QC Discussion Locked

[metaquad4]

http://bgtscc.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=49151

I wonder, what was the reasoning behind this post being locked? Unlike usual locking, this one was not locked with any DM warnings to stay on topic, or any DM message. Not only that, but, there were no real hostilities on the thread. Its leaving a fair few of us scratching our heads. . .

[Jepop]

http://bgtscc.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=49151

I wonder, what was the reasoning behind this post being locked? Unlike usual locking, this one was not locked with any DM warnings to stay on topic, or any DM message. Not only that, but, there were no real hostilities on the thread. Its leaving a fair few of us scratching our heads. . .

Be good little sheep now, don't question the system.

[Boddynock]

for-um:

noun
noun: forum; plural noun: forums; plural noun: fora

1.
a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.

A member of the community had a legitimate suggestion he wanted to discuss, it was beinging discussed in a controlled manner, and it got locked with no reason given. What did I litterally just say about transparency?

[Blackman D]

generally if they lock it without reason its to stop things from going out of hand, tho its not like it needs to be unlocked for them to say anything on it

[DM Cradh]

It was locked temporarily so that a quick discussion could be had about something that was posted on there. It has been unlocked again.

[chad878262]

Anyone who has a skill and wishes to offer their time could reach out to the DM team and offer... It's easy to bash those that are offering up their time and putting work into it while crying transparency. Why not offer to put the work in yourself? You might gain a different perspective. Not being argumentative here, just saying it's volunteer basis, you don't even have to commit to qc or the dev team, simply indicate what you'd like to help with and why you think you can help and go from there.

[Boddynock]

No one is bashing anyone, why are you taking so much offense. We are simply suggesting that the system we have now may be able to work better if done a slightly different way. If you have nothing to add to that conversation specific and applicable to the arguments that have been presented, then just don't add to the conversation at all.

Accusations are not constructive, and implying that if we want to do something we can do it the way it is done now doesn't address the primary reason for the discussion, which is that some people believe we should CHANGE the way it is done now.

[Nyeleni]

Nice. Bashing without bashing and then being offended when the same is applied to you. The whole QC discussion is a veiled attack on the people sacrificing their time for our sake.

If you want to know what is being discussed, join the train. In this case the QC team. If you are accepted, which after the last comments would be difficult I think.

And, no, I don't have access to all informations, and neither do I want to. I think they gave us enough reasons why not. But in my case it is thus: I'm too busy, lazy to contribute more than in rp form to this world (which is totally ok with me) and I don't want to have the same privileges AND duties as developers and QC team.

Does this make me a sheep? Maybe. Still better than a hydra engulfing everything in time consuming discussions. And for every opinion growing two or more heads anew. There needs to be a limit.

[mrm3ntalist]

http://bgtscc.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=49151

I wonder, what was the reasoning behind this post being locked? Unlike usual locking, this one was not locked with any DM warnings to stay on topic, or any DM message. Not only that, but, there were no real hostilities on the thread. Its leaving a fair few of us scratching our heads. . .

Be good little sheep now, don't question the system.

Wow... I never seen so many rebels in an online game. If we could get the forum and Facebook rebels and have them in real life, the world would be a better place by now

Hold your horses mate. There are no sheep, nor rebels here. This is just a game you play for some hours and then you go on with your life

[Shad]

That's silly. If any incompetent (not me, sure, I'm best specialist on any topic) would be able see QC they would have ideas and submit them with good arguments if not in the same topic but in other way possibly PMs, taking time and nerve form QC to respond or just read it. Want to contribute - apply for QC membership and take responsibility.

[Ivan38Rus]

Both sides need to take a chill pill right about now.

If you want to be privy to the information that is not exactly supposed to be privy due to its nature, apply for membership.

If you're afraid of scrutinization over the internet, grow a thicker skin.

[DM Ioulaum]

Following Ivan's post,

Subject: QC Forums

I have temporarily locked this topic to let everyone consume the information generated so far. I will unlock it in one day so that fresh arguments can be presented, if desired.

I realize that discussing the way a community works and is organised is an important aspect of any community. We don't want to discourage that. But things were getting a bit too pointed, it would be a shame to let that derail this otherwise very interesting topic.

---

BGTSCC is a collaborative gaming project. We're not a country, we don't lock-up people in prisons, we don't send the police to your door, nor do we take away your house if you don't pay your taxes.

Therefore you don't get a say in everything like you would with a democratic country. Total transparency is necessary for governments because they have total power. This server doesn't have any power. Its a powerless game run by volunteers with a dedicated community.

This community won't work if everything is decided by everyone. We can't even keep on top of the real-life political process, nevermind spending all that time on a game (it borders insanity). And is that a bad state of affairs? You have a right to discuss decisions after they are made, and you are free to make suggestions and point out flaws. The forum rules grant you those rights and we wouldn't want it any other way (Just so long as you mind your tone).

Disagree? That's unfortunate. Ofcourse we can't force you to be here (wouldn't even try), and we can't really threaten you with anything anyway (We're powerless). If you don't like it then it might be time to move on or take a break. Take your pick from any number of other NWN2 servers. Or even other games. Or go do something in the real world, see a new movie with a friend.


If you are simply curious: see this enlightening post by Ivan.

You people overestimate how much is going on in QC forums.
Here's a screen of the current state of QC subforums:



It's not ideal for representing the general picture, so let's group the forums by their actual role:

---

Ready For Implementation

This forum is for items that are ready to be implemented or are already on the server for private or public use and testing. So, the role is: Bug reports

Spell Rebalance

This is a subforum for old project from 2011 that had since been completed. So, the role is: Archive

Closed Issues

This subforum consists of items that have passed through all stages of team review and have since then already been fixed or added. It is kept around in case anyone ever needs to come back to it. So, the role is: Archive

Archived

Random stuff that is no longer relevant be it technicalities for QC access or process, sub-forum related stuff or the stuff that is out of team's area of expertise (server hosting, for ex.) So, the role is: Archive

Crafting

Feedback on the Crafting project: conceptualizing, prototype testing all the stuff associated with it. So, the role is: Dev Feedback

Feats, Spells

Discussions about adding/reviewing/changing various feats, out of the scope of adding new PRCs. So, the role of both is: Content Concept

PRCs

Discussions about adding/reviewing/changing various classes, complete with class - only Feats and Spells. So, the role is: Content Concept

Area

Subforum for feedback to devs who sumbit their areas for a fresh look before adding it to the server. So, the role is:Dev Feedback

Bugs & Exploits

Reports of bugs and exploits. Consists of its own Closed Issues subforum in case some bugs ever resurface again. So, the role is: Bug reports (most of it is archive though)

Framework Projects

Discussions and feedback about a large-scale project. The role is:Dev Feedback

Items

Conceptualization and creation of new itemsets, stores, etc. So, the role is: Content Concept

---

So, in the end here's the actual spread of posts:



(Interactive version)

And out of all this stuff how much do you think can really be open to everyone?

Content conceptualization is out of the question just because of the sheer amount of flame it would cause from the vocal few. And as much as I want to, I don't believe in community self moderation over the internet.

Bug reports are obviously out of the question.

Dev Feedback requires insight into inner workings of the engine and is mostly filled with technicalities.

Archive, could be opened, sure, but that's not exactly worth it, in my opinion just because the info there can be terribly out of date.

I can see area testing being done by everyone actually working.

In conclusion: I am not against openning up a portion of QC forums in read-only mode to everyone, but as I see it, there is not much content that actually can be reviewed by everyone. If you can come up with a working scheme, by all means.

At the same time, QC members aren't special, they are players like everyone else and their role isn't a privilige, if you are technically sound and can actually find yourself working out a compromise that benefits majority, and not yourself, then by all means you are welcome to participate in the dialogue.

P.S.: having worked in different manufactoring enviroments, QC reviews are never open to the consumer without some heavy editing. Just food for thought.