Jump to content

Ok, real talk. Player/Alliance votes


Buorhann
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Micchan said:

I feel like if I say "Pizza is good" some random BK-NPO will reply with "but we just suggested, no one was forced"

 

@Who Me

A little example to make you understand why your reply makes no sense

Non american: Why you voted for a dumb president like Trump (or a dumb alternative like Hillary)?

American: Maybe people like the no brain approach. Just because you like competent politicians doesn't mean everyone does.

 

@element85

Yep, that ayy lmao mode

 

Unless it means politically and militarily active and not about how much they log in or they talk in their channels, forums, etc.

This makes zero sense and is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. 

1. Pizza IS good, but just because you or I think it is good doesn't mean everyone else agrees, they might like their RAMEN NOODLES for all you know. 

2. That example???? WTF please share whatever it is you're on.. Makes no sense and I can't figure out what you're trying to imply. I think the point was that what you like and prefer may not be what I like and prefer. Neither is wrong or right since it is opinion and not fact. When you have an open voting process, you're essentially asking the diverse group of people in the audience for their opinion, not asking for fact. 

3. Ayy lmao mode? What are you talking about? I've simply been responding in the same fashion that Curu has. You, on the other hand, want to be stuck up crying about the voting results with false accusations and then going "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" when people stand up to defend themselves, as if you have some sort of superiority over me when you don't. If you think a browser based game makes you a better or more superior person than me, then you're the one in ayy lmao mode.

Edited by element85
  • Downvote 2

"I VM due to timezone differences" -Reuben Cheuk

 

timezoneVM.jpg.64e93c4270b92d26e0ac30572d9351eb.jpg 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
2 minutes ago, Mayor said:

No, but it is salty when you whine for a week straight in multiple threads and are apparently against any sort of consensus.

First, it's only been two days.  Second, my only argument is that the awards should proceed as planned because so far no act has been committed that violates the rules as laid out prior to the poll.  Third, it's a competitive vote between candidates, so finding a 'consensus' really shouldn't be priority at this time.   If you're looking for examples of people of being salty and whining though, you might be able to find one or two in the different awards threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think at the lowest common level is how does a vote function within the framework of PnW. I do not think at this point that we have done anything wrong or broken the spirit of the process itself as all we have done is encourage folks to get on the community and vote for the awards. The reason being simple enough, these awards mean something in game and is usually used as some sort off huge propaganda tool. Any other means to change this by current suggestions would involve disenfranchising large amounts of the PnW community, just because they do not post here. They most talk/post elsewhere and be an active member of the community, but posting here does not excite them because of the echo chamber that has been created, specifically to shit on any non-EMC supporting post/comedy/w/e BS you folks wish to describe it as. 

 

The best change I believe as I stated earlier that @Buorhann might have missed is that those stats that can be measured be given by Alex and the staff, like best alliance growth, best membership growth, best military (he can track the damage) and we can discuss the parameters and set it up as a community (almost impossible, but one can dream) for the admins to take a final decision. The other perceptions would work on public relations and get out to vote strategies, but thats the most fair system since it gives all members equal opportunity to vote, regardless of their standing, or activity on PnW forums. The fact is we need a system that harmonises the vote for all sides, and any requirements apart from being a member of PnW, essentially disenfranchises new players and sets up an elitist structure which is unfair and bullshit when it comes to community votes. In essence a mixed system is far better for '18 than some sort of disenfranchising system which states that newer members cannot partake in community activities, just because they are new. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LordStrum said:

So much sexual tension. Jesus people, just !@#$ already.

BACK TO NOT GIVING A !@#$ ABOUT THIS PLACE

 

1 hour ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

I've got an idea! If people don't like that their enemies got votes, why not...

go to war over it? :o

It's a perfectly good CB

We've been trying! They just aren't attacking us! What does it take to provoke a war these days?

  • Upvote 1

UQllJcz.png?2

2nd, 4th, and 6th Adelphotes Princeps of Cornerstone, Ambassador to Black Knights, 4th Grand Pilus of Cornerstone, 2nd Chaplain of Cornerstone, 5th Questor Princeps of Cornerstone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Who Me said:

I see, so only what you think matters, other opinions don't matter if they don't line up with yours.

