|
Post by superflytnt on Jun 14, 2007 15:47:14 GMT -5
It doesn't. As I thought we decided that the polls would be locked, they were not, and those threads have become pissing contests yet again.
I'm done being involved with this. I've already acquired a domain and I'm going to work something out on my own. This is the reason why direct democracies have failed throughout history.
|
|
|
Post by YodaBreaker on Jun 14, 2007 15:56:32 GMT -5
When you create polls when no one's around to lock them and have people start voting, you get what's happened. This is the problem of doing things quickly - lots of unintended consequences come up. I had agreed to locked polls, but there wasn't time to lock them, and there were also polls being made on questions that hadn't even been raised for debate yet (e.g., Stun), while other polls weren't made on issues others had thought debated to death (e.g., Luke/Han Solo as Stormtrooper). Sorry that you feel like this didn't work out the way you wanted it to, but it's the price of a hasty pace.
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jun 14, 2007 16:07:14 GMT -5
There's been no measure of pace, my friend. These debates have been ongoing for months, but as GE said, S.O.G.O.T.P. The idea was to get the game fixed, and this is never going to happen at this rate. These are simple questions, not creating cold fusion in a dixie cup using a helium baloon and a pen-light.
As complex as some seem to be, at their root there is a clear point of logic that will add to the game what it has been lacking - a Flow Chart of powers. Chris and I discussed that today and that was the goal of all of this. To have a clear, concise gameplay flow that anyone could follow, with the rules and verbiage set that they would both work within the confines of the existing figures (as all but Webhead have no control over) yet would seamlessly integrate in such a way with existing idioms that the new ruleset would make utter and complete sense, and most importantly, be consistent.
Let's take Transform. That's an easy one. Why, if a figure is going to TRANSFORM, would they start in an alternative location? I can see why the knocked figure would end up in the defeated pile, sure, but how could Webhead possibly see this as a one-to-one "Recruit" replacement for the Transformers line? If that was the case, why make it a Transform and not just use recruit? It's not like the toy can physically transform. So, by that train of logic, the Transform MUST be, in spirit, a variant of the RECOVER power, by nature of the verbiage, hence it should stand where it's previous form ended up after it's fall. That's so clear to a great many, based on the VERBIAGE of the power. Now whether Hasbro or Brett intended to clear it up later, it still leaves a margin of room for interpretation. This causes delays in game and attrition. Why not just use common sense - if something transforms, it becomes something else. Where in that does it say "Transform and move to another area?". That part is the rub. All the rest I can see past, but that makes no sense to me, although it took Malform and Radar to show me the way.
So, all of the boardies can piss and moan about, back and forth, debating pointlessly, or they can act. I choose to act.
|
|
|
Post by greyelephant on Jun 14, 2007 16:32:18 GMT -5
Why the polls became a battle ground, I don't have an exact answer.
I think Y.B. is correct in saying we are being hasty. I don't think we are making progress at this rate, and that was my main point yesterday. I should have elaborated a bit more instead of being straight forward and just blurting out a solution with out thinking more so of the consequences.
With that said, here is my feelings on what I have seen and what I would like to see.
#1. I don't mind a debate, but sometimes you need to make your point and move on. If you can't give anymore examples or elaborations to up hold your argument, then it needs to be dropped. I am sick of the Transform argument. It is no longer a debate.
#2. Only a select group needs to be involved. Let's face it, YB is correct. This should have been a closed door discussion. We screwed up, now let's fix it.
#3. Let the Mods or even YB pick up to, I am guessing 5 to 7 individuals who can debate the issues. Let them be discussed in a mannerly way, so that we aren't ATTACKING each. Let them be discussed for an appropriated amount of time before we go to a blind vote. We no longer discuss during the vote. We simply vote nothing more. Your time for discussing is over at this point.
#4. Once voted on, we tally and pen it.
#5. Then we break dance and play Twister until our little hearts explode! ;D
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jun 14, 2007 17:16:36 GMT -5
Like I said, this should be a RULES COMMITTEE. There should be an agenda (which was set), involved members (which were set and acted upon) and a discussion. There should be a limit - 1 post per member of the committee per item, then 1 rebuttal. Once all involved have opined, go to a vote, then move on. Haste is not a factor here, as we've not really been jumping to any conclusions or not allowing time or fair share, but when there is no order to anything (which I tried to keep) then nothing will get done. You get Grievous jumping in with theories before he even looks at the bottom of figures to make sure what he's saying is even accurate, and then you get 10 guys jumping on him telling him he's wrong, then you get 2 or 3 more either defending him or berating him further.
None of it is effective. It's like the idiots who banter about meeting about how to hold a meeting. This is exactly what we've become.
And I love the fact that YB is back as he has a keen intellect, but him on a rules committee is like Saddam Hussein on the Anti-Torture and Human Rights committee!! ;D Let's not forget who argued VEHEMENTLY that force moving was OK! ROFL ;D
|
|
|
Post by grievous on Jun 14, 2007 17:34:07 GMT -5
Hey, I looked at the bottom of the figures. They just so happened to be the only error figures of their kind is all ;D.
Either way, I officially anti-nominate myself from even the slightest, most tiniest, ittsiest-bittsiest, microscopic, -10% probability, more likely that the Rapture will happen in the next 3 seconds, chance of being on any rules committee. I'm sick of debating, point-making, throat-slashing, mud-slinging, finger-pointing, and arguing.
I need a break... and a drink. Preferably non-alcoholic considering I'm under-age and also sXe.
Oh well. Have fun, guys, and keep your stick on the ice.
|
|
|
Post by greyelephant on Jun 14, 2007 18:36:50 GMT -5
Step one:
Identify how many people are needed for the committee.
I am guessing around 5-7 people, no more. I feel like too many people will just confuse the topic at hand.
Step two:
Determine who is welcomed to the committee.
Either volunteers are picked and then selected by either a Mod or some other outsider who is not currently running for the position.
This could also be based off of seniority.
Step three:
Thread needs to be locked so that only members of the committee can have access to posting.
This will prohibit nonchalant comments from outsiders who could possibly clog up the thread.
So, I know I would like to be part of the committee. Please put me down as candidate #1.
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jun 14, 2007 18:51:58 GMT -5
Like I said before (and this includes YOU Grievous, for as much as you irritate, I do believe you enlighten in equal portions)
Malform - For his calm demeanor (usually ;D ) and his grasp of webdesign and the DB. Not to mention he knows 'tix all too well.
Joe Manzo - I know he doesn't want to be involved, but he is the voice of moderation and calm in a great many things, and is incredibly well respected for a variety of things.
Greyish Elephant - Sheer interest, enthusiasm, and ability to so bluntly state his points that there is no Grey area.
YodaBreaker - If anyone knows how to skirt rules, it's this guy. Not only highly intelligent, reasoned, and skilled at Attacktix lore, he's the one who will figure out what the rest of us don't, and be able to spell it out clearly.
TNT - Brash, charming, handsome, and the born leader. ;D Vast experience in RPGs and game creation, creation of committes, presiding committees, and overall leadership value.
Grievous - Intelligent, articulate, and young enough to speak for the middle-to-late teens crowd, as well as see things in a perspective that some of us coots wouldn't.
TurboMagnus - Posts respectfully, knows Attacktix, and is an "X" factor. My main reason is that in everything I read of his, the words are generally well-reasoned. The middle-of-the-road guy.
Defender of New Paradon - His skill with Transformers Lore, as well as intelligence, good temper and manners, and sound advice thus far given. Clearly a good choice.
Those are who I nominate, and let the arrows fly as they will.
