Base Committee Forming???

Just felt like mentioning that whatever this committee is, it doesn't represent me. I don't even know if I might agree with whatever they're doing, because they clearly don't want to tell anyone what that is. That's not paranoia, that's just an observation. To the Secret Cabal: If you don't like people acting paranoid when you tell them that you represent them, take away the source of their paranoia. Tell them what the frell you're doing, and why you think you have the right to claim you represent a community that didn't choose you to be their voice.

Perhaps the tools will be available soon. When this awesome game with tons of potential, no advertising, not enough staff, no in game advertisements, shirts, hats, unplayable trial account because of the text box over the toon, and even the lego MMO is starting to look good.
With what I see as the current mismanagement direction..... I am testing my servers for when it goes open source. That is apparently the goal.
Well my opinion may be twisted, but I voice it.

The current situation makes me sad, but if I am wrong... The XYZ tool and some basic advertising could turn alot around.
I just bought a new video card, why didn't I get a COH trial account with that?

Companies would be happy to include a COH trial with box computers and components. It is an awesome game with great dynamics and graphics, not to mention the strength of the community with radio stations, chat servers, and events. The empty billboards, generic storefronts, generic panel trucks, and many other advertising items that could increase income.
I have only seen the game on bottom shelves, never seen a tv ad, net banner, bus bench, or any other advertising. Is that part of a job? Does that department exist?

hint: support, committee, action! not: self designation, support, anarchy.

(hows that unified front werkyn?)

What is this leg work that Turbo has done?

I would like to know more it sounds interesting.

Wow, a lot of posts since I last visited here.

I see that there are some disagreements but I think everyone has the right intention. Just remember, the road to [censored] is paved with good intentions. Maybe this wont go anywhere and we will have "oh I wish bases would ..." threads again, or maybe this is something that we can nurture and let it survive.

I have commitee obligations in the Real World that I cant comment on what is going down at my office. Just because I can't comment, doesn't mean that I wont take my co-workers suggestions about the project. The committee I am on is in the very early stages and we are just not ready for the company at large for input yet. This is the same here. Give Dead_West and Turbo a bit of room to get this off the ground.

When they are ready and have a charter done, then all of the base builders can work together instead of fighting and back stabbing. There have been some great suggestions posted to get bases some love but if we dont have a unified voice, we all all cattle in the field mooing to a different tune. Now, if we all mooed and moved together, don't you think it will get noticed more?

I have known Dead for a while and I trust that Dead has our back. Let's see what he can do without ripping his idea down.

Matt

I have posted for the Committee alot but now I want to let you know what I would like to see from this.

My hope for the Committee is to maintain the creative structures people have already built. I know how many man hours it takes to make one room let alone an entire base, and I dont want all that time to be for not. So the role I would like to take is the posterity of the current design structure.

Also I want it known that the way I see the Committee working is more like a translator than a Senator. We aren't trying to put in the things we want. In fact alot of us were coming in with a clean slate so that we werent bias toward one thing and that we could just get the community's ideas out there.

But really what I am seeing right now is the clubhouse being built, no one has been crowned King of the Clubhouse, nor has there been a "No <Insert Group Here> Allowed" sign posted. We are just trying to do the setup work right now of how the Committee would be structured, not who the structure is.


I am sorry if I have confused/scared/angered/set of a high level of paranoia in anyone with my posts. Had alot of stuff going on but I have been trying to keep up with all of the posts too so that speculation did not turn to conspiracy theories. As of this point I feel i have said all the info that we have to share (and thats not saying there is info not for sharing.)


But do to the monotone nature of the internet, tone and inflection can not be judged, and I am a much better speaker in "person" than in text. So what I would like to do is jump on my SGs vent server and welcome anyone who would like to ask questions or get clarification on anything. Not looking for a screaming match and its not likely I could even be baited into one. Just want to be able to explain things better to those I havent done such a good job with.

So if you would like to talk PM me and I will send the vent info along with the time I will be on there.

Fair enough, West.

While the clubhouse is being built, I would like to reiterate a few things that I hope the construction crew will keep in mind:

When one takes it upon themselves to represent others, it must be because those others have given the individual(s) empowerment to do so. The Committee NEEDS the support of the community they are claiming to represent or, as Forbin pointed out, you will end up with "warring factions".

