Guild of Writers

What is the problem anyway? So, Cyan decided to talk to some people because nothing was certain yet? I'm happy with the outcome and I really hope this won't result in Guild Wars Not to make anybody (even more) angry but that is not my type of game

Wait, let me mention Hitler and get it all over with. You're just a bunch of nazis you!!! There, now this thread has served its purpose

pappou wrote:What is to be gained by discussing it this way? Firstly, to stop this notion of secret meetings as a way of life; and secondly, to wake up the mob. They must demand democratic participation in choosing the rotating panel. There is still no indication from the elite that they are willing to give up their seats on the panel -- except for Andy, i think. Instead, the elite shift the focus to such things as: Cyan made me do it; and, We too do not know what will happen.

That is mere diversion; it is non sequitur to establishing democratic rule over this process.

I assume by elite you mean the Guild Master from GoMa and Guild Councilors from GoW. Well we can't give up our seats on the panel because we don't have them. The panel hasn't even been created yet. This whole thing is still a proposal. We gladly await any suggestions you have, but so far all you've done is gone on about the "veil of secrecy". So let's talk about what's really bothering you. Don't pretend it's because the vast majority of the people weren't included in the discussions. You don't give a crap about the vast majority. You're upset because you personally were not involved. Well, I'm sorry for that but you have the option to be involved now. You have access to everything that was discussed. You have access to the proposal. I suggest you take of the tinfoil hat you wear for fear the government is trying to read your thoughts, trust that someone besides you has the ability to act in the best interests of the community and make an actual suggestion.

My appologies to the Guild Councilors; if I've just gotten myself banned, so be it.

Sophia wrote:Wait, let me mention Hitler and get it all over with. You're just a bunch of nazis you!!! There, now this thread has served its purpose

Dang you! I was about to do that!!! Grrr
Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт!

Frisky Badger wrote:

pappou wrote:What is to be gained by discussing it this way? Firstly, to stop this notion of secret meetings as a way of life; and secondly, to wake up the mob. They must demand democratic participation in choosing the rotating panel. There is still no indication from the elite that they are willing to give up their seats on the panel -- except for Andy, i think. Instead, the elite shift the focus to such things as: Cyan made me do it; and, We too do not know what will happen.

That is mere diversion; it is non sequitur to establishing democratic rule over this process.

I assume by elite you mean the Guild Master from GoMa and Guild Councilors from GoW. Well we can't give up our seats on the panel because we don't have them. The panel hasn't even been created yet. This whole thing is still a proposal. We gladly await any suggestions you have, but so far all you've done is gone on about the "veil of secrecy". So let's talk about what's really bothering you. Don't pretend it's because the vast majority of the people weren't included in the discussions. You don't give a crap about the vast majority. You're upset because you personally were not involved. Well, I'm sorry for that but you have the option to be involved now. You have access to everything that was discussed. You have access to the proposal. I suggest you take of the tinfoil hat you wear for fear the government is trying to read your thoughts, trust that someone besides you has the ability to act in the best interests of the community and make an actual suggestion.

My appologies to the Guild Councilors; if I've just gotten myself banned, so be it.

I see no need for banning

There is still no indication from the elite that they are willing to give up their seats on the panel -- except for Andy, i think. Instead, the elite shift the focus to such things as: Cyan made me do it; and, We too do not know what will happen.

Um pappou as the others have said I don't know that any of the Guild Leadership has expressed an interest in being stuck with this job, we want to make other people do it.

P.S. You didn't answer my question how do you see choosing the Panel?

Information that is needed -
Acceptable Term limits
How to replace people
How to appoint or Elect people to it (Please don't push elections that last half as long as the panel term you suggest. )
How replacement panel members could be lined up

Fecal ejecta aside...

Nynaveve wrote:Pappou, who told you who was on the panel? Unless I've been asleep for the last few days, we didn't even consider that yet. I guess that's the part you're hung up on. We haven't even decided how to elect a panel yet. Let alone who's on it. I'm confused as to why you are picking this bone now.

If I might put words in pappou's mouth; I suppose this is an item that he may have issue with:

" Panel members will be chosen by the guilds' leadership teams, and will serve initially for a term of a few months."

I think he(and possibly others; and probably even myself) would be happier with general nominations and a general election for members of the panel.

Consider general elections as my proposed(on topic) amendment to the proposal to make amends since the rest of this post is kinda off topic.

Further, the reason Cyan has been having "secret diatribes" with us is because they can't deal with the zealous fans as a whole. I think Andy has posted to this effect already (to the backlash of several people...). I personally couldn't take thousands of fans and have a productive back-and-forth with them. I would request a handful to stand as representatives of the rest, who were duly elected as such, and speak with them.

