RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Curtis West · **06-26-2013, 05:01 PM**

Hmm, I was trying to read the minutes and it seems something was cut off?Â Look here

I am not sure if more is coming. Very interesting read so far!

I'm pretty much in agreement with Deirdre in that people should be held accountable for what they say. The words "behave like an adult" / "mature community" keep being said, so let's live up to it and take some responsibility!Â Heart

Shuck · **06-26-2013, 05:38 PM**

Not only do I not have a problem with transparency, I insist on it. I've insisted on it since the initial meeting. Creating the kind of separation that filtered information creates has never been a good idea, and never will be.

That being said, I do want to take some responsibility for a piece of the redacted content: I had requested that a PM that was sent to me (brought up as evidence of what I see to be a growing issue), as well as the user's name, be redacted in order to keep them out of the proverbial frey. Not sure if that's what people are referring to (as there's a /ton/ of content cut out of these minutes. A ton.) But I can't very well throw my voice into the "let's not pretend we're a secret cabal" without accepting my part in it.

Uther · **06-26-2013, 05:56 PM**

I'm going to throw my two cents in here. Take it or leave it.

I'm for 100% transparency. 100%. Nothing less.

Linkshell leaders aren't some appointed government body that actually has any realÂ authority, so I don't see why there's even a question about it. Linkshell leaders just happened to be the ones who bought pearl sacks or whatever first and established a group. I could be a linkshell leader if I just made a thread about it on the Linkshell Hall forum. We're all a bunch of gamers who pay the same amount of money to play the same game. There's no real governmental structure here and I don't see why a bunch of dudes sitting around in skype pretending otherwise needs to be hidden away from us like they're some type of shadow council.

It's essentially a socially accepted clique. And to pretend otherwise is a joke.

***Alothia*** · **06-26-2013, 06:02 PM**

I agree. If we're having these meetings for the benefit of the people in our linkshells, and for the benefit of the community then we should make it transparent. If things are said that could be taken out of context, perhaps it is up to us to better police our words while we are speaking. Same thing goes for on here as far as I'm concerned. Half of the problems on the RPC wouldn't be here if people took a step back and re-read what they wrote before hitting submit.

Eva · **06-26-2013, 06:06 PM**

Everyone is kind of repeating the same thing and agreeing here. So I think it makes sense for all future LS meetings to be held in a glass house.

I know I may have edited one or two lines of text from the last meeting, but if we're going for full transparency going forward I will make it a point not to do this in the future. I think most (if not all) of the other leaders can agree upon this.

It feels like we're all just spinning our wheels here at this point. Dazed

Averis · **06-26-2013, 06:21 PM**

It does seem pretty simple, really. If all involved know that the meetings will be public then anything that needs to be dealt with privately should be dealt with as such. Then there are no questions asked. People will always have private matters, but where and how it's dealt with is the question.

ArmachiA · **06-26-2013, 06:42 PM**

Oh yeah, the end does look cut off, didn't even get to the part about the concern for new people. I would assume that's because of the Forum's character limit though, not because of any redacting. Hopefully the rest will be put up soon

Eva · **06-26-2013, 06:53 PM**

I see what you mean Curtis & Armi. Kylin explained this to me back when I was trying to set up the RP Handbook which was also crazy long. Sometimes really lengthy posts seem to truncate after a certain point - so it made more sense to make that over two or three posts. I imagine the same thing has happened here, and he will probably post the rest of the log when he gets back online. I don't think he realized the truncation happened, nor was this left out intentionally.

Varus · **06-26-2013, 07:12 PM**

(06-26-2013, 06:06 PM)Eva Wrote: So I think it makes sense for all future LS meetings to be held in a glass house.

Allowing regular members to observe the meetings as they take place would also be a powerful way to promote transparency.

In order to prevent spam and as a general courtesy, any non-leaders at the meeting should simply NOT SPEAK IN THAT CHANNEL.Â Any commentary can be said in PMs or on the OOC Skype chat.

There. Transparency. Because you get to WATCH.

ArmachiA · **06-26-2013, 07:14 PM**

I'm pretty much standing my ground that this was a forum error. The part that was Redacted in the meeting isn't even in that log (It happens later).

I don't see why people couldn't watch, though

Varus · **06-26-2013, 07:15 PM**

(06-26-2013, 07:14 PM)ArmachiA Wrote: I don't see why people couldn't watch, though

Yep. I don't see why either.

Oh, actually, this option can lead to a lot of bickering. Wait, no: it WILL lead to a lot of bickering.

But that's the price of transparency.

I'm honestly curious as to what the RPC's administration will do.

FreelanceWizard · **06-26-2013, 07:24 PM**

So... yeah. I've been following this thread, and I just want to throw my two cents in for transparency. If you redact anything, some people are going to assume "conspiracy" and cry shenanigans. Anything that needs to be private should be handled privately among the affected LSs. Anything like a PM providing evidence for a concern should be raised obliquely ("I've gotten at least one PM that suggests to me that X is a problem").

I'd gently suggest that the best approach is a moderated chat room. LS leaders can speak; everyone else can watch. This also gives an opportunity for people to raise issues to their LS leader during the meeting. For extra points, implement a moderated questions, answers, and comments period at the end for the non-leaders. That way no one can say that anyone is excluded or that anything is hidden.

Corin Winterborne · **06-26-2013, 09:05 PM**

I think I'm going to have an unpopular opinion here, but I don't see the big hullabaloo about the need for "transparency." Â They are not the RP Police. Â It's been pretty clearly stated that they aren't here to enforce or make rules, only to facilitate communication between Linkshells. Â So why do people feel the need to know everything that goes on between meetings? Â The only thing I can think of is people wanting to rubberneck and /popcorn at potential drama or paranoia the that Big Bad Linkshell Leaders are out to get them.

Ashren Dotharl · **06-26-2013, 09:33 PM**

I'm still pretty new to the community so I've kept my opinions mostly to myself, but I'm kind of with Nate on this. I don't really see what the big fuss is about. Would saying something in PMs really make a big difference compared to redacting something? Taking things to PMs only generates gossip and what not.

What happens if during the meeting person A goes to person B in PMs, then person B tells person C about their conversation with person A and then person C makes a big fuss about person A not saying whatever they are saying in the meeting? Sorry if that didn't make sense...

The point is, if something is said and then later redacting it feels less conspiratorial than if something was said hush hush and then found out about later.

FreelanceWizard · **06-26-2013, 09:35 PM**

(06-26-2013, 09:05 PM)Nate is Blue Wrote: I think I'm going to have an unpopular opinion here, but I don't see the big hullabaloo about the need for "transparency." Â They are not the RP Police. Â It's been pretty clearly stated that they aren't here to enforce or make rules, only to facilitate communication between Linkshells. Â So why do people feel the need to know everything that goes on between meetings? Â

Personally, having been a guild leader in the past, I don't particularly care about what's discussed, so much as the negative perception that publicly announced, private meetings tend to generate. If a group of RP LS/FC leaders announce they're having secret meetings organized by this site, there'll be a not inconsequential number of people raising the "conspiracy" and "clique" flags. True or not, that perception looks bad to them and makes the community as a whole look bad.

Also, transparency helps defuse any claims that this group of LS leaders are in fact angling to be the RP police, trying to enforce rules, or (worst of all to many RPers) specify and enforce a particular take on the lore and a direction to the plot. Since that last part has actually happened in RP communities in other games (Blood Elves on Moon Guard in WoW, as a recent example), some people are going to be a bit concerned about it.

So, it's a perception issue, really, that helps engender trust and communication. That's especially true if some LS or FC in the future refuses to be part of the meetings or is refused access to them for some reason. If they've been open and forthright up to that point, it'll be harder for the claims of conspiracy to take root.

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (5): « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Linkshell Leader Meeting Transparency

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes