[Summit #1] Comments on the summit agenda [OPEN]

[Frisbeeteria]

This thread is for comments and commentary on the Summit Agenda, as posted by the selected Summit reps in that thread.

When replying to a specific Agenda post, you should incorporate a link to that post by clicking the icon next to the relevant post and copying the URL. You may also [quote] relevant posts, though you need to be sure not to post in the Rep's Only thread. All posts by non-Reps will be removed, and offenders will be slapped with a large trout at the very least.

No threadjacks, please! If you need to expound on a point at length, post to the relevant Gameplay or Technical topic. If it's solely related to the Summit (i.e. UDL or TBR want a dedicated comments thread), you can start a new thread in this forum.

Forum rules apply, of course. Whatever else you do, play nice.

[Unibot III]

Do we have to post as commentary to someone else's summit agenda? Or can we post what our agenda would be if we were a representative: namely what the problems are with gameplay and where we should be looking for solutions?

[Cerian Quilor]

I don't think raiding or military gameplay in general needs to be politized more. There is a lot of politics in it, especially in the Gameplay Forums, and war is merely politics by other means. (Commenting on Skyrim's point)

[Frisbeeteria]

A question from a telegram: "What sort of timeline will the summit threads follow? Is there a certain date by which you would like responses to be submitted by in each thread?"

We're hoping that 2-3 days of response time for each batch of questions would be sufficient. We do understand that this is both a holiday period and end-of-term for school players, so we'll make every effort to be as flexible as we can regarding time constraints. If you're having timing constraints and you belong to an organization that has an interest in the summit, perhaps you can set up a consensus thread either here or at your off-site to make suggestions for your post. We want to give everyone a chance to be heard, but we also want to complete this fairly quickly, so please try your best to work with us.

Q: Do we have to post as commentary to someone else's summit agenda?

Pretty much, yeah. As above, if you want to contribute to an organizational consensus thread, you can set one up here or off-site. You're welcome to use your political skills to attempt to shape the agenda through other Reps, but the official Rep posts will form the agenda.

[Galiantus]

A question from a telegram: "What sort of timeline will the summit threads follow? Is there a certain date by which you would like responses to be submitted by in each thread?"

We're hoping that 2-3 days of response time for each batch of questions would be sufficient. We do understand that this is both a holiday period and end-of-term for school players, so we'll make every effort to be as flexible as we can regarding time constraints. If you're having timing constraints and you belong to an organization that has an interest in the summit, perhaps you can set up a consensus thread either here or at your off-site to make suggestions for your post. We want to give everyone a chance to be heard, but we also want to complete this fairly quickly, so please try your best to work with us.

Q: Do we have to post as commentary to someone else's summit agenda?

Pretty much, yeah. As above, if you want to contribute to an organizational consensus thread, you can set one up here or off-site. You're welcome to use your political skills to attempt to shape the agenda through other Reps, but the official Rep posts will form the agenda.

Sounds good.

First NS Lobbyist award, here I come!

[Unibot III]

Q: Do we have to post as commentary to someone else's summit agenda?

Pretty much, yeah. As above, if you want to contribute to an organizational consensus thread, you can set one up here or off-site. You're welcome to use your political skills to attempt to shape the agenda through other Reps, but the official Rep posts will form the agenda.

I think people should have a voice and this should not be a conference about using "political skills", but about asking the right questions and getting the right solutions. The fact that you want to make this a political conference and put that on the shoulders of the representatives when their mandate of who and what they ought to represent is unclear is only going to make this more stressful and be the failure of the conference.

EDIT: The only threat to the conference posed by letting people post their own agendas is that it could demonstrate that perhaps you chose the wrong people and influence the conference in the right direction. That's a problem caused by lack of legitimacy and could reflect on the overall effectiveness of the conference model, but it is not an objective based problem.

[Mahaj]

Fris, in an organizational specific thread, would we be able to use that to answer there the questions that were posed to the reps?

[Frisbeeteria]

Fris, in an organizational specific thread, would we be able to use that to answer there the questions that were posed to the reps?

If you're wanting to create a "Crafting the UDL answer to [Summit #2] thread", great. If you're looking for "Ask the UDL ...", use your Gameplay thread.

The only requirement I'm going to insist upon is that threads in the Summit forum remain exclusively about the summit. We all know the topics that are routinely beaten to death in Gameplay and Technical, and you're all welcome to continue beating those topics to death in those forums.

