Curial Commentary Thread

[Nikos]

I don't understand this business, and I won't try to.

[pannonian]

Hmm, I've been away from the Curia for about a year, but upon my return I can't say it is any less pathetic than it was. I really don't have a problem with the self-congratulatory mood of this fraternity of have-beens. To each his own I guess. What bothers me is their inability to refrain from projecting their immodesty across the site with a slew of medals and badges. All the more a pity because of the inflation it means of the honours of those who really deserved a medal, and those whose work for the site warrants a badge. If the Curia were a computer, this would be the time to see if it can be salvaged by re-formatting its hard drive.

What's even worse is that those who try to make something constructive of it are put down for taking it seriously. Having been part of a community that was capable of both wit and intelligent discussion, I have nowt but contempt for 4chan-style culture that passes for entertainment for some.

[zznɟ ǝɥʇ]

naught*

Furthermore, just throwing a 4chan label on anything you don't find humorous is a bit off. I'm not sure what qualifies as 4chan humor, but I always assumed it dealt with penises and minorities. Trying to get a badge in your name is not really anywhere near the same level.

This is the same as the awards named after earlier posters. The only difference is that you don't find Sundance & Co. funny. Your loss, frankly. The core group are pretty low-maintenance and inject the fun that you suck out with your long winded posts about honour & glory & fidelity & propriety in the pseudo-governing body for an online forum. On total war games. I know that's the same mantra as always...but come off it.

Most people on this forum are capable of wit and intelligent discussion. That doesn't mean that every post has to fit into one or both categories.

That's wonderful if you miss the glory days of the Backroom or TWC. But those days are past. TW games are marketed towards teens. The mean age of this forum is at a point where I'd go to jail for watching them shower. The small, close-knit group of the early days will never return unless you join a small forum where that is the ideal.

TWC has thousands of members. ~8 people having a good time aren't going to change anything, so don't direct your anger that TWC has changed on them. It was a gradual shift.

I would go on...but it's a bloody internet forum (quoth Manji).

[Juvenal]

naught*

Nowt is actually perfectly acceptable, providing you are from Manchester.

[Каие]

What's even worse is that those who try to make something constructive of it are put down for taking it seriously.

You mean like how your contribution to my putting forth of the idea of engaging the community with Moderation standards as, and I paraphrase, ''an effing joke''?

[Squid]

You mean like how your contribution to my putting forth of the idea of engaging the community with Moderation standards as, and I paraphrase, ''an effing joke''?

You mean your "idea" where the group giving the moderation branch standards is also supposed to independently and without bias judge if those standards, that they themselves have set, are fair?!

[pannonian]

You mean like how your contribution to my putting forth of the idea of engaging the community with Moderation standards as, and I paraphrase, ''an effing joke''?

In the form that it was in, yes it was. Senior staff decide on who gets access to the staff forums, not the Curia. If the Curia wants input on moderation matters, it has to do so without demanding access to staff forums. Which it might be able to, if people tried to achieve their aims with available methods. I once tried to start an initiative on giving the Curia such input into moderation, in a very different form, but using tools that were available, and might have been workable given a bit of work on it. It met opposition, but it wasn't as impossible as your proposal is, and I might have got some form of it working if I had the energy to push it through.

[generally amusing]

What's even worse is that those who try to make something constructive of it are put down for taking it seriously. Having been part of a community that was capable of both wit and intelligent discussion, I have nowt but contempt for 4chan-style culture that passes for entertainment for some.

Since when was the Curia a hotbed for wit and intelligence? The Curia always has been the bureaucratic RPG of TWC. If you're looking for wit and intelligence, you may scour the D&D or the Symposium.

[Каие]

You mean your "idea" where the group giving the moderation branch standards is also supposed to independently and without bias judge if those standards, that they themselves have set, are fair?!

In the form that it was in, yes it was. Senior staff decide on who gets access to the staff forums, not the Curia. If the Curia wants input on moderation matters, it has to do so without demanding access to staff forums. Which it might be able to, if people tried to achieve their aims with available methods. I once tried to start an initiative on giving the Curia such input into moderation, in a very different form, but using tools that were available, and might have been workable given a bit of work on it. It met opposition, but it wasn't as impossible as your proposal is, and I might have got some form of it working if I had the energy to push it through.

You're both missing the point. On purpose it seems. The idea is irrelevant. It was your reply to it which is the issue. Pann, you just said when someone tries to be serious and constructive there some people who reply put them down with contempt. I pointed out that you did that yourself, in other words you're guilty of double standards.

It is entirely possible to reply to my idea without that kind of language. As you yourself acknowledged in your post above. For example look at Harry Lime's post, and Noble Savage's post. Both of whom I respect immensely for that very reason. Also Ian, Imb39. But you guys didn't. Instead letting your personal opposition as prominent and long term high ranking moderators get in the way.

The idea itself was not set in stone. My idea was to throw it in there and see what people thought instead you guys mixed your personal disdain for me, and the flaws in the plan, which I fully admit, and got down to contemptuous language. I was fully prepared to cooperate, like I did with you Squid in the CdeC transparency.

[GrnEyedDvl]

Personal attacks/comments do not belong here.

[Harry Lime]

In case you didn't get it the first time....

Personal attacks/comments do not belong here.

This is getting boring now, lads. Take it to MSN or whatever. Consider this the last warning you'll get.

[Muizer]

My medal is simply self-gratifying baloney, yes. But it's my self-gratifying baloney, just like Asterix' loincloth, Garb's Fight Club and anyone who advertises their modifications with their names attached.

You could put it in your signature. That is the way most advertise their private projects. The difference with a medal is that it is endorsed by and displayed across the site. So I think you would have to be honest and recognise that your self-gratifying balony is of a rather different order.

Oh I see this is about to fall victim to another purge. Pity, I will have to post it again. That will be the third time. I wonder when I can post this argument without it being deleted as a personal comment.

[Squid]

You're both missing the point. On purpose it seems. The idea is irrelevant. It was your reply to it which is the issue. Pann, you just said when someone tries to be serious and constructive there some people who reply put them down with contempt. I pointed out that you did that yourself, in other words you're guilty of double standards.

It is entirely possible to reply to my idea without that kind of language. As you yourself acknowledged in your post above. For example look at Harry Lime's post, and Noble Savage's post. Both of whom I respect immensely for that very reason. Also Ian, Imb39. But you guys didn't. Instead letting your personal opposition as prominent and long term high ranking moderators get in the way.

The idea itself was not set in stone. My idea was to throw it in there and see what people thought instead you guys mixed your personal disdain for me, and the flaws in the plan, which I fully admit, and got down to contemptuous language. I was fully prepared to cooperate, like I did with you Squid in the CdeC transparency.

We're not the ones that keep missing the point, it's you who is. As you point when you post an idea that has merit and can be molded into something that the 2/3rd majority of the curia finds beneficial you will find, as with the transparency bill, that suggestions that people, such as myself, will work with the bills to try and make them work.

If you create a bill where that isn't the case you get the backlash that you have gotten with the moderator commission bill. Further your comment that the idea was not set in stone is quite clearly proved to false, as if it was meant to be changeable then when people point out flaws with the proposed system, those flaws need to be acknowledged and dealt with. There were numerous posts which did this, including two of mine, none of them were taken seriously, and my second one was completely ignored, twice since you ignored it here.

Lastly, it is almost never better to build an entire new structure at the cost of tearing down what is working, reasonably well at least. If you want a body to have greater oversight, specifically you mentioned deleted and closed threads, then adding extra purview to existing bodies, such as the tribunal, would be a better way to go, not trying to force through proposals you have to know are doomed from the start.

[the Black Prince]

You know, everyone says the Curia is full of old has beans who do nothing for TWC

I may be an old member, but I like to think I make regular contributions still, so i will presume for the moment that that label doesn't apply to me


But you know, as a CdeC member, not a day goes by when we're not voting on 3 or so new citizens, all of whom can vote and debate. If the 30 newest citizens all popped down to the Curia, posted an idea and debated it, they'd outnumber the regular curia members who post on anything and everything.

If the Curia is out of touch, outmoded or whatever other insult people would like sling at it, the only reason is because the new members don't bother to get involved. Decisions are made by those who take part, and if its the same old people taking part, its no surprise that things rarely change and the curia becomes stagnant. If all the people who bitterly complain about the curia doing nothing actually got involved instead of sitting on the side lines, there's more than enough votes to affect change, reform or exert real influence on policy.

As far as i'm concerned, the people who take the time to get involved are doing a damn good job helping to make TWC better in little ways here and there. The more who get involved, the better it will be and the more that can be done and the more ideas there are to be shared. If you refuse to get involved in the process, don't sit on the sidelines and then criticise everything that goes on. You have the power and the right to make a difference, if you're not prepared to use it, then to be blunt, sit down and shut up! I'm more than a little annoyed at people who prefer to complain and criticise when they could be doing something instead.

This post isn't directed at anyone at all, so no one take it personally. If you think I'm describing you incredibly well that's a coincidence because I honestly have no member in mind.

[GrnEyedDvl]

If the Curia is out of touch, outmoded or whatever other insult people would like sling at it, the only reason is because the new members don't bother to get involved. Decisions are made by those who take part, and if its the same old people taking part, its no surprise that things rarely change and the curia becomes stagnant.

Agreed.

If all the people who bitterly complain about the curia doing nothing actually got involved instead of sitting on the side lines, there's more than enough votes to affect change, reform or exert real influence on policy.

You mean like the vote to establish permanent committees? Everyone was gung ho when it came time to vote. Have you seen anyone volunteer to do the work yet?

As far as i'm concerned, the people who take the time to get involved are doing a damn good job helping to make TWC better in little ways here and there. The more who get involved, the better it will be and the more that can be done and the more ideas there are to be shared. If you refuse to get involved in the process, don't sit on the sidelines and then criticise everything that goes on. You have the power and the right to make a difference, if you're not prepared to use it, then to be blunt, sit down and shut up! I'm more than a little annoyed at people who prefer to complain and criticise when they could be doing something instead.

As one of the people that criticise and complain, I am also one of those out there doing something. I find it pretty amusing that the successful parts of the site are run completely without any input at all from the Curia. And I also find it amusing that looking through the Anals (pun intended ) that except for the recent Magistrate/Tribunal stuff all proposals are geared towards patting people on the back or cleaning up how the Curia runs.

Last year the Curia voted to remove the Wiki editor as a Curia officer, and none of the other branches of the site have anything to do with the Curia either. Forget moderation for a moment, the Curia is not involved in any of the Content stuff. The Curia is responsible for electing a Modding Registrar and doing stuff with the CB. When was the last election for that??? Hell we removed the Uni from the CB and I pretty much took it over myself otherwise nothing would ever get done there.

The Curia removed itself from Publications. The vote to establish a committee to improve the TW sections of the site failed miserably. I cant fidd that one but it was proposed by Elrond and I had a running bet with a few peopel about how it would work out if it passsed, and I was going to head it up myself.

The Curia as a body isnt interested in doing anything except handing out medals and rewriting how they themselves are elected.

[absinthia]

i came here for the moding, not for debating and quasi politics.
i do vote though.

[GrnEyedDvl]

I suspect there are a lot of people who feel that way absinthia, and the way the Curia handles things just turns them off further.

[The Sundance Kid]

An internet democracy will never work, especially forcing people to do jobs. People will volunteer if they're bored or enjoy it. You can't persuade someone over an internet connection to do a job with no real gains. The reason 4chan is so highly visited is that it has no rules and the only thing you do there is go to enjoy yourself and muck about. Because there's responsibility here, people view it as a second job/school, and it turns people off from participating in the Curia, as they see it as an extension of the tedium they already face IRL.

Let's be honest, people come here to download mods, to discuss TW games or to make mods. They see citizens and want to become one for the shiny badge. They don't want to further the site; bollocks do they. They want a badge. And much like a job interview, you bull**** until you get the job, then do none of the stuff you say. You say the Curia only changes it's own legislation and pats itself on the back...that's all it can do. It's a mindless system where all the real changes are made by Sim or you updating the forum model, Garb buying new stuff or the Admins deciding to change the front page or something. The Curia votes on irrelevant **** because that's the only jurisdiction it has.

[GrnEyedDvl]

An internet democracy will never work, especially forcing people to do jobs. People will volunteer if they're bored or enjoy it. You can't persuade someone over an internet connection to do a job with no real gains. The reason 4chan is so highly visited is that it has no rules and the only thing you do there is go to enjoy yourself and muck about. Because there's responsibility here, people view it as a second job/school, and it turns people off from participating in the Curia, as they see it as an extension of the tedium they already face IRL.

Some people enjoy doing stuff for the site. I do. Thats why I do the Uni stuff. Its not tedious. But if the Uni was turned over to the current Curia it would be a disaster.

Let's be honest, people come here to download mods, to discuss TW games or to make mods. They see citizens and want to become one for the shiny badge. They don't want to further the site; bollocks do they. They want a badge. And much like a job interview, you bull**** until you get the job, then do none of the stuff you say.

Well you are right theres a lot of BS talk, and no action. The difference is that if you BS your way into a job and then dont perform, there are consequences.

You say the Curia only changes it's own legislation and pats itself on the back...that's all it can do. It's a mindless system where all the real changes are made by Sim or you updating the forum model, Garb buying new stuff or the Admins deciding to change the front page or something. The Curia votes on irrelevant **** because that's the only jurisdiction it has.

They could do so much more. Technical stuff is probably out of reach, but forum layout is not, forum skins are not, expanding the mod sections to other games is not, publication stuff is not, other types of contests are not. There are a spitload of ideas out there, and not enough people to implement them. I have a list about as long as my arm that I personally do not have the time to implement, and I am sure other people do too. The problem is that these ideas require more time than a single person can give, and the people willing to give already are.



EDIT: I will give you a perfect example. In this thread there is an idea, a decent one. I even said I would just implement it if someone just put it together. Someone needs to sit down and spend a few hours reworking the points and coming up with clever one liners that are not insulting. Not one person made a serious attempt, not one person tried to get some others, either inside the Curia or out, to help him compile a new list. Another "hey lets do this, as long as its someone else who has to figure it all out".

[pannonian]

An internet democracy will never work, especially forcing people to do jobs. People will volunteer if they're bored or enjoy it. You can't persuade someone over an internet connection to do a job with no real gains. The reason 4chan is so highly visited is that it has no rules and the only thing you do there is go to enjoy yourself and muck about. Because there's responsibility here, people view it as a second job/school, and it turns people off from participating in the Curia, as they see it as an extension of the tedium they already face IRL.

4chan does have moderation. Highly infrequent, but it does exist. I come from forums that actually have no moderation at all. You know what? They contained considerably more substance than 4chan and its like have ever produced. All coming from a desire to make one's posts worthwhile reading, and to help others if one can, and make connections online. The 4chan-style mentality is not only devoid of substance, it actively discourages it.