Page 3 of 6
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:14 am
by Nalates
I agree with Tweek a guild run server should be run from a guild forum. I think those 'a feared' of guilds are a very small number of fans. I doubt being unaligned means one is OPPOSED to guilds or thinks poorly of them. So, this may be too much concern.
I disagree that openuru.org is the logical choice. It is a new and clean forum, which is nice. The operator JWPlatt is pretty well known so I think we know the type of moderating we have. So, it is NOT a bad choice. It's just another new forum.
Since clutter seems to be an issue for many... Consider. The UO Forum home page currently has 5 sections and about 25 topic categories. MOUL has 1 main section (for most - search used to reveal a hidden section) and about 15 topic categories. I think UO is better organized than MOUL. GoW has 4 sections and about 21 topic categories. GoW is nicely organized.
I think any new forum will clutter up over time. I think UO and GoW have to learned to organize. I see GoW and UO as the better organized sites (of the 3). OpenUru.org is too new to know how that will go but there is no reason think it won't be well organized. But, clutter is part of life on forums, which is why I made an
Uru Search Tool I also think UO will create a section for such a project if the guilds choose to go the neutral forum route.
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:42 am
by Zardoz
I don't see UO as being a particular good choice. The forum software is old, and the core website staff isn't really connected to Uru anymore. I'd also guess that the overlap between people registered at MOUL and at UO is in the neighborhood of 30-40% (total guess), so for many people at MOUL, which has the largest concentration of people interested in the new Uru, going over to UO will be going to a new forum, and one that has tons of stuff that duplicates what they're getting at MOUL. Why not go with a forum that has new software, so much less clutter, and is dedicated to the matter at hand? Otherwise, just set it up here and screw the MOUL crowd, which seems to be the general attitude anyways.

Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:32 pm
by Tsar Hoikas
Dot wrote:To help focus on the latter, an open project forum called 'System Concepts' has been set up on the Open Uru site, with the tagline 'Focusing On "Big Picture" Technical Practicalities To Get Open Uru Online'. Here's the link:
http://forums.openuru.org/viewforum.php?f=17
I refuse to use OpenURU.org for anything. Its creation was pointless. I do not need another forum in my massive queue of forums to check.
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:08 pm
by Dot
Fair enough, Hoikas. The area is there for people to use or not, as they choose.
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:35 pm
by Tweek
I agree with both Mr Zardoz and Mr Adam.
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:24 pm
by BAD
I of course will have to be the one to say this.
I believe many people will not want to use Openuru.org because JWPlatt is running it. He has built up quite a reputation over the years.
If we are going to go with a completely brand new and unbiased web space, we would have to use a place ran by someone who is unbiased. Unfortunately JWPlatt is opinionated and not afraid to share it. That is a good thing in many cases, but when we are talking about trying to lure most of the Uru community to one site, we have to attempt to have it run by those who are the most generally liked by all and who are willing to run the website in the background and not get involved in the politics.
(Please understand that I do not have anything personal against JW. I have agreed with many things he has said, but I have also had disagreements with him. I actually like his opinionated behavior as he stirs up a lot of conversations.)
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 8:22 pm
by Lontahv
Aye
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:00 pm
by Zardoz
BAD wrote:I believe many people will not want to use Openuru.org because JWPlatt is running it. He has built up quite a reputation over the years.
If we are going to go with a completely brand new and unbiased web space, we would have to use a place ran by someone who is unbiased. Unfortunately JWPlatt is opinionated and not afraid to share it. That is a good thing in many cases, but when we are talking about trying to lure most of the Uru community to one site, we have to attempt to have it run by those who are the most generally liked by all and who are willing to run the website in the background and not get involved in the politics.
Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle . . .

Are you sure about the reputation business? Are you sure it's not just a reputation over here? And besides, if that's a valid objection, then I suggest the entire hierarchy of GoW resign en masse, as their reputation is deeper in the toilet than is JWP's. After all, isn't "unbiased" what we want in the Guilds?
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:24 pm
by BAD
Zardoz wrote:BAD wrote:I believe many people will not want to use Openuru.org because JWPlatt is running it. He has built up quite a reputation over the years.
If we are going to go with a completely brand new and unbiased web space, we would have to use a place ran by someone who is unbiased. Unfortunately JWPlatt is opinionated and not afraid to share it. That is a good thing in many cases, but when we are talking about trying to lure most of the Uru community to one site, we have to attempt to have it run by those who are the most generally liked by all and who are willing to run the website in the background and not get involved in the politics.
Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle . . .

Are you sure about the reputation business? Are you sure it's not just a reputation over here? And besides, if that's a valid objection, then I suggest the entire hierarchy of GoW resign en masse, as their reputation is deeper in the toilet than is JWP's. After all, isn't "unbiased" what we want in the Guilds?
Well, why don't you spell it out for us Zardoz? Please enlighten us on what others think of the GOW hierarchy?
Re: What the heck is BAD talking about?
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:46 pm
by Lontahv
Let's see... the job of the councilors is to guide the GoW. If they didn't have opinions they would be useless.
What we need for this central site would be slightly different since we'll try to cater to _all_ Uru fans (not just the ones that want to write ages).
If you want more clarity on the role of the councilor you're more than welcome to read the structure document found here:
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=838 .
The GoW has nothing to do with a new hub site that may be made. This new site would try to serve as a new MystOnline.com (minus the marketing parts) but do more than that. Serve as a discussion ground for people from all walks of life and with all different opinions.
We need people who value diverse opinions.
JWPlatt has done more than expressed his views in the past. He has tried to force people to agree with him. I do not feel as though he respects others opinions. This is about the worst behavior for a site admin.