[Mahaj]

Fris, in an organizational specific thread, would we be able to use that to answer there the questions that were posed to the reps?

If you're wanting to create a "Crafting the UDL answer to [Summit #2] thread", great. If you're looking for "Ask the UDL ...", use your Gameplay thread.

The only requirement I'm going to insist upon is that threads in the Summit forum remain exclusively about the summit. We all know the topics that are routinely beaten to death in Gameplay and Technical, and you're all welcome to continue beating those topics to death in those forums.

Awesome.

[Unibot III]

Are we allowed to do "Crafting the UDL answer to [Summit #1] thread" ?

In which case, what is the difference between this and us posting here, except exploding this sub-forum with more threads and unrepresenting individual views?

[Frisbeeteria]

what is the difference between this and us posting here, except exploding this sub-forum with more threads and unrepresenting individual views?

The difference between your organizational threads and the official threads is that we make no promises about reading the former. We've rented the hall and we don't mind you using it, but frankly we're going to be mostly paying attention to what's on the main stage.

[Unibot III]

what is the difference between this and us posting here, except exploding this sub-forum with more threads and unrepresenting individual views?

The difference between your organizational threads and the official threads is that we make no promises about reading the former. We've rented the hall and we don't mind you using it, but frankly we're going to be mostly paying attention to what's on the main stage.

What if you've chosen the wrong candidates and your agenda is fundamentally flawed and you miss the point of what is going wrong in R/D? I don't think this is a big "if" -- I think you've already set yourself up for failure; the fact that "Regional Influence" was decided by a closed-off discussion club like this is very worryingly to me.

You expect your representatives to listen to other people's views outside of the main stage, but there is no guarantee that the important points won't get lost in the translation and there is no obligation on the representative's part to represent others nor is it clear who they're supposed to represent.

Someone should be able to post here with an agenda.

[Frisbeeteria]

Unibot, you've made it entirely too clear that you're unhappy with our selections, and that you think we've failed before we've started. You didn't get invited. We get it.

You've asked and been answered. I'm not going to continue to respond to the same question asked sixteen different ways.

[Unibot III]

Unibot, you've made it entirely too clear that you're unhappy with our selections, and that you think we've failed before we've started. You didn't get invited. We get it.

You've asked and been answered. I'm not going to continue to respond to the same question asked sixteen different ways.

Can an individual post his ideal individual summit agenda as a thread in "Gameplay "R/D" Summit"? Or must it be an organizational thread?

[Biyah]

I thought it was quite a thoughtful selection, all around. A shame I didn't get in, but I can't say I expected otherwise. Hats off to the mods, good luck to the selected. Change something.

Edit: Nevermind, the last half doesn't matter here.

[Ballotonia]

the fact that "Regional Influence" was decided by a closed-off discussion club like this is very worryingly to me.

It wasn't. There was a discussion club which was debating Gameplay with the mods (I was one of the attendees at the time), and then Influence was put forth by Max and that was the end of all discussion taking place. Influence itself wasn't discussed, beyond me pointing out that the plan effectively legalized what was then known as 'region griefing'.

That was in a closed forum, with most of NS unaware it was even taking place. This is taking place very much out in the open. We just don't want everybody be talking at once, so actual participation is limited to selected attendees. Most people in NS are not selected attendees.

Ballotonia

[Unibot III]

the fact that "Regional Influence" was decided by a closed-off discussion club like this is very worryingly to me.

It wasn't. There was a discussion club which was debating Gameplay with the mods (I was one of the attendees at the time), and then Influence was put forth by Max and that was the end of all discussion taking place. Influence itself wasn't discussed, beyond me pointing out that the plan effectively legalized what was then known as 'region griefing'.

That was in a closed forum, with most of NS unaware it was even taking place. This is taking place very much out in the open. We just don't want everybody be talking at once, so actual participation is limited to selected attendees. Most people in NS are not selected attendees.

Ballotonia

Alright, Ballotonia. But I don't see the danger of people posting their own responses, even if the admins are not obligated to read them. Currently only organizations are allowed to post stand-alone responses.

Furthermore I think that "not everyone talking at once" could have been accomplished with more formalized discussion and less allowance for debate, limiting the participants goes overboard.. but that's another remark entirely. I'll note that Fris never opened discussion up in regards to the format of the conference before he announced the conference -- we were just kind of told "this is how it's going to work" without any input into the format which seems just as important as the ideas that will be tossed around.

- Uni

[Unibot III]

viewtopic.php?p=11973967#p11973967

@Abbey: It's an interesting view, but I don't think it's a widely popular view. There are more people getting active and participating in R/D than there has ever been since the decline in 2006, we don't need any radical changes, so much as fixes. I also think that partisanship and adherence to identities in NS has been what people have loved about the R/D game, I think for that to be taken away so that everyone "could get along", would draw a lot from R/D game and make it rather monotone as opposed to distinctly partisan. The groundwork for you to create a group like The Cat Burglars that is more "friendly" already exists, really; the problem is not that the code isn't there, but that people can't be coded to think that they don't want to be "defenders" and "raiders"; some people just -like- to be hardcore defenders and raiders -- it's in their blood, it's what gets them up in the morning to defend or raid, it's what keeps them up at night. It seems to me that you want to change the game so these players can't do that, because they aren't playing the game like how you want to play it not because you ultimately can't play the game like how you want to play it now. I hope you expand on how you want to encourage your way of play through additional game changes because it's unclear how you can change R/D to get rid of the R and D divisions and partisanship without annoying most people who play R/D and love the partisanship and the identity that a clear philosophy gives one.

I also think that the reliance on scripts is way overblown. Defenders only use scripts for research purposes, raiders use scripts to call move-times more easily (I believe), but fundamentally they could do it with a pen and paper if they wanted since the method always starts with a calculator -- I expect someone more involved with the creation of triggering like Spartzerium (who worked with me to create that method -- although he was always the pro) will probably drop a line about this at one point during the conference.

EDIT: Wait is this thread really open to people? Fris's OP says "All posts by non-Reps will be removed, and offenders will be slapped with a large trout at the very least." I'm confused now. If we're not allowed to comment about posts, I'm sorry I thought this thread was open due to the title.

[Sedgistan]

EDIT: Wait is this thread really open to people? Fris's OP says "All posts by non-Reps will be removed, and offenders will be slapped with a large trout at the very least." I'm confused now. If we're not allowed to comment about posts, I'm sorry I thought this thread was open due to the title.

It is open. The quoted sentence should be read after the one that comes before it.

[Unibot III]

EDIT: Wait is this thread really open to people? Fris's OP says "All posts by non-Reps will be removed, and offenders will be slapped with a large trout at the very least." I'm confused now. If we're not allowed to comment about posts, I'm sorry I thought this thread was open due to the title.

It is open. The quoted sentence should be read after the one that comes before it.

Okay so it's more meaning that you shouldn't quote someone else's post like mine just now and comment on that? Just checking.

[Sedgistan]

It means that if you're quoting a rep's post to reply to something they said, make sure you copy/paste that text into a reply to this thread, rather than accidently posting it in the reps-only thread.

[Johz]

It is open. The quoted sentence should be read after the one that comes before it.

Okay so it's more meaning that you shouldn't quote someone else's post like mine just now and comment on that? Just checking.

I think it's just another warning not to post in the closed threads. It's just that quoting a post is perhaps more risky - if you click 'quote', change tabs, then come back, are you going to remember that it's in the wrong thread? In my own case, probably not, as I have a tendency to struggle with pushing pull doors, so I may use the advice to use links not quotes.

I really don't think it matters, though, as long as you're clear who you're replying to, and you don't post in the candidate-only threads.

[Unibot III]

It means that if you're quoting a rep's post to reply to something they said, make sure you copy/paste that text into a reply to this thread, rather than accidently posting it in the reps-only thread.

Oh okay, sorry I totally didn't understand the instructions. Thanks.

[Unibot III]

In regards to Mallorea's Post..

Looking into the recent raid in the Eastern Islands of Dharma we can see that a single nation is capable of halting an operation being run by dozens of other players. Naturally a nation that has sat as delegate for a year in a region has earned protection to some degree, but for two months from thirty other players? Then comes the SC Liberation if we endure.

Just as a note, there's more to the story than that. As Jakker explains:

It took me so long in Dharma because I was using influence banjecting natives. That being said the sleepers in CP and Hippiedom were there for at least 3 months each where the CP sleeper had at least 20ish endorsements during that time, while the Hippiedom sleeper had at least 10 for the entire 6ish month stay. With Dharma though had I not used my influence at all, it would have taken me roughly 20-25 days to password.

[Cerian Quilor]

His point was that Quelesh alone was this major roadblock to refounding.