Linkshell Leader Meeting Transparency

[Shuck]

I do want to point something out.

 

Regarding an individual: A specific individual was brought up in the meeting due to various negative interactions between said individual and several linkshells/individuals, including accusations of attempted sabotage toward the RPC in general. This is considered one of those rare topics that will not be fully disclosed publicly in the meeting logs/summaries in order to minimize drama. However, in order to maintain transparency, any member of the RPC is more than welcome to contact me and receive a copy/pasted summary/statement about this discussed issue privately. Note that no name will be revealed in this statement, however.

 

That's from the initial meeting. Now, we have a good amount of transparency, but I would mark this particular event as where my push for more started. I whole-heartedly encourage folks to take Kylin up on his offer here, and I still throw my vote on the side of "One more step in the direction of total transparency", in the form of folks who want to watch being allowed to watch.

 

'Cause, let's be honest: None of us that have been present to these things has any kind of vow of silence on what gets talked about. Now, I haven't been keeping records, but I'll double-down on Kylin's offer so that he's not hanging out there alone. I will freely talk about whatever (so long as it doesn't involve things like Private Messages. Because that's just unreasonable) with anybody that asks.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure where the idea of paranoia has come from. You can want to know what's up without expecting the gubmint to come and take your baby.

 

And really, that's all I see here. I don't see hostility. I see some statements? I don't understand how you can suss tone out of text. If I were to read this out loud, with an upward inflection, it would all sound like questions, even if it isn't. I'd sound angry if I were to shout it. But none of those things are conveyable via this particular medium.

 

This is one thing I can't stress enough. Any time any issue seems to come up, everyone gets so terrified of disagreement that they try to shoot it down and pretend it never happened.

 

A-goddamned-men. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Disagreement doesn't equate to hostility, and the cry of "YOU'RE BEING HOSTILE" in a civil disagreement shouldn't be used as a bludgeon to end any conversation someone is unable, or unwilling to continue.

 

That's not how we learn, and grow as a community. That's how you stagnate. That's not good for anyone.

[Deirdre]

I can't believe there is all this being raised over them redacting things. Especially from you Deirdre? You seemed ok with redacting all of your comments here...

 

While I think in future it would be better if the leaders approached it in a fashion that is more lik e"if the rest of the community can't see it we probably shouldn't talk about it," the redacting and such was agreed upon by the leaders present because the topic was sensitive. Can we move on? It's really not that huge of a deal, and in future they can handle it differently.

 

Well it's a good thing I'm not a Linkshell Leader participating in open talks, eh Aysun?

And apparently to some people yes, this is an issue. That is why the topic was brought up and that's why it is being dealt with.

While perhaps not a linkshell leader, you do apparently own all of the decision-making for the Wiki, you are the administrator of the large Skype channel that most RPers are directed to, and you seem to have taken on ownership of a voice chat as well.  So it may be that you don't lead a linkshell community, but you are a very important and influential figure in this community and Aysun made an interesting point in spotlighting something where you'd redacted something you'd once said.  I imagine you had good reasons for doing that, and I don't think anybody really leapt down your throat about that back then.

 

Now it's already been advocated that future LS meetings be unedited and most everyone is in agreement about this.  Or perhaps we'll open the thing up to everyone.  At this point the whole thing is starting to feel bureaucratic and burdensome, and my understanding is that we're all here to have fun.

 

This... is not.

 

Is there actually anything more here that needs to be discussed or can this please, please be put to rest?

 

Firstly, this isn't about me so I don't appreciate it being pushed back on me, because it has nothing to do with what I do on these forums. We are speaking about a public meeting, not basic forum conversations, so please stop diverting the subject.

I might be influential, but I'm not a moderator or a LS leader involved in these discussions. I simply ended up taking on tasks.

 

This thread has come to a pretty good close already regarding the opinions on the subject, there's no need for anything further. Again, this discussion was just fine until noses poked in.

 

If anyone has conversation further on the subject of LS Leader Meeting Transparency, feel free to post!

[Corin Winterborne]

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.

 

 

Well no one's out to get anyone, because no one can get anyone. It's ridiculous to think that anyone in this game and it's community has legitimate power over anything other than their own character. 

 

That being said, I want transparency, not because I think they're the government and trying to conspire against me, but because it seems very cliquish to me to have secret conversations which could possibly be about some of us and the linkshells we affiliate with and keep it a secret. It's a manners thing, not a security thing.

 

To me, it comes down to "What makes you better than the rest of us? Oh, right: nothing." I understand the need for organization between linkshells in a roleplay capacity so I'm not going to belly ache about the meetings themselves, but there's nothing so important in there that us puny mortals have to be left out.

 

That's how I feel about it at least. Maybe I'm crazy.