Oh, crap, I just described Democracy. Funny....

No, you've just described a Republic. If that handful of representatives were appointed by general election; a Democratic Republic. In a democracy; all members have a say in everything. Closest thing to a Democratic country in this world is Japan.

I get the feeling that there is some jealousy weaving through the crowd here, about how a "select handful" of individuals have had discussions with Cyan while the rest haven't. I'm sorry to see that. Maybe in the future these people will have the opportunity to experience leadership in this community, with the good and bad... the discussions with Cyan, the flaming on the boards, the joy of leading a group of people, the personal insults hurtled at you for no reason. Its got its plusses and minusses, and it takes a certain person to be willing to fill that position. I guess now I know how the President feels.

I really don't think jealousy is an issue here. People just want to be represented(ick) by people they feel(know) they can trust. Personally; I think the largest percentage of people in this community can be trusted with their intent. It's when small groups try to 'think' for the greater community that things get mucked up; even though their intentions are totally honorable.

teedyo wrote:" Panel members will be chosen by the guilds' leadership teams, and will serve initially for a term of a few months."

I think he(and possibly others; and probably even myself) would be happier with general nominations and a general election for members of the panel.

Consider general elections as my proposed(on topic) amendment to the proposal to make amends since the rest of this post is kinda off topic.

Now that's a perfectly good suggestion. Congratulations, you're the first.

Seriously though, good suggestion. Could you elaborate on it a little more? Specifically, how it is decided who can be elected. I don't know how many members the GoW has but the GoMa has 93 right now. Even if that was the only pool to select from, an election between 93 people, all of whom are voting, would last longer than the service term.

Whoa! I'm just back after being gone for the day. It seems the thread has taken a new and unpleasant direction (apart from Adam's statement about the president of course).

While the the tone is quite hostile (I'm surprised at Pappou's outburst and at some of the answers), remember that this kind of discussion is necessary. It is better to get these questions (even accusations) out in the open right now and settle them, than to have them lingering in the back of everyone's mind for months. Blunt questions were asked, honest answers were provided, now we know what people think.

About the "veil of secrecy": several members have stated, starting from last November, that secret talks among leaders or with Cyan are "not acceptable". It may have been necessary in this case (although I don't believe it was), however don't be surprised at the reaction. You will get the same reaction every time this happens. In this particular case, everything was laid out on the table in the end. It was painful, but maybe next time it won't be necessary. I personally think the 4 people initially contacted could have told Chogon "so THAT's what you wanted to talk to us about? This doesn't need to be secret. Let us consult our members". But I wasn't there, so I can't say for sure what their options were.

About the proposed FCAL: I see many problems in it but they aren't about "Writers vs Maintainers". Although I understand this may be a concern for some, I believe checks and balances can be put in place that will ensure fair representation. I have one concern about the Maintainers and it isn't about the current Maintainers or their leaders (this is tied to my post from last night): if you were the kind of controlling person I described, which guild would you choose? This is where we really need checks and balances.

I'm willing to play by the rules, so I'll be suggesting changes to the FCAL shortly. Some of these may go against Cyan's wishes, but maybe Cyan isn't always right.

teedyo wrote:It's when small groups try to 'think' for the greater community that things get mucked up; even though their intentions are totally honorable.

Thank you! This sums up my whole point much better than I could have. We should print this on a banner and add it to the forum headers.

Just a little thing.

From this point on, any posts that are not a serious proposal or suggestion for setting up this system, they will be moved to another thread called "Unfounded Gripes".

You can RESPECTFULLY disagree with what is going on here, and voice your concerns but as I read certain people's posts I could only think of chicken little. The thing hasn't even been put in place or completely decided upon and you guys are freaking out already? Give it a rest. Either help make this better in your vision or find somewhere else on the forum to complain about how we are ruining everything.

Also about the SECRECY thing. Grow up. You work for professional companies, you know how things are done in private business. How can you sit there and get upset about how Cyan is doing this? They are not idiots. They are not going to just come on a forum and ask general questions of a membership of well over 300. They know the only way to make an effective system is to bump ideas of a few people first, get the ball rolling with them, and then bring in everyone else to work out the details.

What your doing is side stepping what is trying to be done here and causing chaos. For what reason? For your own personal agenda. Just what your accusing others of doing. You don't like how things are going so your going to disrupt things as much as possible.

Well I am here to tell you right now that that won't be tolerated. You wanna gripe open your own thread. Leave this one alone or I will be forced to take action.