I think your opinion matters because you are here reading and posting, I already said it

I don't think the opinion of some random player who knows nothing should matter, this is why I would like to see the 2018 awards with motivated options that only people who really care about the community will make (and it also gives many talking points)

 

16 minutes ago, Curufinwe said:

First, it's only been two days.  Second, my only argument is that the awards should proceed as planned because so far no act has been committed that violates the rules as laid out prior to the poll

I agree with you on this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Micchan said:

I think your opinion matters because you are here reading and posting, I already said it

I don't think the opinion of some random player who knows nothing should matter, this is why I would like to see the 2018 awards with motivated options that only people who really care about the community will make (and it also gives many talking points)

Just because people don't post on the OWF doesn't mean they don't read them or talk to people on Discord or whatever other chat medium that is out there to use. A great many people don't post on the OWF because they are toxic as hell and they just don't want to be bothered dealing with it. So discounting their opinion is the wrong thing to do.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Who Me said:

Just because people don't post on the OWF doesn't mean they don't read them or talk to people on Discord or whatever other chat medium that is out there to use. A great many people don't post on the OWF because they are toxic as hell and they just don't want to be bothered dealing with it. So discounting their opinion is the wrong thing to do.

I usually stay away simply for my mental health. Look at this shit. It's a cluster !@#$.

39fb0c29716d84588918693fef6b7c9c.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we seriously talking about being so arrogant as to tell someone else that they can't vote because we don't trust them enough to understand the issue? Who would be ok with being disenfranchised because someone else doesn't trust them to understand the issue at hand?

Edited by Senatorius
Typo
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Just because people don't post on the OWF doesn't mean they don't read them or talk to people on Discord or whatever other chat medium that is out there to use. A great many people don't post on the OWF because they are toxic as hell and they just don't want to be bothered dealing with it. So discounting their opinion is the wrong thing to do.

In this thread I already said that if you don't come here you should not vote for categories related to this forum like best poster, and I said that many of the other categories should be voted by players who are playing this game enough to be able to do all those things you mentioned, players who know why they are voting an option and not players who vote the suggested option or the only option they know, this is why I suggested to count only votes with motivation for the next year

If you think this is wrong we have to accept the fact that we have different opinions

15 minutes ago, justakittywithabox said:

I usually stay away simply for my mental health. Look at this shit. It's a cluster !@#$.

I can't blame you

15 minutes ago, Senatorius said:

Are we seriously talking about being so arrogant as to tell someone else that they can't vote because we don't trust them enough to understand the issue?

Yep, this is why in politics to vote you must have a certain age

Edited by Micchan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Just because people don't post on the OWF doesn't mean they don't read them or talk to people on Discord or whatever other chat medium that is out there to use. A great many people don't post on the OWF because they are toxic as hell and they just don't want to be bothered dealing with it. So discounting their opinion is the wrong thing to do.

Agree. I don't post on OWF for several reasons. 1) I am busy with other more important things, 2) I prefer discord because of the ease of access and realtime communication,  3) public forums are too toxic,  4) public forums accomplish nothing for me that I can't already do without My opinion should still hold the same exact weight as anyone else, or we'll have to start getting into debate and argument about inequality, discrimination, and elitism. 

I'm assuming when she says "random player who knows nothing" she's referring to me but I will have her know I probably know way more than her, my forum account has been registered since December 10, 2015 nearly 2 weeks after I first started playing P&W. She probably just looked at my number of posts and said "OH, HE'S A RANDOM NOOB THAT JUST STARTED." 

  • Downvote 2

"I VM due to timezone differences" -Reuben Cheuk

 

timezoneVM.jpg.64e93c4270b92d26e0ac30572d9351eb.jpg 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having a young nation however is not in any shape or form an indicator of a brain that is underdeveloped or immature as is the case for restricting votes to adults.  I also believe that OWF has an age restriction to sign up ( impossible to police though). 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Micchan said:

In this thread I already said that if you don't come here you should not vote for categories related to this forum like best poster, and I said that many of the other categories should be voted by players who are playing this game enough to be able to do all those things you mentioned, players who know why they are voting an option and not players who vote the suggested option or the only option they know, this is why I suggested to count only votes with motivation for the next year

And do you know why you voted for who you voted for in every single award? Please do share your reasoning behind every single choice and I will do the same. Are you sure you're ready for that?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

"I VM due to timezone differences" -Reuben Cheuk

 

timezoneVM.jpg.64e93c4270b92d26e0ac30572d9351eb.jpg 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Micchan said:

In this thread I already said that if you don't come here you should not vote for categories related to this forum like best poster, and I said that many of the other categories should be voted by players who are playing this game enough to be able to do all those things you mentioned, players who know why they are voting an option and not players who vote the suggested option or the only option they know, this is why I suggested to count only votes with motivation for the next year

If you think this is wrong we have to accept the fact that we have different opinions

I can't blame you

Yep,

this is why in politics to vote you must have a certain age

If it's such an issue, why is it just being brought up now? What exactly is the issue here? Why was this such an issue after a few days of voting?

Also why does it MATTER to know who voted who? To complain more?

39fb0c29716d84588918693fef6b7c9c.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

The best change I believe as I stated earlier that @Buorhann might have missed is that those stats that can be measured be given by Alex and the staff, like best alliance growth, best membership growth, best military (he can track the damage) and we can discuss the parameters and set it up as a community (almost impossible, but one can dream) for the admins to take a final decision. The other perceptions would work on public relations and get out to vote strategies, but thats the most fair system since it gives all members equal opportunity to vote, regardless of their standing, or activity on PnW forums. The fact is we need a system that harmonises the vote for all sides, and any requirements apart from being a member of PnW, essentially disenfranchises new players and sets up an elitist structure which is unfair and bullshit when it comes to community votes. In essence a mixed system is far better for '18 than some sort of disenfranchising system which states that newer members cannot partake in community activities, just because they are new. 

This is the purpose (Or was) of the thread, to think tank on possible solutions, look through for any potential issues, and see if there are ways to manage them.

So I do appreciate those who actually contributed to the proper discussion at hand.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keeping the awards to objective stats as opposed to subjective opinion is possibly the best we will get. Most damage done by alliance in 2018 is easier than best military. It will not be perfect as most damage done will favour the alliance that gets the most ideal war scenario (lots of targets with high infra and inactive/uncoordinated players) but it is hard to argue that they didn't do the most damage. Best military is subjective (was BKs performance the best counting the position they were in vs the position their opponents were in etc.)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Buorhann said:

You guys are always falling back on this.  Like, seriously, over 80% of the replies has some petty passive aggressive jab about "OH YOU WANT THE WIN WAAAH".

I personally care less about the current votes.  I'm looking forward to next years.  This year is already screwed.  Let it go.

We've seen in the past how silly it can be, and we've seen now how silly it can be.

I've been on your side of the argument before and with the current way how voting is, I'm still on that side, however - you dumbasses are making it so very hard to support.  Seriously, some of you  go "We've been avoiding the forums" but now?   On voting, you're not avoiding the forums?  So weird.  Like you guys could've just mass voted as usual, then remained  quiet, and just watch the salt and enjoy the drama with some popcorn, but no...

Don't get me wrong though, I'm enjoying this to some extent, but I wish all of you whiners and salt miners would've kept your cancerous posts in the other threads where it was already occurring.

Your posts doesn't look like you care less about votes. It was the same structure pnw forum was following for a few awards now, you never mentioned anything like this (afaik of in this scale), you find it a problem enough to make a post only after Inq members started to vote on, which is why I doubt your intentions. On the other hand, if TKR were to get votes like last time, you would've never pointed a finger in the process. I agree this can be improved, but not with people like you, you are always going to pick some biased approach in a diplomatic way and put it in forums.

5 hours ago, Sketchy said:

I mean I see your point about validity, but ultimately its a popularity contest and I doubt you'll be able to get a community consensus on nominations so I think it should just stay how it is.

The real problem imo is some of the categories are dumb and inherently biased just by being voted on.

Best Alliance Growth: Can be mostly objectively measured, 95% of alliances in the game would just not be eligible if we were being unbiased.

Best Economic System: This can't be known by people outside an alliance generally.

Best Recruiting Staff: Same reason, Lots of new members doesn't mean a good recruiting staff, the staff could be garbage and they could be a big alliance with a popular theme.

Most Active Alliance:  This can't be known by people outside an alliance generally.

Best Alliance for New Players: Also completely difficult to quantify without joining yourself.

 

Cutting back on some of these stupid categories that are literally only able to be voted on with bias might at least improve the awards a bit.

May be in categories like "best economic system" alliances can make it public how much taxes they are running at, how much they are receiving as taxes everyday, how efficiently they are managing, how is their econ different from others etc.., then make others vote on the options, we can expect some decent judgment from voters.

Recruiting staffs, it can be measured based on how many new members apply to each alliances. Since plenty of alliances use automatic bots to send messages, new members prefer attractive messages, some form of reply from the one who is sending messages, how well they received in the alliance etc.., (we can also have speed of recruitment bot as a criteria as well)

Most active alliance can be measured if we are measuring in-game activity. We can easily prepare a bot which logs in activity of members, see when they log in every day, how frequent they log in (same can be done for discord as well, using discord bots). So yeah, most of these things can be measured one way or another, but organizers of these events never did it in past and they didn't do it this year as well.

4 hours ago, Micchan said:

I think your opinion matters because you are here reading and posting, I already said it

I don't think the opinion of some random player who knows nothing should matter, this is why I would like to see the 2018 awards with motivated options that only people who really care about the community will make (and it also gives many talking points)

Who are you to decide who is random player and who is not? Anyone you don't know becomes "random"? I don't post on forums, I don't encourage our members to post on forums, but they are part of our community, they stay in contact in discord, they interact with others. It's not necessary for others to agree to your point of view, we can debate about various issues, but calling our votes as rigging or invalid is total BS.

Edited by Bot
typos
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, justakittywithabox said:

Hooking up with an ex of the other alliance?

If we get desperate enough that might work. Rose, you guys got any protectorates you want to break up with?

UQllJcz.png?2

2nd, 4th, and 6th Adelphotes Princeps of Cornerstone, Ambassador to Black Knights, 4th Grand Pilus of Cornerstone, 2nd Chaplain of Cornerstone, 5th Questor Princeps of Cornerstone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bot said:

Your posts doesn't look like you care less about votes. It was the same structure pnw forum was following for a few awards now, you never mentioned anything like this (afaik of in this scale), you find it a problem enough to make a post only after Inq members started to vote on, which is why I doubt your intentions. On the other hand, if TKR were to get votes like last time, you would've never pointed a finger in the process. I agree this can be improved, but not with people like you, you are always going to pick some biased approach in a diplomatic way and put it in forums.

I would've said the same thing regardless of who was spamming what votes.  Hell, I would've spammed the votes myself and still created the same thread.  You can still hold a discussion on finding solutions for future voting threads while still being a paranoid forum troll or a honest legit voter.  Doesn't matter, and it doesn't detract from the purpose of the thread.

The fact you and the others who are constantly pointing this out, while there has been no bias shown otherwise, shows just how paranoid and/or pessimistic you guys are.  You're merely reinforcing the view some people have on you guys that you keep bringing up.

Hell, some of you, who have complained about rig voting in the past had prime opportunities to contribute or start up a discussion yourself.  I literally had a good conversation going, no bias, no alliance calling, no insults - but we get this.

"OH YOU WONT DO IT IF TKR WAS WINNING BUT I HAVE NO PROOF OTHERWISE TO SHOW THIS"

That's basically you right now.

I mean, look at the suggestions I stated myself.  I literally stated that we have a rep from each alliance (YES THAT INCLUDES YOU GUYS) to form a council of sorts to weed through the nominations.

If I was bias with my approach, why would I suggest such a thing?  Get over it.  Yes, I don't like IQsphere and this shit is reinforcing it, but I can approach people with no bias to hold a legit discussion on something that is meant to be community friendly on a neutral level.  I even supported your sphere through this drama shit telling people they can mass vote themselves to counter it or just get over it.  It's silly.  But yet I'm still bias.  Ok.

Edited by Buorhann
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

I would've said the same thing regardless of who was spamming what votes.  Hell, I would've spammed the votes myself and still created the same thread.  You can still hold a discussion on finding solutions for future voting threads while still being a paranoid forum troll or a honest legit voter.  Doesn't matter, and it doesn't detract from the purpose of the thread.

The fact you and the others who are constantly pointing this out, while there has been no bias shown otherwise, shows just how paranoid and/or pessimistic you guys are.  You're merely reinforcing the view some people have on you guys that you keep bringing up.

Hell, some of you, who has complained about rig voting in the past had prime opportunities to contribute or start up a discussion yourself.  I literally had a good conversation going, no bias, no alliance calling, no insults - but we get this.

"OH YOU WONT DO IT IF TKR WAS WINNING BUT I HAVE NO PROOF OTHERWISE TO SHOW THIS"

That's basically you right now.

What I'm doing is pointing out the bias that you (and others from EMC) are showing. May be I'm biased, just like everyone else, but tell me this, if you are genuine about any change, why didn't you utter even a single thing till Inq votes started to land? You were assuming we are not going to participate?

The burden of showing the proof falls on you, show me a similar thread that you made in previous years about how flawed the process was. You can call me anything, paranoid or pessimistic, I don't mind frankly about those names. Also, when did I ever complain about rig voting in the past? What I find disgusting is, EMC members are complaining about something which we were all doing in the past polls.

Edited by Bot
corrections
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

Feel free to point out the bias I showed.  I can easily show every post I replied with that supports your side through this.

You didn't utter a single word about how flawed the process is, till Inq votes started to come in, then start a post saying we need to reform things, this is what I called bias. Ofc you were diplomatic like usual.

Show me any forum post that you made regarding reforms to be made about how these polls are conducted before this.

Edited by Bot
corrections
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jax locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.