Although I'm a bit of a softie at heart, so that might sway my opinion. <:)
I tend to be pretty soft if the situation warrants it... but if someone is an outright troll, then they get no sympathy from me.
Sarm wrote:
I tend to be pretty soft if the situation warrants it... but if someone is an outright troll, then they get no sympathy from me. | |
SilkWizard wrote:
I tend to be pretty soft if the situation warrants it... but if someone is an outright troll, then they get no sympathy from me. Here's an idea of how far I tend to overdo it, though. I was hosting a game once, and Sajai bounced in and a huge fight broke out over Wsay. I ended up unbanning him because I couldn't justify retaining it when half of the staff and 70% of the community members stooped to the same level and caused as much of the problem. :P | |
Okay, so IainPeregrine:
The ranking system only justifies the constant battle for popularity and renown around here... although I do agree that it is a symptom of the underlying problems. The guild system is incomplete and useless at this point... it shouldn't have been implemented until it was ready. The term "rip" means a game made from someone else's source code; often without permission. Usually only a few changes are made before it is released (due to the developer's lack of knowledge about DM). Elitism as I use it refers back to the problems around here with popularity contests etc. | |
e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism (ĭ-lē'tĭz'əm, ā-lē'-) pronunciation
n. 1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. 2. 1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. 2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class. | |
Acebloke wrote:
1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class. Thank you. That's it. | |
Evre wrote:
What I'm seeing, though, is that you would rather see the bulk of BYOND games be cut away completely, and leave only the quality games. Exactly. And by cut away I mean removed from the main page or anything that makes them look official. > The changes you're suggesting seem like they would completely break down the community as it exists now and make it cold and unwelcoming to anyone who doesn't meet the established standards. Established standards will give developer's something to aspire to. As it stands, there is no real measure for quality on BYOND. Mediocrity is celebrated. Having standards will more the community MORE welcoming, if anything. It will certainly help to chase away immature users and trolls. > It reflects what the vast majority of users feel ought to be seen. If a bad game makes the rankings, it's the users' fault, not the system's. The system is set up to fail. Having a crappy game ranked #1 hurts BYOND, and the staff shouldn't be at the mercy of its users like that. > Subscriptions are nice, but usually not necessary to keep games running. I don't miss the BYONDime economy and all the dishonest users that came with it. I miss it. I've had to manually add hundreds of subscribers over the past couple years who pay through Paypal. Plus, it's a huge incentive to develop games. So yeah... that's what came to mind when I read your post! | |
I don't have time to respond to all of this now, but I'll at least start with this:
Re-enable the pager for all users. I see pluses and minuses involved in making the pager membership-only, but in the end, I think it's very important that BYOND -at least- break even, which before membership, it definitely wasn't I'm not sure whether it's quite there yet or not, though I know it's at least doing -better- financially. Of course, when you factor in the staff's time, there's -no way- it's breaking even, but it's quite possible that membership pays fully for server upkeep at this point (I hope so!). I think BYOND Members would have been a much less profitable endeavor without the decision to limit the pager to member use (and nonmember-paging-member use, of course). | |
This is why you're not in charge of BYOND. If you were in charge of BYOND, it would die out quicker than ever. You don't understand that nobody wants to be a part of something where the moderators go around controlling everything. What's this bullshit about putting an end to the culture of elitism? That's laughable. First of all, you promote elitism more than anybody else on BYOND.
You know what this is? "Quality BYOND Member sites would be featured on the main BYOND site. All remnants of the BYOND Member main listing would be wiped out." That's elitism. Second of all, you think anybody wants to be a part of a place where moderators can "put an end" to a culture? People like the internet because they like to escape from the stranglehold of society in which their every move is controlled. | |
Wizkidd0123 wrote:
I see pluses and minuses involved in making the pager membership-only, but in the end, I think it's very important that BYOND -at least- break even, which before membership, it definitely wasn't Do you have proof? How much were they losing a month? $20? $200? I doubt that you actually know... that's just the general assumption around here. The people behind this system aren't in it to sustain themselves. | |
Wizkidd0123 wrote:
I think BYOND Members would have been a much less profitable endeavor without the decision to limit the pager to member use (and nonmember-paging-member use, of course). I certainly don't have any statistics to back this up, but I think a fair number of people paid the $15 to "buy back" the pager instead of paying to become a subscribed member. I don't think there's really any way to sugar-coat one of the bigger incentives for obtaining one. | |
Wildrogue wrote:
People like the internet because they like to escape from the stranglehold of society in which their every move is controlled. Stupid society. It's so controlling. Screw the mainstream. I'm unique. Authority is stupid. That's why I hate my parents. Nobody understands me. I'm a rogue. I can't be controlled. | |
The only comment I have is that if Silk really were in control, it'd take him a long while before he got around to doing everything he listed. :p
| |
...I cant see how byond costs alot of money. they cant be using more then 2 severs max, Sever and Tracker.
| |
Wait before this happens...AA please!
| |
I agree with the ranking and pager thing. Thats just about it. The rest should be up to the moderators to control. Its hard to make the right decisions in such a position of power where you think you could do no wrong.
The ranking thing should go both ways though. Like a 5 star system. That can be abused as well but thats just how the internet is. But even with that said, a 5 star ranking system would be more accurate because each game can be voted for or against. Wouldn't solve the problem completely. In every which way you think, there is no real way to solve the ranking system. | |
RealQMark wrote:
Its hard to make the right decisions in such a position of power where you think you could do no wrong. People in positions of power make correct, successful decisions all of the time. A solution isn't impossible just because the staff is making it look hard. > there is no real way to solve the ranking system. True. Games should not be ranked at all. Making games on BYOND isn't a contest. | |
Do you have proof? How much were they losing a month? $20? $200? I doubt that you actually know... that's just the general assumption around here. In 2002, Tom said they were spending around $500/month on "various server expenses (http://developer.byond.com/forum/ index.cgi?action=message_read&id=145311&forum=5&view=1)." The people behind this system aren't in it to sustain themselves. I am not involved in BYOND to get rich. Hopefully 7 years of working for free has made this clear. I would like nothing more than to see BYOND become very popular. I'm tickled when someone puts out a game that does things I never dreamed were even possible in the system. I'm especially pleased when a person comes along and discovers that "this coding thing" isn't too hard. If we never make a cent off this project, it'll be ok, as long as these things can persist. But since maintaining the community and the medium for development takes a lot of our time and money, we do have to figure out a way to realistically make a profit. -- Tom (http://developer.byond.com/forum/ index.cgi?action=message_read&id=144831&single=1) | |
I'd be interested to find out how one could possibly spend $500 a month on server costs... but that's a moot point.
The second quote supports what I was saying. Tom isn't in this to make a salary. | |
SilkWizard wrote:
RealQMark wrote: A solution is never possible. The person banned will always come back in some shape or form. I think the community here has proved that. It's not about being a popularity contest. Its to measure quality of a game. Many people tend to confuse the two with coinciding with each other. Like I'm sure you can understand this since your making a show. A show only goes as far as how many viewers it gets. The less viewers it gets, the more chances it has of being canceled. Sadly, there is no such thing on BYOND of a game being canceled because that would not only be wrong to the players but developer as well. But you get my basic point. | |
If people are going to brag and laugh about evading bans, yeah. Give them another boot. I think that honest attempts to reform should be given chances, though. Of course, there's the whole "what if they're lying" bit but I'm of the mind that it would be better to give believable-sounding requests the benefit of the doubt.
Although I'm a bit of a softie at heart, so that might sway my opinion. <:)