I apologize for disrupting this thread again.

Chacal wrote:About the proposed FCAL: I see many problems in it but they aren't about "Writers vs Maintainers". Although I understand this may be a concern for some, I believe checks and balances can be put in place that will ensure fair representation. I have one concern about the Maintainers and it isn't about the current Maintainers or their leaders (this is tied to my post from last night): if you were the kind of controlling person I described, which guild would you choose? This is where we really need checks and balances.

I look forward to your suggestions, Chacal. I don't think anyone believes that everyone is qualified to be on the FCAL panel. One requirement I can think of right now is that members will probably have to be at least 18, just for legal reasons.

Chacal wrote:...but maybe Cyan isn't always right.

That may very well be true, but this is their game. They welcome our suggestions, but what they say goes, for better or worse.

Not to mention that each guild that is suppose to have members on the panel need to adapt to using the same selection: IE no one can say "That's not fair, the So and So Guild does it a different way."

Election nominees should be Guild members of either the GoW, GoMa, and GoA (this is something that Alahnmat has just come to us about).
Reason that the panel members should be members of these guilds is for the following that needs to be check both prior to FCA being issued and upon Age completion: Technical, Operational and Story.

Writers for Technical. Maintainers for Operational and Archivists for Story.

That above is just a suggestion. Most Writers that are on the panel should be famliar with Age Creation Process, enough so that they can see if something is wrong that a Maintainer may not notice.
Most Maintainers that are on the panel should be familiar with the operational aspects of the Age: load times, performance on both low and high end computers, CTD's, Black Age loading.
Neither Writers nor Maintainers should be restricted to noting these, as you'll have some Writers that know what Maintainers know, just from testing their own Ages.
And of course you will have some Maintainers that dabble in making Ages, so they also know some of the things that Writers know.
The big help is the Archivists. They can address any Fan or Cyan story line conflicts. This is something that Alahnmat spent time talking to both Rand and RAWA about. Rand and RAWA feel that the Guild of Archivists would be perfect with helping with guidelines and policies concerning Age's storylines.

Cyan was okay with us saying that "We could stick some people in there, they serve on the panel for X amount of time, and then we rotate, so no one can claim favoritism, agendas, etc, etc"

However, if the community would rather elect people to the panel positions, that is indeed a viable solution. However, I'd like someone to also suggest a "Stand In" solution too. Meaning: What happens if someone from the panel can no longer be there for X reason (X reason being anything from sickness, Real Life, Removed from the panel for doing something bad, etc). How will we fill that position until the time for rotation comes up?

Also, rotation. Be aware that we can poll to see how long you think people should be on the panel. Cyan like 3 months or 90 days. Y'all could ask for it to be shorter, or longer (I wouldn't recomend longer, people get burned out), however in any case, the panel needs to be rotated (that keeps the Evil Power Hungry Maintainers like me away). So will we have elections every 3 months? If so, can we stream line the elections?

What do we do with ties in elections?

I'm not throwing monkey wrenches (feces....HA!) here. Just asking the hard questions that certain Cyan employees will be asking. We need to have those answers, and they need to be answers that everyone.........

Okay, ALMOST everyone can agree to.

Why not have Joe Explorer on the panel?

Other than the obvious things that panel members need to be familiar with that Joe Explore may not be familiar with: Cyan said (publicly I might add) that they want the Guilds to help run things, and they urged people to join a guild.

Now, there will be some of you that don't want to join a Guild. The pilot light in hell will go out before you join a guild.

Those people could be simply left out in the cold so to speak.
One option to this could be, 1 member who does not belong to any guild be also elected to the Panel to sit on said panel. This 1 member from the Community could be the "Watch Dog" for the explorers that don't want to join, don't trust the guilds, don't (fill in your own reason here) guilds.

Again however, they also would be rotated off the panel and a new "Joe Explorer" elected, but the election process should again be stream lined. We don't want to see American Politics enter here (I'm shruddering). If you think the Feces are flying now.......just wait until then if we go down THAT road! hehe.

I really don't see the problem, since:

A) there is no FCA panel yet.
B) the process mentioned at the begining of this thread is merely a proposal and not written in stone.
C) If we turn around and present Cyan with a agreeable solution to putting people on the FCA panel and can rotate them, and can show that it WILL work.

This makes sure that no one guild is in control of the panel, that there will be at least 3 Guild working with the panel, that there is no majority Evil Maintainers trying to run things (quick, quick, bring out the secret veil...), and it also provides a way for non-guild Joe Explorer to be involved and even report back to the rest of the community just how well it works (provided the evil Maintainers don't cause problems).