Guild Wars 2

otome.2673:

Jerus.4350:

otome.2673:

Quick question since i am not playing for so long. Where can i vote for the Players/Guilds voting for thoose rulesets?

Guilds that participate in records (set a record) are invited to vote. So basically get involved and have your voice heard.

And there is only 1 record needed? Also if the record , lets say, 1 year old is? That diesnt sound very good if guilds are still voting for rules who arent good in pve anymore.

The requirement wasn’t very high but all had a quite recent record and interest towards more. The idea was to encourage more players doing records by including minor speedrunning guilds like DnT and rT.

Enko.6123:

So I have someone from DnT, vC, SC, and rT has expressed interest except the time proposed won’t work. We can always find a different time to include rT if we need to.

Anyone else want to participate at all? Invited Wethospu but don’t know if he wants to go or not.

Yes, I will come, unless I have something more important during the chosen time.

Anyways, here are some my observations:

First of all, the agenda should be decided carefully. The current agenda is a rule proposition which is practically same as currently, apart from few things. For meeting there are two outcomes.

1) People vote about same as they did before and the rules remain about same as currently.

2) People vote differently which raises a question about reliability of both previous polls and the meeting.

This means a different more reliable decision mechanism is needed. If that fails, which I see likely, I will probably just say “kitten this” and decide rules by myself. Then either people accept them and everything goes fine (unlikely), people just quit or DnT starts their own record hosting which causes even more chaos and probably everyone just quits.

I know some people think that there is a third option:

3) People decide about rules and everyone lives happily ever after.

I can say that’s not going to happen. People are very creative and they will always find new ways to stretch the rules. New issues will come up and the whole point of current poll system was to deal with those issues efficiently. The only reason poll system came up was that “just deciding rules on meetings” didn’t work.

Also based on last meetings, in about a 2-3 hour meeting you can decide 1-2 weeks worth of polls. For example creating a completely new rule set during one meeting won’t happen unless you spend there like 10 hours.
—-

So my humble suggestion is that we go directly to the question of a better decision mechanism.

• How to decide bigger changes?
• How to decide smaller changes?
• What issues are small and what are big?
• Who has decision power?
• Etc.

If that fails we still have the current system which in my opinion works fine.

From a lurker’s point of view, spoj view’s about restricted/unrestricted makes sense. Imo, it would lead to more fun and different options on every run. Restricted had it’s use yeah, but now … well we know that Arena Net pretty much don’t care about dungeons anymore. So why restrain when we can go with new fun things to watch/do ?

With that said, Nike, i know that you don’t like this idea at all (your caustics answers about it pretty much show it :p) but i don’t really understand why you are opposed to it, could you explain ?

I can’t answer for Nike, but I will say, I don’t want to see tournaments turn into jumping puzzle contests. That’s why I proposed a new set of twin rulesets, speed runs and tournament rules. Tournament being more restrictive preventing a win/loss coming down to making a single jump.

As a fan of watching these speed runs though, I do want to see what people can do when they let loose. Unrestricted simply allows too much to be competitive and interesting. Somewhere between the two opens things up to new tactics, new cool things, things I want to see done. That’s what I want to see from speed runs at this point. But, those things don’t belong in a tournament IMO.

Just like in professional fighting. The best fighter in the world may lose in a boxing match or even an MMA fight, but take the rules out and he’s an animal. The settings play a big part in things and I personally want to see what people can do at this point. I enjoy the jumping puzzles. I enjoy the IB4/meteor manipulations. I like the immob tricks. But, they’ve proven unpopular with people doing the runs, I wonder if it’s influenced by the replication within a singular time or if it’s just based on doing a speed run. In the end it’s up to what those people want to do, but all I can say is I want to see what they can do without tying their arms behind their backs.

Jerus.4350:

I can’t answer for Nike, but I will say, I don’t want to see tournaments turn into jumping puzzle contests. That’s why I proposed a new set of twin rulesets, speed runs and tournament rules. Tournament being more restrictive preventing a win/loss coming down to making a single jump.

As a fan of watching these speed runs though, I do want to see what people can do when they let loose. Unrestricted simply allows too much to be competitive and interesting. Somewhere between the two opens things up to new tactics, new cool things, things I want to see done. That’s what I want to see from speed runs at this point. But, those things don’t belong in a tournament IMO.

Just like in professional fighting. The best fighter in the world may lose in a boxing match or even an MMA fight, but take the rules out and he’s an animal. The settings play a big part in things and I personally want to see what people can do at this point. I enjoy the jumping puzzles. I enjoy the IB4/meteor manipulations. I like the immob tricks. But, they’ve proven unpopular with people doing the runs, I wonder if it’s influenced by the replication within a singular time or if it’s just based on doing a speed run. In the end it’s up to what those people want to do, but all I can say is I want to see what they can do without tying their arms behind their backs.

Makes sense. Thanks for your input

The ruleset is working as implemented right now, new records are being posted, reviewed and approved every day. We don’t currently have a pressing need to tweak it, nor do we have any need to totally revamp it. Voting each week on pointless topics is as big a waste of time as a community meeting to talk about this proposed revamp. Can we just stop both of these things until there is actual reasons for them to be done?

Stop the ruleslawyering maddness. Stop talking about rules. Go run records. Roleplaying as a bureaucrat isn’t as fun as all of you seem to act like it is.

You can use your own ruleset on tournaments.

spoj.9672:

You can use your own ruleset on tournaments.

I already am.

This has nothing to do with tournaments, my concern is people (myself included) have their time wasted by trivial nonsense.

NikeEU.7690:

The ruleset is working as implemented right now, new records are being posted, reviewed and approved every day. We don’t currently have a pressing need to tweak it, nor do we have any need to totally revamp it. Voting each week on pointless topics is as big a waste of time as a community meeting to talk about this proposed revamp. Can we just stop both of these things until there is actual reasons for them to be done?

Stop the ruleslawyering maddness. Stop talking about rules. Go run records. Roleplaying as a bureaucrat isn’t as fun as all of you seem to act like it is.

I basically want to have a meeting so we can stop the week to week votes. Let’s decide on a ruleset, get it done, and not change it unless something huge happens again.

Once we decide on the ruleset, we shouldn’t have to change it until there’s a major change from Anet (at this point, most likely HoT).

Wethospu, your 3rd option is what we’re aiming at. The baseline rules should be just that, baseline. If it’s not banned, then its allowed. This shouldn’t require a constant tweaking of the rules.

And one week after the meeting someone does a record with some new strategy that some people don’t like, like immobilizing that hotw boss, and what happens then?

if you read the proposed rules, that wouldn’t be a problem . ..

Just a few points i found while reading your proposed rules:
- The decision of the community about Fimbul is ignored.
- The ruleset doesn’t allow consumables for solos, duos and trios.
- Jumping at the start is disallowed? As far as i remember there were a lot of duos which used jumping as a way of communication to signal that they were ready for the run.
- If you can kill a mob before it spawns, is he considered hostile but inactive? There are a lot of spawnpoints in dungeons where mobs will try to spawn but instantly die to aoe, often even before visibly spawned. The dredge-champ in Fractals may count too, in the current record he is first visible with about half hp?
- I’m not a native english speaker, but doesn’t rule 5 need to read “Time must be…” instead of timer?

I’m with Whetospu for the agenda:

How to decide bigger changes?
How to decide smaller changes?
What issues are small and what are big?
Who has decision power?
Etc.

Well come along to the meeting. As I said, that proposed ruleset isn’t in stone. Was more so we had something to go off of to discuss. The entire point of this meeting is so we can discuss this stuff, get it nailed down, and stop the endless week to week voting.

As for the hostile but inactive thing, that’s targeted against bosses that just bug out as in they just stand there and do nothing and will never do anything because their AI was broken. First Alpha in CoE if you jump the doors is an example of this. Arah P4 bosses that you bug are also an example of this. With the current wording on the rule of not being able to attack bosses that can’t attack, you can’t Deep Freeze as they don’t attack while they’re frozen and bosses like Bjarl basically are going to suck to kill in accordance with the current wording.

This one? This is worded fine.
Videos may not be sped up or slowed down, and must be captured in normal time.

If you want to go off about your own ruleset: Can you please list all the differences of yours to the one from gw2dungeons.net(Especially if we already voted on them, and what that vote decided)? I doubt there would be a lot of people, who will do the work to figure that out for themselves. And if at the end of the meeting there is a difference on both rulesets, we will be worse of then now, because nobody will know, which ruleset is the right one. And some may even fell tricked, because the differences were never made clear.

Artemi.1437:

If you want to go off about your own ruleset: Can you please list all the differences of yours to the one from gw2dungeons.net(Especially if we already voted on them, and what that vote decided)? I doubt there would be a lot of people, who will do the work to figure that out for themselves. And if at the end of the meeting there is a difference on both rulesets, we will be worse of then now, because nobody will know, which ruleset is the right one. And some may even fell tricked, because the differences were never made clear.

I’m not trying to make a second ruleset. I’m trying to simplify the one we use for dungeons.net and just get it finalized so we don’t have endless votes. Heck I can change the proposed one to be an exact copy of dungeon.net and this will still be the same since its going to be a discussion hopefully followed by a decision. It’s not to just get on teamspeak to immediately do a vote. I just want to have a meeting so we can get all this stuff finalized instead of week after week of voting.
I’m hoping we have a quorum at the meeting so we can present it to Wethospu (if he isn’t there). If he wants to put it up for one final vote with his official way on gw2dungeons.net so that all 10 people listed have a chance then I’m fine with that.

If you need to know the differences on my proposed changes for how it’s applied, the only real change that I proposed is changing "Attacking enemies which don’t try to fight back is banned " to something that is a little more clear and to define what a hostile, inactive mob is.

Other than that, it’s pretty much the same. I stated the differences in my first post. Again, we’re going to discuss this and any other issues during the meeting.

Artemi, do you want to attend?

So again, why are we having a meeting? We don’t need a meeting to stop the weekly voting madness. We don’t need a meeting to reword the existing rules that we have now. I just don’t get it.

NikeEU.7690:

So again, why are we having a meeting? We don’t need a meeting to stop the weekly voting madness. We don’t need a meeting to reword the existing rules that we have now. I just don’t get it.

I agree with this; it’s basically pointless.

The only thing I think people need to agree on here is: are votes still OK if they only happen rarely for issues that guild leaders agree are a problem? Or do we hate votes entirely and want a completely new system? How frequent of votes is too frequent? Monthly? Annually? Patch-driven only?

There shouldn’t be votes for the sake of having votes, but I don’t believe there have been; a lot of the previous rules prior to the votes were confusing for approvers and not because they’re dumb, but because records keep pushing up against the rules’ limits.

The entire name of the game is to push the envelope, and that results in people trying new stuff. New stuff frequently either feels “like it’s gone too far” or is “just fine”, but opinions vary. Votes are needed to clarify those rulings so we don’t have to guess every time.

Really, all I want is for it to not be such a pain in the kitten to approve things in weird cases. If we want to implement an “approver has final say, period, deal with it” approach to stave off votes, I’m all for that too.

approver has final say will lead to even more kittened unrestricted promoting.

rules have always been pretty clear before weth took over (doesnt mean i have a problem with weth, i have more of a problem with how some approvers handle the situation).

I may participate, or may not, depends on the rest of my guildmates, as they are higher in rank then me and actually did some records, but will probably see a meeting as to timeconsuming and nervwracking to attend

Regarding the inacitve Mobs: If i understand correct, your definition is unable to fullfill the wish of the community regarding Fimbul and therefore already obsolet? If you wish to make the rules clearer but in that process loose the point of the rules, ain’t that a futile exercise? But enough of that.

The point of the meeting, and as far as i can see it’s only point, is to make the rules final for an undefined intervall of time, but probably a few months.
So we will have the same problem as before the weekly voting started, that as the game and the strategies used keep evolving, there will be more and more edgecases, making it hard for our referees (the approvers) to decide if a run is legal or not and more and more shady for the recordrunners, if their records will get approved.
It seems to me your motivation for this is reduced time investment about the ruledeciding process for the “general public”, meaning the record running guilds. But i doubt this will be achieved, as the meeting will probably last for 2-3 hours and the timeinvestment needed for the (bi-weekly) votes is about 10 minutes. So this one meeting will use up the time of about half a year of votes. The maximum i read here in the forum about the time intervall between proposed meetings. At the same time getting less things decided, being a lot slower to react to new things and more uncertainty on all sides of the recordrunning community.
So instead of a rulediscussion, that we already had so many of, our first point on the meeting agenda should probably be, if we want static (for what lenght of time?) rules or the votes, whenever something pops up? Not that we already did a vote on it, but i’m fine with discussing it again.
The next point should probably be which one is to set higher: Decisions made in the meeting, or decisions made by the votes, if we find out there is a difference afterwards. This is to avoid any confusion after we have the results of the meeting. Personally i would weight the decisions of votes a lot higher then ones made on a meeting, but thats probably just me.

In short:
Proposed meeting agenda:
- Static Rules, or reacting to new issues?
- Which to weight more: Meeting decisions or vote decisions?
- Is there a better decision mechanism then current votes or meetings?

NoTrigger.8396:

i have more of a problem with how some approvers handle the situation.

Now would be a good time to discuss the approver list, then, if you think the issue is with them. We can remove some of them and add in some new ones if people think there are problem-children and there are good suggestions for replacements.

i dont want to discuss the approver list and i dont want anyone to be removed. but it would be cool if some people did their job instead of passively trying to promote unrestricted stuff, because “i no understand da rulez”.
again, rules were clear before. why do some people have issues with it all of the sudden?

You should have the courage to give names, even if everyone know who you’re talking about, it’s a completly childish attitude you have here.

Btw, the simple fact than people vote for different things, show that there is a divergence of opinions in the community. Rules aren’t that clear (there would be NO discussions if that was the case), and i can understand that weekly voting is annoying, so a final meeting would be a good compromise to fix it once and for all. But no voting AND no meeting, even when some divergences arises ? Seriously ?

Hes clearly referring to me. I may promote unrestricted. But the issues i have had with approving records are nothing to do with that. Also as an approver i make sure i understand the intended difference between restricted and unrestricted. Unfortunately the people submitting dont seem to put the same effort in and the difference has become blurred in recent months.

So even if all that needs changing is rewording of current rules. The meeting will still be useful to decide on whether to just go to a singular ruleset for 5 man groups. And a singulur ruleset for small man groups. Merge restricted and unrestricted together and avoid using the names which clearly misrepresent the rulesets. Hash it out in one go. Voting takes time to sort out. With a meeting it can all be decided and discussed in one go.

I think we should first figure out whether anyone would vote differently if rules were named something else. Removing unrestricted should be trivial since no one really cares about it. Starting from a scratch is an option but I think voting would still be better for that. I can just reopen all votes.

Kordash.2197:

You should have the courage to give names, even if everyone know who you’re talking about, it’s a completly childish attitude you have here.

Btw, the simple fact than people vote for different things, show that there is a divergence of opinions in the community. Rules aren’t that clear (there would be NO discussions if that was the case), and i can understand that weekly voting is annoying, so a final meeting would be a good compromise to fix it once and for all. But no voting AND no meeting, even when some divergences arises ? Seriously ?

It’s already finalized if we exclude all future issues. So a meeting to verify that would be quite pointless.

Kordash.2197:

You should have the courage to give names, even if everyone know who you’re talking about, it’s a completly childish attitude you have here.

Btw, the simple fact than people vote for different things, show that there is a divergence of opinions in the community. Rules aren’t that clear (there would be NO discussions if that was the case), and i can understand that weekly voting is annoying, so a final meeting would be a good compromise to fix it once and for all. But no voting AND no meeting, even when some divergences arises ? Seriously ?

In the last 4 months there have been lot’s of votes, but no actual divergence, which is why the voting is a problem. Very few of the votes have been contentious, very few of the issues have been contentious. That’s the issue. We have voted on votes to voting on clarifications no one needed with eventualities no one wanted. That has bred a lot of discontent. A meeting isn’t necessary to resolve that all that’s needed is there to be no votes until there are real issues.

and no one said no future meeting or voting when there are actual contentious issues. Right now the voting is pointless and a meeting would be equally pointless. If and when there is a need for it, we can have votes and/or meetings.

Ok then Nike, then what’s your solution for the right now? As it is, we’re going to continue on the path of weekly voting.

I’m about to give up on just trying to get everyone together just so we can work this out now but you apparently don’t want a meeting, you don’t want to continue the current weekly voting, but suggest no alternative for way ahead. Balls in your court, suggest something or get on board with someone who’s trying to resolve issues either with having a meeting to get things finalized or continue with Wethospu and the weekly voting. If you don’t have a solution but all you’re doing is complaining about the people who are trying to resolve something, then what are you doing?

As far as I can tell the only contentious issues that have arisen are the out of bound issues, attacking bosses before they are able to attack, and then the other one off issues for specific things that are contradictions to how they are allowed in other paths like jumping past doors is ok for some but not ok for others. The rest has just been some random votes that not really sure why we had them.

NikeEU.7690:

Ideas, just throwing it out to save everyone some time.

1. Keep the rules as they exist today.
2. Stop the weekly voting/tweaking/clarifying minute non-issues and reserve voting for new issues of severe importance where there is actual controversy and the community opinion seems to be actually divided and/or meta resets.
3. Have a meeting once a year to discuss larger ruleset changes.
4. Everyone kitten for a while and play the game.

If this is your solution with keeping the rules as they exist right now, rule 11 is still an issue with how it is worded. Other than that, I think its fine to keep the rules as they stand now if rule 11 is worded better and we stop the weekly votes. Still think it would have been faster to decide this all on voice comms together but hey sure, let’s toss this up for another vote.

After all these discussions and people’s opinions going from left to right, would it be too much to ask that you guys could consider that perhaps things you find pointless are important for someone else? Sure, there have been pointless votes but comments like “most polls were pointless” just shows how out of touch you are.

About efficiency of “all on voice comms together”. This has already lasted almost a week. Is even the date decided yet?

The efficiency of voice comms comes in once we all get together. Comparing the discussion of when to have a meeting to actually having a meeting is comparing apples to oranges.

August 2nd has been proposed and I haven’t heard anything against that date so how about Aug 2 at 10:00 AM Eastern Time (2:00 PM GMT).

Also changed the limit to 5 so a guild can bring a team.

Does this mean you’ll be attending when we have it?

No matter what actually goes down during the meeting, I’ll be there if it’s on the second of August. If only it’s just to say we dont need a meeting. The entire discussion here alone has been showing how much disagreement there still is regarding the subject.

Wethospu.6437:

After all these discussions and people’s opinions going from left to right, would it be too much to ask that you guys could consider that perhaps things you find pointless are important for someone else? Sure, there have been pointless votes but comments like “most polls were pointless” just shows how out of touch you are.

I think it’s just as fair to turn the question around and ask what you (or anyone else) thought was important?

By my count, the molten facility out of bounds and the chain Immob are the only two things that have genuinely needed community clarification and the second of those was questionable at that since most people seem to have not had a problem with it. FWIW, if those two topics had been the only thing we voted on since this started we wouldn’t be having this discussion in the first place since people would have been satisfied.

I consider things which several people have asked about important. I have also done my best to not filter issues based on my opinion so I wouldn’t influence the result (which ironically, I have also been accused of). For example stuff like arah p3 door, dialogue skipping, etc. might have been decided on some previous meetings and the result is quite predictable. But since there are no documentation, not everyone knows are those allowed or some sort of a grey area.

Yes, I could have just added those by myself but I thought it would be better to do a poll about them to ensure there would be no confusion or further issues. Especially when the effort of answering a trivial poll is like 1 minute. Much less than the time used to complain about it.

Every poll easily takes me 30 minutes to set up (including planning, writing and so on). Do you think I would add stuff just for my amusement?

Obviously it would be the easiest and fastest for everyone if I made the decisions by myself but so far people have wanted to do them by themselves.

We’d like to have representatives as well, please add Rena Drayen for tS. I’ll send more names if needed in a bit.

Wethospu.6437:

the effort of answering a trivial poll is like 1 minute.

But then that’s one entire minute less available to train to land comets :s

Wethospu.6437:

Every poll easily takes me 30 minutes to set up (including planning, writing and so on). Do you think I would add stuff just for my amusement?

Don’t martyr yourself for us. If it troubles you don’t do it.

Obviously it would be the easiest and fastest for everyone if I made the decisions by myself but so far people have wanted to do them by themselves.

It would be easiest and fastest for everyone if ANYONE was allowed to make decisions by fiat. Benevolent dictatorship is the most efficient form of government, but has a lot of potential pitfalls around the interpretation of benevolence.

NikeEU.7690:

It would be easiest and fastest for everyone if ANYONE was allowed to make decisions by fiat. Benevolent dictatorship is the most efficient form of government, but has a lot of potential pitfalls around the interpretation of benevolence.

I’ll try to remember that quote for the next time you “benevolently” try to monopolise record hosting

Zelyhn Lekovitch.2867:

NikeEU.7690:

It would be easiest and fastest for everyone if ANYONE was allowed to make decisions by fiat. Benevolent dictatorship is the most efficient form of government, but has a lot of potential pitfalls around the interpretation of benevolence.

I’ll try to remember that quote for the next time you “benevolently” try to monopolise record hosting

Maybe you should check your chat box screen shots, it was my suggestion that we offer that service, not Nike’s. TBH I am out for world domination but I’ll settle for destroying all of your euro dreams.

Also, there should be a vote to decide which guilds can even compete for records. This way we can keep the club even more elusive and prevent trashy “I quit the game” people from participating in further discussion.

Wow Card This is very … intersting, thanks for your input!

You did mention people “trashing” though, let’s talk about that.

We can all see that Nike has been irresponsibly trashing all record initiatives since the community prevented him from carrying out his plan to monopolise records. This attitude is no tolerable. Of course there are people constructively criticising the very young system we have in place, like Enko, but at least he is not trashing. I think it would be good to take a step back, try to forget about your damaged egos, and look at the situation.

Weth put in place a mechanism that is very efficient because it allows the community to finely tune the record scene.

This ambitious system was not perfect. Even Weth is humble enough to admit this. But it is very easy to improve. In a way, Enko’s proposal is a step in this direction: instead of continuous voting, vote all at once for one big settlement – why not. This does not mean that the voting system is flawed. It means that it can be built upon.

We can improve it by discussing without trashing.

I am tired of seeing people like Nike say things like “this is bad, duh”. I am tired of people senselessly calling out on Spoj – or even trying to have him resign :o I am tired of the irrational negativity that comes from a few players that we all know.

Are you really that salty?

For a change, be helpful and assist Weth to improve the system instead of insulting him.

I didn’t mention “trashing” trashy is an adjective used to describe the state/condition/etc of something or someone eg: white trash, euro trash. Nor did I say anything against Weth, I merely suggested even more bureaucratic safeguards to insure the current system stays in place.

I am sure we’re all tired of seeing people so delusional like.. well you know those FEW players take things so out of context and can never seem to admit that they are less than perfect. Oh well.

Zelyhn Lekovitch.2867:

I am tired of seeing people like Nike say things like “this is bad, duh”. I am tired of people senselessly calling out on Spoj – or even trying to have him resign :o I am tired of the irrational negativity that comes from a few players that we all know.

nobody wants spoj to resign. but its quite obvious what he is trying to do and when weth took over everyone knew this was going to happen..
he even tried it before. unrestricted rules were changed because he said it will make unrestricted runs more interesting and the old rules were holding unrestricted back.

if you are so desperate for the unrestricted stuff and if you prefer to jump around like tarzan in the jungle, then use the unrestricted ruleset. but dont try to turn the restricted ruleset into a circus.

and for the thing with nike, you are stuck in delusions zelyhn.

Zelyhn Lekovitch.2867:

For a change, be helpful and assist Weth to improve the system instead of insulting him.

thats what people were trying to do..

you dont need weekly votings or even meetings to decide stuff that was decided in meetings a long time ago.
just allow whatever is not breaking the rules and if a major problem shows up and the majority of the community thinks its not ok, then you can still vote.

Delusional about Nike??

I know you three are DnT hivelings, but you cannot be so blind!
Allow me to refresh your memory.

When Weth suggested that records are hosted on gw2dungeons, Nike fought as much as he could against the idea. He through everything he had, he argued relentlessly – yet senselessly – and in the end the better option prevailed. In such situation, a reasonable man, a guild leader, would realise he had acted with too little judgement and too much ego. A sensible man would accept the will of the community. But what did Nike do? Oh it was quite clear!

The DnT website page where he wanted to host the records was changed for a page where he directly insulted Weth, and of course rT because why not. I have rarely seen so much salt in my life.

We can all see that the salt is all over the place when Nike adresses Weth, and when DnT hivelings fail to constructively discuss with Spoj. You guys wanted Wethospu’s initiative to fail since the start.

But now everybody can see how beneficial it is to have Weth in charge.

_

Of course there is much room for discussion and improvement.

Spoj may or may not have a point. Discuss with him, let the community express itself. Don’t go behind the scenes to try and shut him down.

Weth’s voting pace may have been too high. The reasons why there was so much voting have been stated clearly many times yet you guys decide to ignore them for some salty reasons: need to clarify rules, need to decide on how to decide. The advantages of such approach are clear: record approvers and record setters have less grey areas to deal with.

I cannot fathom why you would prefer to keep lengthy meetings and unclear rules instead of Weth’s system, but if such is your desire then express it without trashing and the community can then make its mind.

Finally you are no required to take part in all the votes if you think it is so “atrocious” and if you have requests Weth appears to be very efficient at addressing them provided you express them constructively.

dude, nike had nothing to do with the records being hosted by dnt.
not sure how often people need to repeat it?!
if you want i can write it down, send it to you and you can hang it over your bed..

and im not trying to shut down spoj, i even said so in another post. if he wants unrestricted to become a thing, im fine with it. but i dont think trying to merge the unrestricted and restricted ruleset is the right way to do it.

nobody wanted weths initiative to fail. but people knew it will probably end up like this.

and if you are tired of irrational negativity, then start with yourself and stop your witch hunt.

Zelyhn Lekovitch.2867:

Finally you are no required to take part in all the votes if you think it is so “atrocious” and if you have requests Weth appears to be very efficient at addressing them provided you express them constructively.

yep. at one point this community will blow up itself anyway.

Nike said it himself that he was the manager of the DnT record hosting.

The speed record community will not blow up itself unless we let people like you have their way.

Seriously, what is wrong with some (not all) DnT folks??
If you cannot have a toy only for yourself then you do everything you can to break it??
Grow up.

it is already blowing up itself.

also i heard there is an EU guild that is just as obsessed with nike as you are. maybe you should join them.

NoTrigger.8396:

it is already blowing up itself.

If the record initiative fails, it will be your (DnT) responsibility only.

first you say “you are no required to take part” and then you say its our responsibility.

let me know when you are back to reality.

I feel sorry for Enko. He’s pushing the initiative to resolve issues but instead his efforts gets derailed into pointless arguments.

We’re having a meeting at 2nd of august. Collect your opinions and discuss it then where it can be constructive.

Snowball.3497:

I feel sorry for Enko. He’s pushing the initiative to resolve issues but instead his efforts gets derailed into pointless arguments.

We’re having a meeting at 2nd of august. Collect your opinions and discuss it then where it can be constructive.

Sounds like you’re planning on being there. Sent you an invite.

August 2nd seems to work for everybody so we’ll do it then.

NikeEU.7690:

—

Obviously it would be the easiest and fastest for everyone if I made the decisions by myself but so far people have wanted to do them by themselves.

It would be easiest and fastest for everyone if ANYONE was allowed to make decisions by fiat. Benevolent dictatorship is the most efficient form of government, but has a lot of potential pitfalls around the interpretation of benevolence.

Exactly. Different decisions methods have different pros and cons. But there is no decision method which would be fast, easy and give everyone what they wants.

If people want faster and easier decisions, that means giving more decision power to me or someone else (like a council of few players). If people want to affect the result they have to get involved some way. For example I could make all decisions by myself and then we could have a poll if enough people disagree with any decision.

While Enko’s idea of a quick voice comm meeting where everything is settled sounds good on a paper, it’s not very realistic.

Also just doing nothing rarely helps if there is an issue. I’m not sure if the issue is just a few people causing drama when they don’t get what they want, but having a meeting should calm things down.

NoTrigger.8396:

—

nobody wants spoj to resign. but its quite obvious what he is trying to do and when weth took over everyone knew this was going to happen..
—

What exactly is “this”? I would prefer more fact based discussion instead of using subjective terms. People may agree with you even when they interpret it differently.

—
you dont need weekly votings or even meetings to decide stuff that was decided in meetings a long time ago.
just allow whatever is not breaking the rules and if a major problem shows up and the majority of the community thinks its not ok, then you can still vote.

As explained above, I got people asking about those things since they didn’t know whether they are truly allowed or some sort of a grey area. I felt it was more safe to make a quick poll instead of adding stuff to rules on my own.

“What is not breaking the rules” is not 100% clear since lots of terms are subjective. If people want, I can interpret them as I want. Then we can vote if enough people disagree with something.

NoTrigger.8396:

—
nobody wanted weths initiative to fail. but people knew it will probably end up like this.
—

Yes, it’s unfortunate when the system is made more open, people abuse it by stirring up drama.

NoTrigger.8396:

it is already blowing up itself.

also i heard there is an EU guild that is just as obsessed with nike as you are. maybe you should join them.

It only blows up when people stir up drama on purpose. It won’t magically self detonate.

Anyways, perhaps I’m really dumb. But I have waited weeks for someone to explain me what is so horrible with the current situation. The voting pace has already slowed since the backlog was dealt with. Current rules are mostly the same as before. What exactly is so different than before?

I’m not saying the system couldn’t or shouldn’t be improved. I have just seen so much emotion based bashing and hating against the current situation.

Wethospu.6437:

But I have waited weeks for someone to explain me what is so horrible with the current situation. The voting pace has already slowed since the backlog was dealt with. Current rules are mostly the same as before. What exactly is so different than before?

That’s just it: there was no backlog. All the stupid pointless votes to end up at the same place we could have been without the stupid votes. And you would have avoided all the trap votes that had trick question type results, which really kittened people off. I’m sure you are probably not great aware of how upset basically everyone was when an innocuous vote on a typical non-issue had the result of unbanning of lupi wall. People were extremely angry, I’m sorry I have to be the one voicing it to you and explaining it when I have people from every guild whispering me every day about the situation. I know English isn’t everyone’s first language so they dont post here but don’t think it’s just me.

Secondly, I was not the least bit involved with the records when they were on our site. I didn’t touch the rules, I didn’t approve records, I didn’t create the subforum and I didn’t create the leaderboard. It wasn’t my idea to host it, it wasn’t anything I concerned myself with. The only thing I did was post about it on reddit, because a post I make is more likely to be seen and not buried immediately. I hope that clarifies it for you #dntspiracies

Lastly, we aren’t trying to take over anything. We don’t want to. This ingrate community, as you now know first hand Weth, isn’t super thankful of the hardwork people put in to organize things. I’ve said from the start of your administration that you’ve done an awesome job with the site and the functionality of it. Better than anyone could have hoped. The criticism I have, and very many others share, is how you took it upon yourself to revamp/revise/clarify the rules, which I don’t think people were too interested in. I’ll be extra clear; there are two jobs here. One is hosting the records and leaderboard. The other is making sure the rules are posted and the records adhere to them. You did a perfect job with the former. You took the latter job as a chance to innovate and revise when that is NOT what most people expected of your or wanted you to do. FWIW, I still think the voting mechanism could work but only if it isn’t abused with trick questions and useless clarifications and is reserved for matters of serious importance.

NikeEU.7690:

Wethospu.6437:

But I have waited weeks for someone to explain me what is so horrible with the current situation. The voting pace has already slowed since the backlog was dealt with. Current rules are mostly the same as before. What exactly is so different than before?

That’s just it: there was no backlog. All the stupid pointless votes to end up at the same place we could have been without the stupid votes. And you would have avoided all the trap votes that had trick question type results, which really kittened people off. I’m sure you are probably not great aware of how upset basically everyone was when an innocuous vote on a typical non-issue had the result of unbanning of lupi wall. People were extremely angry, I’m sorry I have to be the one voicing it to you and explaining it when I have people from every guild whispering me every day about the situation. I know English isn’t everyone’s first language so they dont post here but don’t think it’s just me.

Could you explain how do you know better than I how often I was contacted about the rules? Also I would like to hear why would I create pointless polls on purpose when it just wastes my time?

Yes, I did some mistakes with the polls, and so did people who voted on them. Those things often happen with new systems. Yes, I knew people would get upset about the wall on wall. My choices were either influence the result or let it go and fix it next week. No permanent harm was done. Could you get over it so we can move on?

Your results don’t really match with mine. You think I don’t talk with people at all? Most people I have talked with are interested in record running, and not that much with voting. They don’t seem to care that much. Why would they whisper you everyday about the situation? What did they exactly tell you?

Lots of people seem to be mostly confused about what this all complaining is all about. Obviously lots of people also find some problems with the system but it’s something we can work on, without filling the forum with emotion based crap.

Secondly, I was not the least bit involved with the records when they were on our site. I didn’t touch the rules, I didn’t approve records, I didn’t create the subforum and I didn’t create the leaderboard. It wasn’t my idea to host it, it wasn’t anything I concerned myself with. The only thing I did was post about it on reddit, because a post I make is more likely to be seen and not buried immediately. I hope that clarifies it for you #dntspiracies

Lastly, we aren’t trying to take over anything. We don’t want to. This ingrate community, as you now know first hand Weth, isn’t super thankful of the hardwork people put in to organize things. I’ve said from the start of your administration that you’ve done an awesome job with the site and the functionality of it. Better than anyone could have hoped. The criticism I have, and very many others share, is how you took it upon yourself to revamp/revise/clarify the rules, which I don’t think people were too interested in. I’ll be extra clear; there are two jobs here. One is hosting the records and leaderboard. The other is making sure the rules are posted and the records adhere to them. You did a perfect job with the former. You took the latter job as a chance to innovate and revise when that is NOT what most people expected of your or wanted you to do. FWIW, I still think the voting mechanism could work but only if it isn’t abused with trick questions and useless clarifications and is reserved for matters of serious importance.

I would rather not get involved with this conspiracy stuff. It’a discussion which won’t end up anywhere.