A community empowered committee is a good idea. However, the manner in which you guys have implemented your Committee was through self-empowerment, NOT through community empowerment.

I fear that, until The Committee allows the community to empower it, this will be a bone of contention for many, and may even become a hindrance in unforseen ways.

Think of it this way... When the community empowers an individual or group to represent them, the community can then feel that they share in the successes (or commiserate the failure) of that representation.

For true success, The Committee needs to change the community's perception of it as some kind of closed door, secret agenda, nefarious group. The Committee needs the community's trust (empowerment).

Communication is the key.
Communication will build trust.
Not just some vague mumbo jumbo (we've had our fill of that), but meaningful communication.

Please, include the community in the process. Hold nominations and votes for participating members.

• It will ensure a more equitable representation amongst the various voices (agendas) in the community.
• It will give the members confidence in knowing the community actively supports them.
• It will also give anyone who deals with The Committee the confidence of knowing the representation is solidly backed by the community.

If this is already part of the plan, communicate that.

Please, tell the community what you've "filtered" from the lists, and for what reasons. The lists were a community effort, it's only fair that we know how they are being presented.

Please, post The Committee's charter (when it's finished)... preferably somewhere that everyone across several timezones can access easily and read at their leisure. It is important that the community feels comfortable with The Committee's agenda. If this is already part of the plan, communicate that.

Lets get this ball rolling.

Lets support it and keep it alive.

My last post until there is more concrete info on this topic (that has got to please at least some of you). I don't know much about clubs and clubhouses. Always considered myself kind of a free thinker.

But I'm very interested in "filters", "pipe dream elimination", "excess noise to the devs elimination ", priority determinations, code complexity evaluations, and that type of thing. Where does the "Committee's" (a player group evaluating) responsibilty begin/end vis a vis a Dev's?

I just looked at The BIG consolidated LIST for BASE LUV again and to tell you the truth... I'll grant you there are some bullets... but it's not the biggest or most complicated document I've ever read. Seems to me a dev that knew about code/art and cared enough could do a read on easy/hard and lots of interest/no interest in fairly short order (heck many of my ideas get rated by my fellow forum players... how well is another question... unofficially in a matter of seconds!... I know from the timing of the response.).

A dev review of some sort would save a bunch of "filtering PvP" issues. Also, do we owe something (anything) to those who came before The Committee existed and struggled for years (and I'm not talking about me... you can pull every idea I have off the table if everyone else gets a fair shake) that their ideas (from at least the referenced list) were at least read and subjectively scored by somebody who could do something about them once?

Maybe that dev take has already happened, I don't know (I don't know a lot about this ). Or is such a review asking for too much? If it is, then I guess I'd be most interested in one small player group's (The Committee's) qualfications and criteria to rate/reject another group of players' ideas in an official capacity. Or is that asking for too much as well?

West, I think part of the problem here is that we don't know if Turbo or this "secret" committee even represents us. If you/they want our support then we need the secrecy to come to an end. What little I know is that you guys are already working on base contests and charters in secret. Well that's not winning me over.

I bet if the devs are "interested" in bases again, then they are indeed reading these threads. If you/they want to show that we support the committee then he needs to address us, not you on his behalf. Until the secrecy comes to an end then he doesn't represent me nor the majority of the rest of us because we don't know what his thinking is or what he's planning.

This is not meant as an attack on him or you. I want bases to get the attention that is so long overdue. And I bet the majority would agree that we all want the ball to move forward. So we have some undisclosed dev comments showing interest and a undisclosed list of priorities and some lame contest ideas. Couple that with excuses that we can't know what is going on because it was leaked out and so far the smell from this thing stinks. I will be the first to rally behind anyone that can seriously get bases attention again, but not at this time and not this way.

While Turbo has earned a high degree of respect for being able to get the devs attention, he is rapidly eroding that respect he earned by ignoring what potentially could show the devs a rally of support behind him. Instead he has a thread full of "he doesn't represent me" comments.

Support comes from people rallying behind you because they believe in your plan.

I figured I would post here after having a long conversation with Turbo over the weekend.
He assured me that no decisions will be made without the consent of the community and that he is following this thread closely.

He agrees with much of what we re saying actually and couldn’t reiterate enough that his intentions are good. Though that may be true, I expressed my frustration with the secrecy of the committee. He explained that it took over 8 months form the time of the proposal in speaking with several developers to get this far.

When asked about this proposal, he told me that it’s not nearly a secret as much of us have been making it out to be. The contents of the proposal are based off of our pre-existing lists and documentations by MadScinteists, Impish Kat, Fire_Away and a few others.

When asked why he selected himself? He said that he didn’t intend for it to be that way. That after speaking with a few devs, they suggested he start the organization after writing up much of the literature. He was also warned about the repercussions in starting a committee much like this, so after I asked him if it bothers him that were ripping him a new one, he said (paraphrasing here) The passion the base community has is what will make this work. Everything that has been said is rightfully so. We do not see it as an attack but more as constructive feedback. I would be doing the same if it was another.

I kinda feel differently now after speaking with him and believe this is the best way. As long as we are able to make decisions, I no longer see anything wrong with this. It’s been sometime since we have seen base love and I believe the devs are on board more then ever (just my feeling). I do wish I knew how to record my conversation but think I did a good job summarizing our talk.

Turbo asked me to share this:

Welp, won my vote. So what can we do to help with this?
Or is it the waiting game for now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow City of Heroes is a game about freedom of expression and variety of experiences far more so than it is about representing any one theme, topic or genre.

Seeing what Turbo has said I'm willing to take a wait and see position. Tho I must admit I'd still like a rough idea on what is being put on their list.

I'll preface what I'm about to say by saying that I've played with Turbo often recently. I like him as a player. However the way this has been handled was wrong.

I make this post having been on a couple of player committees for this game. Even with the best intentions a player committee can run afoul of the group that it is supposed to be representing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dead_West Turbo has done what no one else wanted to do and thats the leg work.

This statement is inaccurate. MadScientist quit the game because he was tired of smashing his head against the developer silence.

Before Issue 12 I was asked, in private, for a consolidated list of player concerns of bases. I pointed out the extensive documented concerns and suggestions that were ignored. I was involved, publically, in those threads. I felt at the time that editing and prioritizing those concerns in private would be detrimental to the community as a whole and I still do. I feel it was, and still is, the developer's job to take the existing player base issues thread(s) and see what could be done. What completely disillusioned me that was going to happen was Issue 13. I've also been sitting on a pretty large group security hole (which I've documented, tested, and sent to the developers) for the last six months, but I was told that it wasn't on the radar to be fixed.

Since then several other players have tried to shed light on the base building community to no avail.

No disrespect to Turbo, Sidhe, or yourself, but saying that no one else wanted to do the legwork for a project that no one knew about is wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dead_West not holding a vote was going to draw negative comments, i understood that. but to think we will sabotage what this community wants is absurd.

I don't think the intention was to sabotage the community. However, as some have pointed out, secret committees and player committees tend to have a polarization effect.

Reading this entire thread, I'm taking a "wait and see" approach. However be very aware of the fact that how you have went about this damaged some of the base community players' trust in what you are doing.

Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters

Just wandering why this committee needs to justify what they are doing?

If I came up with a loads of ideas for issue 25 and posted them off to the devs and all of a sudden I get a PM back from devs stating we really like your ideas can we discuss this further, would I then have to post on the forums to everyone that the devs have taken note of my ideas and we are in discussion?

I note that very few of the playbase actually use these official forums, so a majority of people have no input into dev suggestions what-so-ever, and have never seen in-game people complain to official forum users that we would voice an opinion for them.

I would like to thank this committee for keeping me informed of what they are doing, even though they really don't have any obligation to.

Any improvements made to bases made through this committee I thank you in advance, keep up the good work.

Heya folks,

Just wanted to drop in here and voice a few of my thoughts. When approached about this idea, we were immediately excited. We think that the base building community would be well served by an organized committee that focused on the communities needs, and are happy to do what we can to aid in such an endeavor.

I also think that it is best for a small group of like minded individuals to initially do much of the work in forming such a group, without seeking extensive input from the community. The reason for this is committees are not effective in getting things done initially and the early organizational efforts do not require extensive input but merely setting up the framework for later interactions.

Having said that, obtaining validation from the community that any committee purports to represent is crucial or the whole effort is in vain. Much of the discussion I've had with Turbo has regarded making sure that the community will have access to the committee and be able to participate if they are interested. That being said I believe that the intention is there and the structure is coming along well.

Looking forward to working with you folks,