 

So then it doesn't matter if people have secret conversations about you or your character.  You said it yourself:

 

no one can get anyone. It's ridiculous to think that anyone in this game and it's community has legitimate power over anything other than their own character. 

 

 "What makes you better than the rest of us? Oh, right: nothing."

Not one of us has ever claimed to be better then anyone else.  I'd suggest you stop trying to victimize yourself.  The linkshell leaders are trying to facilitate an enjoyable experience for their members.  I'd have to pose the question: why are you joining the linkshell if you don't trust the leader to have your best interests at heart?

 

but there's nothing so important in there that us puny mortals have to be left out.

If left out, you mean not being able to see the chat go on why it happens; have you seen the Skype OOC chatroom?  It's practically unmanageable.  There would be no way to have a structured meeting with that many people talking and questioning and interrupting.

[Varus]

There would be no way to have a structured meeting with that many people talking and questioning and interrupting.

 

Then just make a rule that observers are NOT ALLOWED TO CHAT IN THE MEETING CHANNEL.

 

I could have sworn I emphasized this earlier.

[Grott]

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.

 

 

Well no one's out to get anyone, because no one can get anyone. It's ridiculous to think that anyone in this game and it's community has legitimate power over anything other than their own character. 

 

That being said, I want transparency, not because I think they're the government and trying to conspire against me, but because it seems very cliquish to me to have secret conversations which could possibly be about some of us and the linkshells we affiliate with and keep it a secret. It's a manners thing, not a security thing.

 

To me, it comes down to "What makes you better than the rest of us? Oh, right: nothing." I understand the need for organization between linkshells in a roleplay capacity so I'm not going to belly ache about the meetings themselves, but there's nothing so important in there that us puny mortals have to be left out.

 

That's how I feel about it at least. Maybe I'm crazy.

 

So then it doesn't matter if people have secret conversations about you or your character.  You said it yourself:

 

no one can get anyone. It's ridiculous to think that anyone in this game and it's community has legitimate power over anything other than their own character. 

 

 "What makes you better than the rest of us? Oh, right: nothing."

Not one of us has ever claimed to be better then anyone else.  I'd suggest you stop trying to victimize yourself.  The linkshell leaders are trying to facilitate an enjoyable experience for their members.  I'd have to pose the question: why are you joining the linkshell if you don't trust the leader to have your best interests at heart?

 

but there's nothing so important in there that us puny mortals have to be left out.

If left out, you mean not being able to see the chat go on why it happens; have you seen the Skype OOC chatroom?  It's practically unmanageable.  There would be no way to have a structured meeting with that many people talking and questioning and interrupting.

 

The whole point of my post is that it comes down to manners. If people actually had legitimate power and could do anything I could understand a sense of secrecy. But they can't. So it comes down to "Why are you talking about us if it doesn't matter?" It's just rude and cliquish.

 

I'm not trying to victimize myself because I seriously doubt I've ever come up in conversation. That quote was taken out of context. If you want to know what I meant look at the paragraph above this one.

 

By being "left out" I'm not suggesting we all get to talk, but letting us watch and maybe fielding some questions at the end would solve this problem.

 

As for my linkshell leader. I completely trust him as a more experienced roleplayer and I think he's a good guy. But that's about it. That's all it should be for anyone. I personally don't give a shit if he has my best interests at heart. It's a game. I'm free to come and go as I please.

 

But, really. If you're going to start quoting my post and trying to spin everything on me, at least read the whole thing. The main point was "It's not about security, it's about manners." Which apparently you missed because you didn't quote anything from the second paragraph... Which is the one that had my main point in it.

[Corin Winterborne]

There would be no way to have a structured meeting with that many people talking and questioning and interrupting.

 

Then just make a rule that observers are NOT ALLOWED TO CHAT IN THE MEETING CHANNEL.

 

I could have sworn I emphasized this earlier.

Why go through all that trouble? The meeting is for Linkshell leaders to communicate with each other regarding cross-linkshell issues. It's not to dictate policy to the members of the RPC.  It's not meant to be a forum to discuss issues with the community at large.

[Grott]

Why go through all that trouble? The meeting is for Linkshell leaders to communicate with each other regarding cross-linkshell issues. It's not to dictate policy to the members of the RPC.  It's not meant to be a forum to discuss issues with the community at large.

 

Well the obvious reason is because people are asking for it.

 

Also "Someone sabotaging the RPC" is not a cross-linkshell issue. It's a community at large issue. So if "It's not meant to be a forum to discuss issues with the community at large" why is that happening?

[Curtis West]

[align=center][/align]

[Edricane]

[align=center]

 

[/align]

[Corin Winterborne]

Also "Someone sabotaging the RPC" is not a cross-linkshell issue. It's a community at large issue. So if "It's not meant to be a forum to discuss issues with the community at large" why is that happening?

I think you need a lesson in reading the whole post as well.

