Jump to content


Photo

Future of the MT


  • Please log in to reply
394 replies to this topic

#361 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 19 March 2018 - 06:45 PM

Well guys, there you have it. Lonello wants to take down the entire MT with him. Very collegial. The majority of votes casted seemed to be positive for individual members. No one gave all MT members 'terrible' The two 'excellent' votes for lonello were from, so I have been told, people who rated all 5 individual mods 'excellent'. 
 
Delusionello as a well respected forum member stated recently.
 
Perhaps some forum members would like to make their vote publicly? :)
"Not filling in any of the surveys ourselves ofcourse" fake news once again. Napoleon did fill it (MJ's survey) in and didn't rate himself.
 
It seems you're not too happy with the results of MJ's survey. The only thing Delusionello is doing, is trying to downplay the survey result. 
 
Spoiler
 
Can you name all individual members that, according to you, Delusionello, I'm guessing they're all from those who voted 'terrible' or 'poor' even? so I expect 15 names from you that would be part of 'the clique'
 
Or perhaps you can give share your opinion about the latest big lie that was outted from you? http://forum.strateg...-18#entry449304
 
lNotcJe.png
You were given 2/3 of all 'terrible votes'. A job well done one would think.

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#362 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,460 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 20 March 2018 - 03:21 PM

I'd like to follow up on a couple of points Lonello has made here: (the following two points are his words)

> What you can not do is discount the one member for one other, but much more active, member. We are all equal around here!

> So I would understand why we wouldn't get hundreds of people filling in, especially since there are many surveys going around now. Just the 100 seems a good goal if we have Admin mail around to advertize for it indeed. That would be feasible and representative.

----

Please can you clarify whether these points are made specifically in regards to surveys, or whether you would apply them to either polls or petitions?

I ask because it was the MTs own suggestion that criteria should be in place to assess whether a forum member should be eligible to vote in a petition (MT proposed the combination of a total post count of 50 and membership of the Alias Register). This contradicts the point you have made in the opening paragraph - because if every member should be afforded the same opportunity to present their opinion, then why have MT proposed restricting members ability to vote based on their post count and whether they have declared their aliases to the Tournament Committee?

Changing the eligibility criteria does obviously affect the number of members who can vote (see my post titled ' response to MTs proposal - removal of a moderator by the community'), so with numbers that you have mentioned in this thread (100 and 600) I would like to know the context that you are applying - to ascertain validity.

Finally, if MT are to gain admin assistance and send round a circular to a large amount of members, I'm sure you can see the benefits of requesting additional material to be included in the circular. TC for one would greatly appreciate including the publication of the tournament calendar for example.

Thanks

#363 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 20 March 2018 - 10:21 PM

So. You'll see only a meager 23 results with half of those relative lower results, of which the worst results are all PB-clique ofcourse (that goes without saying). A genuine result would be this to be a relative fine result (excluding the PB-clique that said to purge all 5 of MT many times, as their views were a given already).

If this immense "clique" of yours wanted all MT members out, how do you explain then that most of the moderators scored satisfactory or better in the MJ poll and only 1 got all these bad marks?

 

I think that there is no "clique", just individual people that are dissatisfied about the same things and give their feedback.



#364 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 21 March 2018 - 04:06 PM

SvtHoNb.png

 

 

Just to show that I never asked Major Nelson to step down. He decided this by himself. My original message to him is a few posts above this.

 

I just congratulated him for making a brave decision.

 

After talking to corrupt MT members he decided to stay on.

 

So far Lonello has not apologized for implicating Nortrom in any of this.

What is worse the cases regarding this are not even being opened.

 

Note: I do have permission to post this from MN, it is somewhere in this thread.



#365 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 23 March 2018 - 08:07 PM

Still waiting for an answer from lonello regarding http://forum.strateg...-19#entry449729

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#366 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 27 March 2018 - 04:40 PM

I think I will give my feedback to MT in their survey, without giving away parts of my improvement plan today or tomorrow, well before their very long deadline.

 

If I did not fill it in, I am sure there would be people saying: you did not even do anything for improvement.

 

Which is of course not true, I offered a lot of help to implement my plan and even helped to expose an incompetent MT member, at the cost of:

 

1 Being accused of harassment

2 Being accused of taking money to travel around the world

3 Being accused of wanting to install a new MT that wants to put porn on the forum

4 My cases no longer being opened by MT

5 Having the PM restricting being misused by mentioned member of MT

 

It is difficult to be a whistle blower on this site.



#367 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 March 2018 - 08:12 PM

Don't forget the lies and libel.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#368 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,258 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 29 March 2018 - 07:50 AM

 
Speaking about TC and tournaments, my question about why the WCO / TC merge was vetoed by MT still remains unanswered. I'm sure many other forum members will be delighted to be informed properly too.



The reason for the desire of a a separate entity for the WCO was both

1) a concern for the burden on the TC
2) a belief that a separate and devoted group to run a WCO tournament would make for a stronger Tournament than one run by the TC as a third or fourth event on their calendar.

I think history has shown it was a fair stance to take. Both the TC and WCO have been amazingly successful.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#369 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • NASF Committee
  • 910 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 29 March 2018 - 03:17 PM

The reason for the desire of a a separate entity for the WCO was both
1) a concern for the burden on the TC
2) a belief that a separate and devoted group to run a WCO tournament would make for a stronger Tournament than one run by the TC as a third or fourth event on their calendar.
I think history has shown it was a fair stance to take. Both the TC and WCO have been amazingly successful.

Since the MT was concerned about the burden that 4 tournaments would place on the TC, will you guys be vetoing the TC's expansion to 8 tournaments?

Edited by malcom.jansen, 29 March 2018 - 03:18 PM.

  • Nortrom likes this
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#370 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 March 2018 - 03:26 PM

With even less people than a WCO/TC merged team :).

 

Gary, I find it interesting to see your / MT's side. As far as I remember, it was suggested that TC + WCO would merge and we would all focus on our strengths, that means WCO people would keep organizing WCO as main task. TC members could help out. Just like vice versa, TC members would focus on "their tournaments" and people from the (then) former WCO team could help out if needed.

 

This also allowed for "mix" tournaments. In case you haven't noticed, TheO is almost always the lead in every tournament. I applaud his effort, I really do, and I think he's doing a great job, but what if TheO has to be offline for say 2 months? I feel the newest additions, MM, Roeczak are capable managers too, but they would no longer have TheO's experience to fall back on, which would be very bad for the community and site.

 

I don't know whether history has proven that MT had taken a fair stance. How many TC members have gone and go? (Maestro, Cflag, SymmeTric, Mr. Smith, Astros, Sevenseas (other reason).. to name a few) Maybe they wouldn't have if the guidance was any better and they did not only have TheO to learn from. Just a thought. And yes, both TC and WCO tournaments have been very succesful. I don't know why this would have been any different with a merge. 

 

The way MT vetoed without even really discussing TheO's proposal was truly shocking and if after 3 years (take or leave) this is the only 'explanation' MT can come up with, I'm sure many people will find it very compelling reasons. Do you remember anything about feeding a group with a pizza? That too was a truly amazing argument.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#371 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,258 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 30 March 2018 - 08:48 AM

Nortrom, I'm not sure why you would want to give up sovereignty by merging with the TC now. Originally, we hoped for a successful WCO that would be run by a strong team. That's what we got, all credit due to you and Dennis and Greg. I see no benefit to the WCO now with this merge talk.

The MT has always felt that anyone who wants to run a tournament on the site should be allowed to run one. queenbee1 wanted to run one and so she did. That was fine. But hers wasn't really a TC tournament either. Same for the Juniors and the NASF.

Although placing everything under the TC umbrella would be arguably cleaner, our aim has been to nurture the ability of the average enthusiast to advance the game of stratego by allowing him or her to hold a tournament if they want, however they want, so long as they abide by the basic principles of the GS&FR.

This preference for decentralization of tournament control favors the individual who has the desire and drive to express his or her creativity and that has to worked well so far.

As far as the number of tournaments goes that TheO now runs being too much, as malcom.jansen has remarked about, I don't think our fabulous tournament manager has shown he has taken on too much at this point. For someone else his load could be too much, yes. But TheOptician is like an incredibly talented waiter who delivers multiple trays of food to the table. He hasn't lost a dish yet. And until we hear the crash of broken plates--or from him directly that he's at the end of his tether--we have no reason to suspect he is overburdened.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#372 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • NASF Committee
  • 910 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 30 March 2018 - 09:14 AM

Then the MT would not oppose a merger between the TC and the WCO if it were proposed today?
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#373 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 March 2018 - 09:23 AM

We promise, we deliver ;). I personally don't see too much benefits in a merge right now either. I don't know how morx/karaiskakis feels about it, nor any of the current TC members. I was merely questioning MT's motives in the past. It was a very fair, constructive and good proposal by TheO back then. Some people on here also suspected hostilities between TC / WCO. The way MT dismissed TheO's fair and balanced proposal was disheartening.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#374 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,460 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 March 2018 - 05:21 PM

Dear MT,

 

I would like to make a 4-step suggestion which in my opinion would at worst provide the Community with an official avenue to pursue all lines of enquiry or at best would eliminate the justification for almost all of the criticisms that various members have levelled at MT.

 

The prime objectives of the following 4 steps are to increase transparency and visibility of MT action and opinion and encourage community co-operation.

 

1. Classify all offences of all types by category (eg offensive language/sexually explicit/threats of violence/discriminatory language/draw refusal/stalling etc etc) with standard disciplinary action matched to the offence on each occasion. Clarify which Site Rules will be enforced by MT and which will not

 

2. Create a Report Log for all cases (brought to MT privately or publicly). Track type of case, verdict, voting score (eg 3-2), disciplinary action taken, majority reason for decision). Include all cases in the Report Log without deferral to admin

 

3. Create an Announcement Log with details of any other MT decisions, actions or admin interaction regarding any matters not concerned with cases in the Report Log

 

4. Create a Proposal Log where the Community can advocate proposals of any nature to MT. MT (and the community) to discuss each proposal publicly and vote, disclosing verdict (eg. reject the idea/support the idea/might support a variation of the idea), determining action required (if any), and provide reasons in the Proposal Log.

 

Dear MT,

 

On February 18th Napoleon 1er (whilst still on the Moderating Team) stated in this thread that MT 'welcomes constructive proposals'.

 

As a result I made the proposal above on March 1st. Whether you deem it constructive or not depends of course on your opinion, but a month has now passed without any kind of response from any member of MT. In case this has just been forgotten or overlooked, here it is again.



#375 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,331 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 01 April 2018 - 01:37 AM

Dear MT,

 

On February 18th Napoleon 1er (whilst still on the Moderating Team) stated in this thread that MT 'welcomes constructive proposals'.

 

As a result I made the proposal above on March 1st. Whether you deem it constructive or not depends of course on your opinion, but a month has now passed without any kind of response from any member of MT. In case this has just been forgotten or overlooked, here it is again.

 

Sorry there was no response.

 

 

 

1. Classify all offences of all types by category (eg offensive language/sexually explicit/threats of violence/discriminatory language/draw refusal/stalling etc etc) with standard disciplinary action matched to the offence on each occasion. Clarify which Site Rules will be enforced by MT and which will not

 

I don't like this proposal. I think the context is important and so the gravity of a particular swearword can vary depending on what is going on in the game, what previous chat there has been etc

 

If someone posts '******* idiot!' after blowing up their Marshal on my front row bomb then i assume they are referring to themselves and i would not be offended. If they post '******* idiot!' after i blow up my Marshal on their front row bomb then they would be referring to me and i might be offended ( or i might think it fair comment in the circumstances). If they post '******* idiot!' in the middle of the game when nothing has happened to provoke it at all then that is more serious.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

2. Create a Report Log for all cases (brought to MT privately or publicly). Track type of case, verdict, voting score (eg 3-2), disciplinary action taken, majority reason for decision). Include all cases in the Report Log without deferral to admin

 

This seems reasonable. In a sense i guess the reporting threads could be considered as logs but they can become swamped by other things so a dedicated thread for all verdicts may be better. I don't see a need for publishing votes though.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

3. Create an Announcement Log with details of any other MT decisions, actions or admin interaction regarding any matters not concerned with cases in the Report Log

 

This also seems a  good idea. Such things as promotions/departures from tournament manager positions etc tend not to be announced when they ought to be.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 

4. Create a Proposal Log where the Community can advocate proposals of any nature to MT. MT (and the community) to discuss each proposal publicly and vote, disclosing verdict (eg. reject the idea/support the idea/might support a variation of the idea), determining action required (if any), and provide reasons in the Proposal Log.

 

This is also a good proposal. One thing though we like to be wary of is having too many pinned threads on the general forum as it kind of gives the impression of a dead forum when people glance in here. Perhaps any new threads resulting from this could be located elsewhere.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  • TheOptician likes this

#376 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 07 April 2018 - 03:48 PM

Nortrom, what is it going to take to replace the mods that are worthless and actually do what it takes to make this place what it should? Power is clearly what the majority of the mods truly want, not the future of Stratego.

#377 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 April 2018 - 04:00 PM

"make this place what it should" will require some programming / development. As it seems this is not going to improve any time soon, I'll focus mainly on the other concerns.
 
While not always in agreement with MT, actually, about many topics, I do feel the team (not lonello) does try to it's best of their ability. Of course in lonello's words this means that one would be of opinion the entire MT should go due to exclusively his own shortcomings.
 
I can't imagine it being fun nor productive having to discuss improvements with someone who seems enemies in anyone that does not agree with him. I'm sure you can deduct who I am refering to.
 
As long as the other mods tolerate the fact that lonello is glued to his green chair, we shouldn't expect too much I suppose. One would think that when 75% of a poll want you out of a position any sane person would come to the conclusion that perhaps there is a slight possibility his ways aren't appreciated.
 
Several members made a suggestion to lonello about stepping down (napoleon, fks, losermaker) but he hasn't even responded to them. If you're looking for lonello, you can find him here:
AO2bbd4.png
 
Anyway, all I can suggest for now is you vote in the poll http://forum.strateg...onello-poll-v2/ and try to talk some sense into MT.

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#378 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,682 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 12 April 2018 - 08:02 PM

Nortrom, what is it going to take to replace the mods that are worthless and actually do what it takes to make this place what it should? Power is clearly what the majority of the mods truly want, not the future of Stratego.

A question that has kept some forum members busy is "Why is it MT is so slow?" I hope I can answer this, somewhat with the info to be found here.
 
Back 'in the days', there was a discussion with MT going on about the implementation of the ISF anti-chasing rules on here. Note that this idea was backed up with a 24 to 1 majority in a poll. So far nothing has happened.
 
I think it is worthwhile to show at which high level MT operates. 
 
Also extra bonus points to the author of this beautiful "I don't care about the community's wishes" statement (aka lonello).
---------------------
 
i1xcI7N.png
---------------------
 
It will be a long read, but most definitely an interesting one. Enjoy. Click the image to get a more readable version. (4x)
EKAzqTJ.jpg
wXst2Wc.jpg
Y7yt6YB.jpg
4Z9mkaO.jpg
 
If there are any questions, I am happy to answer those as independent forum user.

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#379 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 13 April 2018 - 10:41 AM

A discussion that ran for 2 months and ended going nowhere.

 

A bit the same as the discussion I had on another subject with the MT.

 

Sometimes you just need to act and implement by telling people the new rule. A lot of things like exact punishment can be refined afterwards.

 

Lonello not interested in the community input done by voting: no surprise either.

Very disappointing but no surprise.



#380 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • NASF Committee
  • 910 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 14 April 2018 - 01:14 AM

Can I get an honorary status because I started the NASF?
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users