There should be 6 on panel, and 1 chair who presides, sets the agenda, and enforces the rule of 1 comment, 1 rebuttal per person, then a vote.
|
|
|
Post by grievous on Jun 14, 2007 19:28:43 GMT -5
I'll take that backhanded compliment since I generally take whatever I can in the compliment department . If I had an RPG-style class, I'd be something like an Argue-Caster with an alignment of Logically Annoying and a specialty in the powers Wall of Text and Babble Incoherently. Man... I really need to stop reading DM of the Rings, makes me sound like I know more about role-playing than I actually do . If the "1 argument, 1 rebuttal" rule is absolutely 100% enforced for all people and I am guaranteed to get smacked in the back of the head for breaking it so I'm not tempted in the slightest, I would consider joining the panel. Also, I agree 100% with all of Superfly's selections (other than myself ) but add in ionicdesign or Radar for consideration, especially if I decide not to re-join this can of worms. Both are intelligent posters who I respect very, very highly. However, neither has commented much here, if at all (probably due to the insanity of this topic, which I will raise my hand as being a major part of), so I'm unsure if they'd accept the nomination but both would be worth having in the group if any of the above that TNT listed decide they don't want in.
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jun 14, 2007 23:36:05 GMT -5
Exceptional choices both.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2007 7:50:43 GMT -5
Also, I agree 100% with all of Superfly's selections (other than myself ) but add in ionicdesign or Radar for consideration, especially if I decide not to re-join this can of worms. Both are intelligent posters who I respect very, very highly. However, neither has commented much here, if at all (probably due to the insanity of this topic, which I will raise my hand as being a major part of), so I'm unsure if they'd accept the nomination but both would be worth having in the group if any of the above that TNT listed decide they don't want in. I'm flattered by Superfly's roster, but if I'm voted off of it to make room for Radar and/or Ionicdesign, I won't be heartbroken. Those guys would be excellent choices for the committee, though I'm not sure if they'd want to be part of it, after the mess this topic has spawned already...
|
|
|
Post by greyelephant on Jun 15, 2007 8:19:46 GMT -5
This rings oh so true. This is why this committee needs to be selective. Ones who know how to handle things without flying off the handle.
Once we get an answer as to who and how this can be done in a more dignified way, then we can proceed. Other wise we wait..................................... ;D
|
|
|
Post by YodaBreaker on Jun 15, 2007 8:57:27 GMT -5
Well, I'd be able to enforce the 1 comment, 1 rebuttal rule with the Amulet of Mod. However, if that happens, expect posts to be deleted with impunity and no notice
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jun 15, 2007 9:05:32 GMT -5
Yodabreaker, please (since you're so MODest) contact all of the involved parties via email or PM and ask if they're interested. Once they've all responded, then we can move forward. Once the panel's done we can start a new thread titled "Rules Committee Thread only - please do not post" and then the rules committee can get together and decide an agenda of rules that need to be discussed. Once the rules agenda is complete, we can then go to debate, vote and then be done.
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Jun 15, 2007 10:47:43 GMT -5
I've tried to stay out of this but I've heard Joe moaning about it quite a bit. I've removed the announcement to vote in the polls (originally Joe told me to put it up) since their author superfly don't like them anymore. Seeing as things are 50/50 on the voting I don't think making a committee will really help things.
This whole thing is simple to me but maybe because I like things black and white. There are the OFFICIAL RULES and there are HOUSE RULES. So you don't like the official rules? Play with the house rules you like. There does not need to be "official" community rules. There can be a list of house rules people play with on the Wiki site and you can include all variations. No biggie. There is no way that people are going to eventually agree on one set of rules for community rules. And even if you post them who is really going to follow them if they disagree? I am not. I will use my own House Rules. I just think this whole argument is a waste.
Am I missing something here? I've tried to read through the eight pages of this thread but it's a bit of a pissing contest (no offense guys). I'm not trying to be too much of a thread troll but I just want you to think of a peaceful solution. Because if you vote on a committee there is going to still be a lot of arguing going on.
|
|