, or do you stand by the relevant admin's decision?

4) The PA implements X characters per player, and you believe that X is too big. How do you handle this? Feel free to substitute an issue you personally care about.

FoamBats4All wrote:Hypothetical situations:

1) The DMA and TA disagree on an what scripted content should remain or be put into ACR. How do you settle this dispute? Who is in charge?

The ALFA Charter 2.1.2 cross domain issue rule applies here. The TA has control over the ACR domain and is also usually the one who is actually doing the coding and scripting. The DMA has control over server compliance and specific policies. In this case, both do overlap on the domain of scripted content being brought into ACR and the LA absolutely does have a right and duty to step in and resolve domain conflict.

As an engineer, I deal with this sort of problem somewhat frequently. What the architect wants may look beautiful, but may be technically difficult or exceedingly costly. What the engineer wants may be efficient, but not as visually appealing.

I would approach this diplomatically on ALFA just as I do on the job. The DMA may not always realize what can and can not work with NWN2 scripting; what the DMA wants may not be possible within the limitations of the NWN2 framework. In this case, I would defer to the TA, and ask for an explanation on what is possible, within the ACR framework, and how best to address the DMAs desires in a manner that is both feasible and reasonable.

Conversely, the TA may wish to implement something that the DMA has determined to be inappropriate for the server. Handling the situation with tact and diplomacy is just as important, as everyone is volunteering their time here, but if the TA is implementing something that is inappropriate for Compliance, then I would defer to the DMA, and ensure that the TA's implementation is altered to comply with DMA guidelines.

In both cases, I view the role of the LA here as a moderator, someone who can ensure that a mutually satisfactory compromise between technical content details and overall server compliance can be agreed upon. I would give both the TA and DMA a deadline to come to a compromise on the issue, and be more than happy to moderate between the two in an objective and impartial manner, should the need arise.

This is a cross-domain issue, and if it becomes a frequent problem, then a proposed change to the Charter may be needed to more clearly define the domains.

FoamBats4All wrote:2) The IA and TA disagree what content can be included in hak files. How do you settle this dispute? Who is in charge?

ALFA Charter 2.1.1 applies here and is clear. The IA has no authority over hak files.

If something in the haks is questionable or undesirable for view on the website in the form of a screenshot, for example, then the IA can certainly enforce a rule stating that screenshots of such hak content are not appropriate on the website (or in IRC, the FTP, or the vaults), but the IA can not influence what goes into the haks themselves.

This is not a cross-domain issue.

FoamBats4All wrote:3) The DMA does not punish/moderate an inappropriately behaving DM (alternatively: PA does not do the same with a player). Do you intervene and oversee, or do you stand by the relevant admin's decision?

This question relates to ALFA Charter 4.1.4 and the right to appeal a grievance. If there is no appeal, then the LA can not step in. If there is an appeal, then each case would have to be weighed on its own merits. I will do my best to answer in an hypothetical manner.

The DMA (PA) was elected for a reason, and the DMA (PA) has the trust of the electorate. I believe that the LA must respect the office of the DMA (PA) and allow the DMA (PA) as much sovereignty over the DMA (PA) domain as possible. In the absence of an appeal, the DMA (PA) decision would stand, most of the time.

However, if the case were one where the DMA (PA) could not justify the leniency and the offense by the DM (player) listed in the grievance was particularly egregious, or there was a clear case of a conflict of interests or direct involvement of the DMA (PA) in the issue, or some other form of ethical or moral conflict, of a particularly significant nature, then the LA can, and should act, even absent an appeal by the aggrieved party.

That action taken by the LA at that point is covered in the ALFA Charter 3.4, recall. If a DMA (PA) were clearly corrupt or derelict in their duties, even absent an appeal on a decision, the LA can, and should, file a motion to recall said DMA (PA). Clearly, such an action is a last resort, and to be used only in a clear and obvious case of serious conflict, and not to be taken lightly.

I wish that I could give you more specifics than these broad hypothetical answers, but I am a firm believer supporting the chain of command and backing all administrators within their domain.

FoamBats4All wrote:4) The PA implements X characters per player, and you believe that X is too big. How do you handle this? Feel free to substitute an issue you personally care about.

This falls under chapter 2 of the ALFA Rulebook, and Chapter 2 of the ALFA Rulebook may be changed by the PA.

I happen to feel that two characters per player is working well for us, and overall, has improved the morale of ALFA players. I am not aware of any instances of censure or discipline regarding rule violations that could become an issue with two characters per player. (Although I am not privy to such either.) That being said, most of these violations would be easy enough to verify and discipline for, and so I believe that the two characters per player idea has worked very well for ALFA.

The question came up in IRC the other day, why not three or four? My answer to that was that it could work, but that two was chosen because the limit was one, and changing that to two was an easier and less controversial change than jumping directly to three. I happen to like two myself, but I would not be adamantly opposed to three characters per player, if it could be shown to benefit ALFA as a population. As this falls under the PA domain, my only option would be a LA veto, which I would not exercise in this case, even though I prefer a limit of two rather than three characters per player.

However, because of the number of servers we have, I would be opposed to four characters per player, and so that is where I would exercise a LA veto under ALFA Charter 3.6. And with that veto, three Admin members (one likely the PA), as well as 2/3 of voting HDMs could override my veto, if they felt that it was for the good of ALFA.

That said, if the discussion from all admin indicated a strong favor for a four (or more) characters per player allowance, I would not waste my (or their) time posturing with a veto that is likely to be overturned.

Let me be clear that I am not eager to exercise veto authority. All administrative rights come responsibilities, and I believe that the LA should have a commitment to all of ALFA to operate impartially in a manner that is conducive to the growth and morale of ALFA as a community. Even if I disagree with an issue, if there is overwhelming support from the players and/or admin, then my opinion should not be forced on ALFA.


--------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for the thought-provoking questions, Foam; they helped to clarify my own platform as well as make me aware of issues that past LAs have faced.

Will you reinvigorate this:

http://www.alandfaraway.org/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=372

Castano wrote:Will you reinvigorate this:

http://www.alandfaraway.org/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=372

Absolutely. I feel that player retention falls under public relations, which is one of the most important functions of the LA. As I am relatively new to ALFA (two years or so) compared to some of the six plus year veterans, I would be delegating some of the player retention responsibilities to willing volunteers, and overseeing their work.

A big problem for ALFA today is that people simply stop caring, or get tired over the fact that nothing ever happens. (Either IC or OOC)

There has been talks in the past about doing away with the titled admin positions and replacing them with a "team" of people instead. The reasoning behind this is that instead of five individuals who more likely than not, want their own version of ALFA, you get a unified vision, shared between the five. This way all five are working towards the same goal and no time is lost debating issues needlessly to the point where people just stop caring. So instead of LA, DMA, PA, IA, and TA we get five people who run as a team.

Would you be in favor of such a fundamental change for this community? Yes/No and why.

EDIT: Clarification
The "job" that normally falls under the different Admin domain would instead be positions of trust which does not need to run for their seats, instead they simply answer to and work with the admin group. You'd have a head of Tech, DM, Infrastructure, PR, etc.

boombrakh wrote:A big problem for ALFA today is that people simply stop caring, or get tired over the fact that nothing ever happens. (Either IC or OOC)

There has been talks in the past about doing away with the titled admin positions and replacing them with a "team" of people instead. The reasoning behind this is that instead of five individuals who more likely than not, want their own version of ALFA, you get a unified vision, shared between the five. This way all five are working towards the same goal and no time is lost debating issues needlessly to the point where people just stop caring. So instead of LA, DMA, PA, IA, and TA we get five people who run as a team.

Would you be in favor of such a fundamental change for this community? Yes/No and why.

EDIT: Clarification
The "job" that normally falls under the different Admin domain would instead be positions of trust which does not need to run for their seats, instead they simply answer to and work with the admin group. You'd have a head of Tech, DM, Infrastructure, PR, etc.

There is nothing inherently wrong with the way ALFA is structured or the way you describe others' proposals. Any flaws in ALFA's admin seats are a result of either the way the position is voted for, or the ability of the elected candidates to not only work together, but to come to a consensus on a disagreement. Endless debate does not solve an issue, nor does a filibuster approach.

In this sort of team admin vision that you mention others have proposed, ALFA is likely going to have the same people from the tech department no matter which way the core is structured. That's a simple matter of a very limited supply of talented and willing tech folks, along with a larger supply of willing admin team folks.

The flaw with what this proposal entails, is that the core of ALFA's admin team would run as a bloc. That means, essentially, that Tech department dictates the fate of ALFA, because whomever they run with will win, unless the ALFA populace elects a team without tech support, in which case, ALFA will cease to have meaningful ACR development, and ACR is a large part of the engine that drive ALFA in its current configuration.

Thus, I am opposed to such a team bloc election. If we had five or six more tech people that were equally capable, then an argument could be made for the team bloc admin.

As an alternative, I would propose that all admin positions be voted on by the entire community, rather than different groups. (DMA is a good example, as only DM/HDM/Admin/Staff can vote on DMA). This is not to imply any negative qualities of current DMA or past DMAs, but rather to point out what I think is a reasonable alternative.

While your rp, recent DMing, (haven't tried but am sure it's great), tech work and general abilities are not in question (not by me at least) and you're certainly qualified in all these fields,
How do you feel about your people skills?
From my short lived experience you're argumentative, sometimes extreme in your responses, and got an "I'm smart and right and you're stupid and wrong." attitude that shines even when slight disagreements arise. And I seem to recall you had some similar issues on other servers as well, bans or whatever.

This is not aimed as a personal attack as many would likely say the same about me (at least the second part), however I'm not running for position.
So is my assumption/descrption just completely wrong?
Do you think it has no relevance to the LA position?
Or perhaps you've matured and even if this was true once apon a time it no longer is?
I don't know, not trying to troll the troll here, but seems to me like an important question.