[DISCUSSION] New Authors & Etiquette

[Sincluda]

Seeing as though there may be a larger discussion behind some comments in Gun Control Act, I'd like to make a new thread to discuss this (OOCly). I'm not quite sure where that discussion stands currently in that thread, whether it is nearly finished or waiting to be uncovered, but I decided to make the thread anyways.

The question is this: How should we treat newer WA (GA more specifically since the initial discussion took place here) authors? Should we dismiss some as badge hunters, or people who just don't understand how things work and should be thrown shade? Or do we give them more support and treat them more gently? I don't think that we should be harsh with new players, because we'll immediately make them feel unwelcome and hostile towards the community. That's unhealthy for the playerbase and the sustainability of the community.

Again, I'm not really sure how necessary this thread is, but I figured it was at least worth making to keep some posts from toeing the threadjack line.

[Outer Sparta]

New and aspiring authors definitely should receive a general welcome and be directed to the relevant resources and be informed about the rules and procedures. If they show enthusiasm and want to genuinely improve on their craft, then they definitely should get the support. However, if the person is dismissive of criticism, believes their poorly-written draft is superior to any others despite being poor and/or illegal, and just doesn't listen to advice or feedback, then I understand if the general public is more hard on them.

[Sincluda]

New and aspiring authors definitely should receive a general welcome and be directed to the relevant resources and be informed about the rules and procedures. If they show enthusiasm and want to genuinely improve on their craft, then they definitely should get the support. However, if the person is dismissive of criticism, believes their poorly-written draft is superior to any others despite being poor and/or illegal, and just doesn't listen to advice or feedback, then I understand if the general public is more hard on them.

Yeah, I would pretty much apply a Golden Rule here, too. If you're a jerk to others, then don't expect others to not be jerks to you.

[Minskiev]

Be honest but reasonable with them imo. If the proposal idea sucks then it sucks. If the proposal needs improvement but the idea is good, work with them. I don't see how this is necessary (although I can imagine a few people may not be acting too kindly to newer players, unfortunately. You should know who you are.)

[Outer Sparta]

Be honest but reasonable with them imo. If the proposal idea sucks then it sucks. If the proposal needs improvement but the idea is good, work with them. I don't see how this is necessary (although I can imagine a few people may not be acting too kindly to newer players, unfortunately. You should know who you are.)

If they are dismissive of criticism and don't seem to listen to any advice, then I wouldn't work with them in that case.

[Separatist Peoples]

We should make a serious point not to attack the motivations of any new player for participating. A quality draft motivated by a badge and a quality draft motivated passion for a topic are equally beneficial to the community.

It is often frustrating to see people produce poor quality work with what seems to be blatant disregard for the rules. It's harder when you've posted the rules for them. We need to remember that this is a game, intended to be fun, and not a litigation manual. It does us no harm to refrain from accusations and nastiness against new players. Lord knows their illegal draft won't go anywhere.

[Daarwyrth]

There's a reason why I keep hearing outside the WA subforums that people are scared to participate because of the toxic atmosphere. Whether someone wants to draft and pass a proposal for the badge, to increase their card value or simply out of a genuine passion, it shouldn't matter. As I have stated many times myself, this is a game, this is a place people come to, to have fun. Achievements are a part of many, many games where people earn achievement badges. If people obtain their fun from getting achievement badges in games, then that is entirely normal and fine. The "badgehunt" trope some people use is bogus, minus the "ogu" part of that word.

Yes, new authors that have a blatant disregard for the rules and consider their draft superior when it's bad, those can be admonished. I repeat admonished, not bullied. And if someone trolls, then they are to be reported to moderation and not berated. Because they won't care for that anyway and the berating may scare off genuine writers who want to try their hand at drafting.

I repeat, this is a game, not a real life courtroom. People come here in their free time to have fun, to let their imagination loose. There is no valid reason to try to curb that, so please, let's be kinder and more helpful, especially to new players who genuinely want to get a hang of it. The learning curve can be steep, but people don't need to stand at the top waiting to beat the person climbing up down again simply because they feel in the mood for that.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Oh, hmm. I posted this in that draft thread, rather than here. Sorry if you've read this before:

---

I confess I've never understood the rancor against "badgehunting." If they get the badge, that means they've produced a resolution that enough people thought would be good for the GA to actually get it enacted, thereby generating game activity. And if it's Bitely and World Space Authority, that's on us for not communicating well with voters.

The only reason "they just want the badge" would be a valid inference to attack the motivation is in the case of plagiarism - which is what someone does if they want the reward without doing the work. But actually plagiarizing something is far, far worse than simply wanting a reward. This particular reward is rewarded for actually creating a resolution, which is the entire point of the game.

If someone misjudges the amount of work it takes to pass a resolution, that's not something to denigrate them for. Either they see it through or they don't; in neither case is there anything for GA players to shit on them for.

[Gruenberg]

This thread won't change the behaviour of those it's talking about, on either end.

[Outer Sparta]

Oh, hmm. I posted this in that draft thread, rather than here. Sorry if you've read this before:

---

I confess I've never understood the rancor against "badgehunting." If they get the badge, that means they've produced a resolution that enough people thought would be good for the GA to actually get it enacted, thereby generating game activity. And if it's Bitely and World Space Authority, that's on us for not communicating well with voters.

The only reason "they just want the badge" would be a valid inference to attack the motivation is in the case of plagiarism - which is what someone does if they want the reward without doing the work. But actually plagiarizing something is far, far worse than simply wanting a reward. This particular reward is rewarded for actually creating a resolution, which is the entire point of the game.

If someone misjudges the amount of work it takes to pass a resolution, that's not something to denigrate them for. Either they see it through or they don't; in neither case is there anything for GA players to shit on them for.

I found badgehunting in the SC to be with those that jump on a certain bandwagon "raiders bad" and try to craft a crappy proposal, shove it through quorum with incessant telegram campaigns, and hoping that enough people jump on the bandwagon regardless of whether it's good or bad.