 

Regarding an individual: A specific individual was brought up in the meeting due to various negative interactions between said individual and several linkshells/individuals, including accusations of attempted sabotage toward the RPC in general. This is considered one of those rare topics that will not be fully disclosed publicly in the meeting logs/summaries in order to minimize drama. However, in order to maintain transparency, any member of the RPC is more than welcome to contact me and receive a copy/pasted summary/statement about this discussed issue privately. Note that no name will be revealed in this statement, however.

The emphasis is mine.  The drama was between this person & linkshells involved.  The "sabotage" was brought up as a result of the drama that was being discussed: not the primary topic of discussion.

 

Further, Kylin offered to disclose the contents of the discussion, only redacting the persons involved.

[Grott]

including accusations of attempted sabotage toward the RPC in general.

 

 

This is my point. Right here. But this back-and-forth is getting us nowhere.

 

Granted, I don't know all of the facts. You're correct on that one and I'll admit to it. Once again though, if people are asking for less transparency, why not give it to them? No names have to be released for obvious reasons, but why not just put whatever was going to be said when someone asked via PM into the log?

[Corin Winterborne]

including accusations of attempted sabotage toward the RPC in general.

 

 

This is my point. Right here. But this back-and-forth is getting us nowhere.

 

Granted, I don't know all of the facts. You're correct on that one and I'll admit to it. Once again though, if people are asking for less transparency, why not give it to them? No names have to be released for obvious reasons, but why not just put whatever was going to be said when someone asked via PM into the log?

People are making a mountain out of a molehill.  The only reason that information is redacted was to avoid drama.  There isn't a need for more transparency, because it's already transparent.  There's no legitimate need to disclose specific names for these issues. Disclosing the names would only serve to shame or ostracize the parties involved, which is something I'd think we all want to steer clear of.  These issues do need to be discussed at times, rarely, and outside of the immediate public view to avoid big dramastorms.

 

I think during the next meeting, I'll try and start a discussion to get a definition of the scope of the LS leaders meeting, and a less nebulous guidelines on what should be redacted.

[Grott]

There's no legitimate need to disclose specific names for these issues except to shame or ostracize the parties involved. 

 

...

 

I think during the next meeting, I'll try and start a discussion to get a definition of the scope of the LS leaders meeting, and a less nebulous guidelines on what should be redacted.

 

1. No one on this thread has asked for a name.

 

2. That's fair.

[Corin Winterborne]

There's no legitimate need to disclose specific names for these issues except to shame or ostracize the parties involved. 

 

...

 

I think during the next meeting, I'll try and start a discussion to get a definition of the scope of the LS leaders meeting, and a less nebulous guidelines on what should be redacted.

 

1. No one on this thread has asked for a name.

 

To my knowledge that was the only thing that's ever been redacted or kept from the membership's general knowledge.

 

I think the issue today was a result of the last parts of the log that was an accidental oversight due to the forum character limit.

 

I'm just hoping people will put down their pitchforks and torches until something actually happens.

[Shuck]

The emphasis is mine.  The drama was between this person & linkshells involved.  The "sabotage" was brought up as a result of the drama that was being discussed: not the primary topic of discussion.

 

Further, Kylin offered to disclose the contents of the discussion, only redacting the persons involved.

 

Goofy sniping aside (which I'll note is unnecessary, and does nothing to actually help your point), I'll shed some light here:

 

As someone who was present, I'll go ahead and correct you. It was the primary topic of part of the discussion, and lead to another series of questions/statements that we all went back and forth on for a bit in a kind of microcosm example of this exact exchange here.

[Deirdre]

There's no legitimate need to disclose specific names for these issues except to shame or ostracize the parties involved. 

 

...

 

I think during the next meeting, I'll try and start a discussion to get a definition of the scope of the LS leaders meeting, and a less nebulous guidelines on what should be redacted.

 

1. No one on this thread has asked for a name.

 

To my knowledge that was the only thing that's ever been redacted or kept from the membership's general knowledge.

 

I think the issue today was a result of the last parts of the log that was an accidental oversight due to the forum character limit.

 

I'm just hoping people will put down their pitchforks and torches until something actually happens.

 

I just want to correct a little bit.

The issue was not brought up because the last part of the log was missing, it was redaction of content in logs (not limited to the redacted item you are speaking of, it was not the only thing redacted).

It was already concluded by LS Leaders that they will speak of redaction.

[Asyria]

Looking at this thread, I can't help but think there shouldn't even be round table meeting minutes. Just have the LS leaders share with their LS. We're a (big) bunch of gamers, not an actual government or company with responsibilities and paychecks.

 

Now that's my personal opinion.. but what isn't an opinion is that taking these things too seriously inevitably leads to drama. It's happened before and I have bad memories of it (and I wasn't even involved!)

 

So whatever you all do, take it easy!