Topic: Attention everyone

[FPF_TraceyG]

Given that we appear to be having problems establishing an ordered server schedule (EAW and OP), I'm asking players and admins alike, if this is a path we would like to see put in place. There would be no ruling body determining such a schedule, just a gentleman's agreement between server hosts. Ideally, we would need someone to coordinate that task, that person however, does not have authority per se over what the schedule is. They simply fulfill the role of messenger and organiser.

Firstly, the poll.

Do we need a centralised server schedule?
Yes
No

Comments and suggestions are welcome.

Secondly, I'd like this process to be as democratic as we can. So please place nominations for who should be the 'Secretary General', for overseeing the process and why.
Once candidates are nominated and seconded, I'll place an election thread where you can cast your vote in another poll.

 

[Dizzy]

I nominate Hooch. Since he is the king daddy pimp for our feddie meetings and such, it seems only fitting that he should be in the know about when servers start and all. And of course, he is very vocal about planning, perhaps anally so...

[KOTH-Steel Claw]

I would nominate Fluf. He lives online anyway.

[NuclearWessels]

Can I nominate J'inn cuz he's a bastard?

dave

 

[jdmckinney]

I know this is probably absurd, but how about someone who doesn't design campaigns or work with a major campaign team? It might be nice if a respected community member (or members) who likes to play all sorts of campaigns on the various versions could mediate any admin scheduling conflicts. The decisions on their schedules would come down to the admins, but an independent voice of reason to try to find the path of least resistance and keep tempers in check would sure be nice. Then again, what sort of nutcase would volunteer to get in the middle of such a discussion?

[Kroma_BaSyl]

Seems to me that this would be a perfect role for a council of race moderators. Representative democracy.
 

[Karnak]

I won't support the nomination of anyone who is a RM/ARM, mission script developer or server admin. due to conflict of interests issues and other political stuff I don't want to get into here.

IHHO, the server co-ordinator should be someone who is long-standing member that genuinely cares about the community as a whole and does not have a stake in one particular server going before the other.  Someone who goes the extra mile to start up constructive projects without prodding.  Jinn started the idea to schedule the servers behind-the-scenes about a month ago. He also is very good at calming people like RMs and server admins down when they are flipping out over all sorts of stuff.

For these reasons, I nominate Jinn.  Who can be trusted to get the job done.


 

[FPF_TraceyG]

An additional note, once a nomination has been made, someone must second that nomination, and the nominee must then accept that nomination, preferable by posting here or having someone post for him/her by proxy on their behalf. In accepting the nominations, you are committing yourself to making yourself available where possible and putting the time and effort needed into the position. Good diplomacy skills and communications are a must... lol!!
Kroma's suggestion has merit. Perhaps if we create a "Board of Directors", with someone then being nominated as ChairPerson with respect to the above role. The Board can consist of members from each of the server admin teams, and we could meet, say, once or twice a month, on GameSpy perhaps, or MSN. In fact, as I type this, I'm liking that idea more and more. It would give us all a chance to exchange info and help each other out with server problems, in addition to coordinating servers.

[Kroma_BaSyl]

I second the nomination of J'inn....couldn't happen to a nicer guy......I mean it's not his fault, really.

[CaptStumpy]

I'm going to chime in here and point out that we may be imagining a problem where none exists.

There have always been competing servers, with of course the SFC2.net/EAW ones being the big boys in most cases, certainly recently. I'm still a little puzzled at the concern over the SFCX OP servers. I think Castrin has pointed out the server philosophy of the ToW campaign, Badlands etc. Badlands, I believe used to run consistently, at the same time as the biggest of the EAW servers without noticebly effecting it's numbers. I expect that the primary users of Badlands have always been OP fans and a home for Castrin's Fleet Members. There have always been servers like this on both EAW and OP.

When the SFCX members began discussing the idea of ToW, we envisioned the idea of introducing the mini-campaign, campaigns that run on small maps for days, at most two weeks. This idea was proposed with the coordination of the SFC2.net servers in mind from the start and at least in my case was a reaction to the perpetual delay of proposed servers, and kicked back launch dates. The idea was to insert these mini-campaigns between the larger servers run periods. All this would require is a bit more flexibility in scheduling and with proper communication between the admins can easily be done. As long as we generate an atmosphere of cooperation and mutual respect.

If I'm off base here, any SFCX member please pipe in but our future campaigns were designed to coordinate with SFC2.net, NOT and I repeat NOT compete with them. Regardless of how many people in the D2 community claim that our intention was to divide the community, I can only assure you this was not the case.  I, and I believe the other SFCX members have a clear conscience on this issue and I think our track record proves it. Want some examples? Shutting down RT3 completely to stress test the new SFC2.net server comes to mind. (BTW in that case the SFC2.net server went live before the end of RT3, even in the face of objections from us, not that it matters anymore). And frankly, to me it seems that some people have made up their minds before we've put up anything but a test server.

To be blunt, this seems to me an attempt to herd cats, and in one case, an attempt to discredit SFCX on the basis of a stupid personal grudge. SFCX always was, and will remain commited to cooperation with ALL MEMBERS within the D2 Community and looks forward to working with the other admins to provide the best D2 playing experience possible. I think our track record shows it and I think if you put aside some of these concerns for the time being, and allow us to prove it, you will find that this is true.

My advise is for everyone to chill out and see how this plays out before jumping to conclusions about what will happen BEFORE it has happened.

Sincerely,

CaptStumpy
SFCX Founding Member



 

[FPF_TraceyG]

I don't think the integrity of SFCX is being questioned at all. In fact, as you say, good communication is a primary ingediant, and this proposal is a means by which that can be formalised.  

[CaptStumpy]

What I am questioning here is the need for formalising anything, when coordination hasn't proved to be a problem yet. SFCX hasn't declared it's inflexibility to scheduling as long as we have an opportunity to have a server. I think we've clearly stated our intentions to run small campaigns between scheduled "long-run" servers. All that is needed here is to coordinate running these between the big boys and everyone will be happy.

Adding a few days to a scheduled launch isn't going to kill a server that is planning a 4 week run-time will it? I don't think so.

If scheduling becomes a problem this is an option...right now I think it can be done with simple common sense, goodwill and compromise.

[Karnak]

Quote:
What I am questioning here is the need for formalising anything, when coordination hasn't proved to be a problem yet. SFCX hasn't declared it's inflexibility to scheduling as long as we have an opportunity to have a server. I think we've clearly stated our intentions to run small campaigns between scheduled "long-run" servers. All that is needed here is to coordinate running these between the big boys and everyone will be happy.

Adding a few days to a scheduled launch isn't going to kill a server that is planning a 4 week run-time will it? I don't think so.

If scheduling becomes a problem this is an option...right now I think it can be done with simple common sense, goodwill and compromise.  

Well, this is not gonna work if any of the parties are unhappy about the idea. So, I guess we should wait on it and see how it goes.  

But, I do think it would be a good idea to have server co-ordinator who would post the server schedule that the admin work out.  That's why I nominated Jinn.  We already have a  defacto committee of server admins. Obviously, the entrance requirement to the committee is that you are a server admin, mission scripter, etc.  People critical to the production of a dyna. I don't think we need a vetting process for the committee. You can't just say that: yeah, you are a server admin and all but....

As for defacto committee meetings, they are already happening whether people like it or not.  No one is gonna tell an admin how and when to meet with other admins, etc.  They just happen on their own like SFCX said.

I think all we really need is a strong neutral party to put on a nice front cover to what the server admins work out for a server schedule and someone you can bounce off your issues with to make sure you are not being irrational.

[ZTempest]

Jinn is a nice guy...and I know him from my time in the KATs....Have flown with him and have enjoyed several campaigns with him.

But isn't he a member of the inner circle of SFC2.net?  Just like I would not nominate any inner-circle member of SFCX, I do not think that a member of SFC2.net should be running the campaign scheduling either.  Too much possibility for conflict of interest on both sides.

If this thing is to take place, we need people who are not associated with either group.  I am well aware that this may not be possible, but am throwing it out for consideration anyway.  

 

[Karnak]

Yeah, I can understand how the SFC2.net affiliation can cause problems especially since SFC2.net already has such a big D2 presence and certainly does not need anymore.

I was thinking more of specific job qualifications for which Jinn is perfectly suited for. I have never seen him show a bias for SFC2.net. In fact, back during AOTK he actually asked about my server ideas and was receptive to them.  A subject no one else would bother to give me the time of day over, at the time.  So, I would be willing to vouch for him there.

But, if we cannot do that then I would recommend K'Rolling. She always is trying to do the right thing with PR in the D2 community.  I can also think of some people in the GFL but that may not work if Jinn won't qualify. Maybe one of the forum moderators?

[ZTempest]

Those are good suggestions, Karnak. Jinn, although I consider him my friend, does not play OP or even own a copy of it as far as I know.  He has always been very good with EAW campaigns and has been on the forefront of some truely excellant EAW Campaign Roleplay threads, but historically has not shown any preference one way or another for OP activities.

I don't think that this indicates bias -- he is a very smart guy (I believe he is a Lawyer in real life) and he drinks good beer -- or is it Scotch.  Can't remember that particular thread, but in any case perhaps we do need someone who is not only neutral, but who plays both games.






 

[Karnak]

I do not play OP, so I don't know who would be a strong neutral player that plays both EAW and OP, and is NOT a Server admin, mission scripter and/or ARM/RM.

I hope some one can supply some new names that fit the above skill set.

[FPF_TraceyG]

Quote:
What I am questioning here is the need for formalising anything, when coordination hasn't proved to be a problem yet. SFCX hasn't declared it's inflexibility to scheduling as long as we have an opportunity to have a server. I think we've clearly stated our intentions to run small campaigns between scheduled "long-run" servers. All that is needed here is to coordinate running these between the big boys and everyone will be happy.

Adding a few days to a scheduled launch isn't going to kill a server that is planning a 4 week run-time will it? I don't think so.

If scheduling becomes a problem this is an option...right now I think it can be done with simple common sense, goodwill and compromise.  

I would argue that there is a need for formal communication, and good quality communication at that, in order to achieve just exactly what you have described. When the server schedule went up, I did my best to contact everyone that I knew who had a campaign planned. I was criticised by SFCX for not contacting them, to which I apologise. Hence, the need for formal communication. Who else might spring up out of the woodwork and decide they want to host a campaign? If our aim is to be fair to everyone, then everyone must have their say and be heard, and everyone must be aware of what is going on. Formalising that communication is the most efficient means by which that process can be conducted in a democratic and fair system. The initial server schedule was put together in the fashion you describe above, and it became a flame war. Obviously then, that approach is not sufficient. Without some kind of formalisation to the process, it simply isnt solid enough to stand up. I'm sorry if I sound pesimistic here, but without some kind of order here, I can't see this working at all, and chaos will once again reign throughout D2 server land. This is an opportunity to prevent that from hapenning, and holds server admins accountable for their actions. The choice always belongs to the community, however, so by all means, lets continue this debate. For the record, currently, they 'yes' vote is winning, 13 to 5.

[KOTH-Steel Claw]

Capt Stumpy, I can see your point as well as Tracey's. Maybe the best thing to do would be to ask the players themselves what they would like to see?

I am sure we could get someone from each of the fleets to poll their folks and post the results.

Then again........................

[Dizzy]

Here we see jdmckenneys post on this thread:

Quote:
I know this is probably absurd, but how about someone who doesn't design campaigns or work with a major campaign team? It might be nice if a respected community member (or members) who likes to play all sorts of campaigns on the various versions could mediate any admin scheduling conflicts. The decisions on their schedules would come down to the admins, but an independent voice of reason to try to find the path of least resistance and keep tempers in check would sure be nice. Then again, what sort of nutcase would volunteer to get in the middle...?

Then in a show of solidarity, we see CaptStumpy in the quote below assert  jdmckineys above statement.

Quote:


If I'm off base here, any SFCX member please pipe in but our future campaigns were designed to coordinate with SFC2.net, NOT and I repeat NOT compete with them. Regardless of how many people in the D2 community claim that our intention was to divide the community, I can only assure you this was not the case.

.

To be blunt, this seems to me... an attempt to discredit SFCX on the basis of a stupid personal grudge. SFCX always was, and will remain commited to cooperation with ALL MEMBERS within the D2 Community and looks forward to working with the other admins to provide the best D2 playing experience possible. I think our track record shows it and I think if you put aside some of these concerns for the time being, and allow us to prove it, you will find that this is true.
.

My advise is for everyone to chill out and see how this plays out before jumping to conclusions about what will happen BEFORE it has happened.

Sincerely,

CaptStumpy
SFCX Founding Member

Fortunately I happen to KNOW the SFCX members in a rather personal way. And from personal experience I dont need to 'chill out'. That is why this thread exists. It is to secure a non compete agreement. It is painfully apparent that you guys are FoS and I personally will not take you seriously until ALL SFCX members FULLY support Traceys request. Otherwise, anything you have to say, I take with a grain of salt. My reason for this is jdmckinneys ideology on 'anywhere, anytime, dont care who's feet I step on':

 

Quote:
  So, would I push to roll out a campaign during SG's run (or any other campaign, EAW or OP)? Yes, because we have been waiting for a usable OP D2 for a year, and we've waited long enough.

All this is going to take is a coordinated effort and a bit of solidarity from the divided SFCX members to step up and tell the community in one voice that you support a non compete agreement and will abide by the commitment to insure a maximum playerbase for these planned campaigns. Pretty simple if you ask me. Do the right thing, and support the playerbase, not split it with simultaneous servers.

It is obvious from the post made below by ZTempest that you do not trust us. Well, my friend, the same goes to you and for good reaon.

Quote:
Jinn is a nice guy... But isn't he a member of the inner circle of SFC2.net?  Just like I would not nominate any inner-circle member of SFCX, I do not think that a member of SFC2.net should be running the campaign scheduling either.  Too much possibility for conflict of interest on both sides. If this thing is to take place, we need people who are not associated with either group.    

Continuing to mask your real intentions will fail, I'll make sure to piont out in EVERY post you all make that SFCX's middle name is glass UNTIL ALL of you In UNISON declare your commitment in preventing simultaneous server runs.

There are currently 3 servers ALLREADY planned. 1st is SG3 which has a tentative start date in 3-4weeks, which is right after DOE server concludes, then is followed by Karnaks ISC Invasion server, and finally by RDSL.

I would suggest you cut the crap and simply start negotiating your insertion into this schedule that works for everyone. The last post by jdmkinney pretty much sums up why this post is here:

Quote:
Seriously, I don't read EAW campaign threads, and haven't for some time. I don't play EAW campaigns (not enough time), so I don't read threads about them. I really don't know anything about it, and don't really care. I also have not even glanced at this supposed "schedule" that seems to exist (I didn't know about it until I read this thread).

Not knowing or not caring sinks SFCX's boat and your credibility.