LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 You need to back that statement up with something even remotely resembling a fact. The dev group is not a hive mind as you're implying. It is undoubtedly not a hive mind. It is structured to engage in group think though. And I took the time to back that statement up earlier. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 It is undoubtedly not a hive mind. It is structured to engage in group think though. And I took the time to back that statement up earlier. No,it isn't structured so that people will just avoid confrontation. You're wrong there,I'm pretty sure I've been involved in proving you wrong there myself despite all your your well written theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 No,it isn't structured so that people will just avoid confrontation. You're wrong there,I'm pretty sure I've been involved in proving you wrong there myself despite all your your well written theories. Pretty sure you have not provided a single proof or otherwise. So, no. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Pretty sure you have not provided a single proof or otherwise. So, no. I'm pretty sure I've been involved in proving you wrong THERE myself despite all your your well written theories the bolded word means its important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 (edited) Your use of the word 'there' is dazzling. iirc correctly you said 'we do not like each other, therefore we do not engage in group think'. Of course groups with people who do not like each other are just as likely to do so - if not more so. Your current argument of "nu uh" is not impressive. Edited July 14, 2015 by LordRahl2 -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Your use of the word 'there' is dazzling. iirc correctly you said 'we do not like each other, therefore we do not engage in group think'. Of course groups with people who do not like each other are just as likely to do so if not more so. Your current argument of "nu uh". Is not impressive. Its not happening,there is conflict but you refuse to believe it. Fine.Enjoy the changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Did you fail to read before you replied or did you not understand the reply? Its not happening,there is conflict but you refuse to believe it. Fine.Enjoy the changes. Again: Presence of conflict does not imply an absence of group think. You do not understand the terms themselves. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 I wasn't going to throw my hat into the ring but I think I will. I think the dev group should remain closed. I work as a professional software developer and we never show our clients the internal work flow of developing software or how we come by designs. The design and workflow is for developers and no developer wants to see a client picking apart a work flow or saying the design process is flawed. However, the closed dev group could post minutes in a public area for greater transparency while not hindering the workflow that developers love. Bottom line is, in my professional opinion, let the developers work behind close doors but a minutes report of what was discussed would be nice. I personally think its a fair compromise and negates the possibility of proxying politics into development. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 I wasn't going to throw my hat into the ring but I think I will. I think the dev group should remain closed. I work as a professional software developer and we never show our clients the internal work flow of developing software or how we come by designs. The design and workflow is for developers and no developer wants to see a client picking apart a work flow or saying the design process is flawed. However, the closed dev group could post minutes in a public area for greater transparency while not hindering the workflow that developers love. Bottom line is, in my professional opinion, let the developers work behind close doors but a minutes report of what was discussed would be nice. I personally think its a fair compromise and negates the possibility of proxying politics into development. It is not really a dev group tbh. It is more an advisory board for the CEO. Unfortunately, it is not working very well and part of this is transparency. I doubt you will get much from their minutes. It would be far easier to simply unhide the boards and restrict posting rights to the associated membergroup. 2 -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 It is not really a dev group tbh. It is more an advisory board for the CEO. Unfortunately, it is not working very well and part of this is transparency. I doubt you will get much from their minutes. It would be far easier to simply unhide the boards and restrict posting rights to the associated membergroup. Easier for in-depth minutes to be published over your idea imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Easier for in-depth minutes to be published over your idea imho. Easier in what way? Mechanical implementation should be pretty easy. I am not intimately familiar with this forum but it should be a 2-3 minute procedure for a forum admin. Minutes would require significant work and would invite aspersions on the person writing them for what they chose to include or exclude from the minutes. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Easier in what way? Mechanical implementation should be pretty easy. I am not intimately familiar with this forum but it should be a 2-3 minute procedure for a forum admin. Minutes would require significant work and would invite aspersions on the person writing them for what they chose to include or exclude from the minutes. The group has been resistant to fully opening up, so you have to do this with time. First, you go the minutes and then you can push later for more transparency. There is also the options for the dev group to have a public readonly forum where they discussed hashed out ideas that may or may not have been worked on in the private area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avruch Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 I think Sheepy can get his advice any way he wants to. This is a business, not a democracy. His interests are necessarily aligned towards whatever will create the best atmosphere for more people to use his game and buy more credits. If he wants to cut out a lot of noise by controlling the group of people from whom he receives advice, that's his choice. Anyone should feel free to complain about his decisions (and Sheepy certainly seems to welcome and engage with criticism). But demanding that he change the makeup of his testers and advisers is not our place. If you want to be in the group, send him a PM asking to apply. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Ahh, easier in that way maybe so. Good idea. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 I think Sheepy can get his advice any way he wants to. This is a business, not a democracy. His interests are necessarily aligned towards whatever will create the best atmosphere for more people to use his game and buy more credits. If he wants to cut out a lot of noise by controlling the group of people from whom he receives advice, that's his choice. Anyone should feel free to complain about his decisions (and Sheepy certainly seems to welcome and engage with criticism). But demanding that he change the makeup of his testers and advisers is not our place. If you want to be in the group, send him a PM asking to apply. So we can !@#$ about his decision but not question the manner in which he reaches it? Your logic is a bit thin. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avruch Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 So we can !@#$ about his decision but not question the manner in which he reaches it? Your logic is a bit thin. How well is your approach working, so far? I'd argue that people !@#$ing about an elitist cabal are being and will always be ignored. Debating other non-actors (i.e. people with no say) over extremely minor points is also not a great strategy for effecting change. It's just irritating for anyone reading it, even if they agree with you. If you want to be involved, ask to be involved. You have no basis for demanding transparency - you are owed nothing. So far you've chosen to be the pedant philosopher ("Your logic is weak!") rather than offer a persuasive argument in favor of some other solution. I imagine this is exactly why Sheepy chooses to channel his useful advice from a small list of participants. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 How well is your approach working, so far? I'd argue that people !@#$ing about an elitist cabal are being and will always be ignored. Debating other non-actors (i.e. people with no say) over extremely minor points is also not a great strategy for effecting change. It's just irritating for anyone reading it, even if they agree with you. If you want to be involved, ask to be involved. You have no basis for demanding transparency - you are owed nothing. So far you've chosen to be the pedant philosopher ("Your logic is weak!") rather than offer a persuasive argument in favor of some other solution. I imagine this is exactly why Sheepy chooses to channel his useful advice from a small list of participants. Doesn't matter if you don't or do talk about the "elitist cabal" you're always pegged as such if you complain as it such a easy method of attack. Yeah no. First of all that'd betray things said up to this point, secondly we've all already been subjected many times to how they have such excellent characters and on the reasons on why "people like you" aren't included. As such I'd find it very odd for people labeled as jackasses to be accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 It is not really a dev group tbh. It is more an advisory board for the CEO. [Citation needed] I would believe you if you were actually in the CDG, but you aren't. (Unless you are a multi) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 [Citation needed] I would believe you if you were actually in the CDG, but you aren't. (Unless you are a multi) Because that's what it is? Definitions don't really need citations. -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Because that's what it is? Definitions don't really need citations. No, it isn't. Like I said, you have never actually seen the CDG. That isn't a definition. Unless you are a journalist for Infowars and Prison Planet. Wait a minute. Just wait a minute. I plan stuff. The final piece of the puzzle has fallen into place. We have all been blessed by one of Alex Jones' lead conspiracy theorists journalists. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted July 14, 2015 Administrators Share Posted July 14, 2015 Look, I just want to point this out - I created the Closed Development Group subforum and invited some players in because I wanted a sounding board with a little less noise for some ideas. It is not the end-all-be-all, I still use the Suggestion forum, and at the end of the day when a change is made, I am responsible. I listen to input and feedback from every single player that contacts me or posts something that I end up reading. I do my best to not be biased, and you'll probably be able to ask anyone and they can come up with a few changes that I've made that they don't like. If we were to compare the development/suggestion forums to the US government, to make an analogy, it would be something like this: The Game Suggestions forum is something like the House of Representatives. Everyone with a forum account can post and provide feedback there, and I do read and use the Game Suggestions forum. But letting everyone post and read what's there is a blessing and a curse, we see a lot of silly ideas and bad feedback there as well. The Closed Development Subforum is like the Senate, if all of the Senators were picked by the President. It's supposed to be players with more experience, different backgrounds, and ones that are interested in leaving alliance politics at the door to help provide feedback for a better game. At the end of the day, though, my position is not "President". I was not elected; this isn't a Democracy, but please do believe that I have every intention of being a benevolent dictator that can listen to constructive feedback and ideas, pick through the garbage, and take advice from all players, whether it's a PM, IRC Query, the Suggestions forum, or the CDG forum. It's then on me to consider each and every idea and decide on an implementation (or lack thereof) that must be built and added to the game. What the CDG comes down to is just a way to improve that process and help sort through some of the noise and clutter therein. 1 Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 No, it isn't. Like I said, you have never actually seen the CDG. That isn't a definition. Unless you are a journalist for Infowars and Prison Planet. Wait a minute. Just wait a minute. The final piece of the puzzle has fallen into place. We have all been blessed by one of Alex Jones' lead conspiracy theorists journalists. I'm really not understanding what exactly you're trying to argue. His definition of it coincides with how some people have come on here and defended the matter so arguing against it is... odd to say the least. Your last bit I'm hoping is a joke, a poor one but one nevertheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senatorius Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Hoping Sheepy or one of the dev group guys can answer this. How much time between Sheepy announcing a change to you guys passes and the rest of us find out? And to what extent do you find out all the details.? I think that would be my only real concern. .. and it is not an attempt to accuse anyone of murder or high treason. Apologies if it comes across as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Hoping Sheepy or one of the dev group guys can answer this. How much time between Sheepy announcing a change to you guys passes and the rest of us find out? And to what extent do you find out all the details.? I think that would be my only real concern. .. and it is not an attempt to accuse anyone of murder or high treason. Apologies if it comes across as such. It greatly varies. Sometimes Sheepy puts up an idea he has and it gets a great deal of discussion but it might be concluded to be a bad idea (with a lot of reasoning around why), sometimes Sheepy puts up an idea and it'll have tons of discussion and then more threads will be made with alternatives based on that discussion and it could go on for weeks. Sometimes Sheepy has a small idea, it gets a good reception and there might be a few formula tweaks from suggestions and he'll go and implement his idea in a day or two after coming up with it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) How well is your approach working, so far?Pretty well all thing considered. Yours? And it is the minor points that people bring up to me generally. I try to stay focused on the big rocks though. Edited July 15, 2015 by LordRahl2 -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts