 |
| |
|
|
Master Zen
|
 |
of naughty
Jan 2003
time: 23:32
|
|
Ok, not really, but we are going through some turbulent waters internally and I think it's time we realized that despite our differences, we are a great team, we are great people, and we are here for two things: 1) to have fun 2) to win.
Unfortunately these two things can sometimes be incompatible, on one hand, this is a team that seems to demand an extroridinary amount of professionalism, almost to the point it seems like a job. Now, some people seem to relish these aspects of the team, you have E_T doing untold lines of spreadsheet work just so that Hispanica does not waste a shield in Turn 168, you have Trip who's practically been a one-man Joint Chiefs of Staff, or vondrack or nye making turn reports that would make the editors of the World Almanac blush. It is a shame, we aren't getting paid because many of these people devote so much time into this game, while all this time they could have been doing something else, something more fun, something less demanding and MUCH more rewarding. Because there ain't no reward here, only the satisfaction of knowing we have played a silly little video game as close to perfection as possible.
So why on earth do we do this? Because beneath all this apparent seriousness and no-bullshit attitude, there is fun and satisfaction. I know I've had my fun. Dealing with Goonie is fun. Arguing with people is fun. Making up evil plans is fun. Just plain, hanging around the chat room is fun. I'm sure everyone else has some fun some way or another (and not just by making fun of Trip in the chat room).
How do these things cause conflicts? Because sometimes we take it TOO seriously, and other times we take it TOO lightly. I would hate to have a team of slackers who screw it up for those who want to do a good job, imagine a team of Goonies... that would be intolerable! On the other hand, I would hate to have people bossing others around, acting as if they actually had any form of moral authority over others regardless of their possition. We are not here to boss around and make other people feel less, the moment a person perceives a Consul, or a Minister to act arrogantly that person has every right to say "screw you, I'm out." Me, personaly, since I am not getting paid a cent for this, should I perceive the leadership to be incompetent or unfit, I will leave. In that sense, if people decide to quit for whatever reason, it is a decision that must be respected. We cannot force anyone to stay and our job as leaders is to run the team, not as bosses but as guides.
Sadly, I feel we have failed in more than one occasion in this regard, I have already made public some of the things that bothered me about the previous leadership, and also looking back at yesterday's incident with WB, I cannot help that perhaps me, BF and Arnelos went a little overboard in the chat room. If the price of this mistake is not getting WB back, then its a mistake I will regret more than any stupid chat with CFC because mistakes in-game ultimately only have in-game consequences. Losing a respected and talented individual needlessly makes you feel bad as a person too.
I am saddened that both WB and F-P are leaving over our differences. I think that these differences are what makes us great, and the thing about a democracy is that people will never agree on everything, you win some and you lose some. We may try to get our points across, heatedly if necessary, but we must always remember that the majority will rule in the end and we must swallow our pride when things don't go our way or when we make mistakes. If we quit because everybody wants something different, then why do we not care when half of our country wants one thing and the other half wants the other? Heck, even if something is decided by only 51%, then we have to stick to it if we wanted the other 49%. I think that as mature individuals we must learn that the most important virtue in a team of our size isn't consensus, it's compromise, because frankly, we will hardly ever achieve the former.
In conclusion, I love this team, with its ups and downs, with its crazy spreadsheet-loving builders, with its maniacal warmongers, with its authoritarian leaders and even Trip who wants to do everything all at the same time, with its lurkers who are nevertheless hearing about what is going on, and voting on what they think is right, to the active members who make valuable comments on everything, to the wonderful gang who hangs out in the chat, EVERYONE has put something into this team, are we are so much better for it.
Let's change our methods perhaps, but let's not ever change this diversity which makes our team great, let's argue, let's debate, let's get angry, let's get happy, let's learn from our mistakes and cherish our victories. And most importantly...
let's win this game. 
-MZ
Last edited by Master Zen on 11-12-2003 at 02:42
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Master Zen
|
|
of naughty
Jan 2003
time: 23:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WhiteBandit
To clarify some things people seem to be confusing: I'm not leaving the team. I'm simply resigning from the FAM. So I'll still be around to heckle everyone (and make fun of Trip in the chat), but I just would rather not have the responsibility of dealing with other nations at the moment and being held accountable because saying "Hi" is too nice and I might get their hopes up or something. |
Let me tell you somthing, the moment I step into a chat the first thing in my mind is "I sure hope I won't say anything to screw it up". I doubt anyone here can feel 100% sure of himself when talking diplomacy with another team, and being, human, we will screw up, I've screwed up, Togas has screwed up etc. Because diplomacy involves the fine art of knowing what to say and what not to say, it is just plain hard especially when you are negotiating for something. Please, please don't let that discourage you.
The guys didn't react like they did just because you were being nice. It was because it was felt that we offered the possibility of giving them something, and that if we eventually chose not to give them that, it will disappoint them (and its better to surprise than to disappoint). I think what we need is to understand certain universal guidelines when chatting with other teams (and this should be a must-read for the FAM):
1) Always be nice
2) Try and lighten up things by being humorous when possible (but not to overdo it)
3) Should you be confronted by a Goonie-type fellow, do not respond to his bullying in kind. Patiently point out that he is getting nowhere with his attitude, respond confidently, do not give in, but do not give in to insults either.
4) Should you ever get "cornered", lessen the situation by saying that you either do not have an answer or that the team needs to decide or vote upon a course of action. Invent fictionary voting results and debates if necessary.
5) When negotiating, there will be two situations to keep in mind: 1) when WE want something, or 2) when THEY want something. This situation with CFC is typical of the second. When THEY want something, it is up to them to put the first offer on the table and negotiation begins from that point. As they begin withdrawing petitions, we wait until the negotiation reaches a point where both parties are willing to stick to the other's argument.
Obviously the idea is to get the negotiation to a point where we have reached an acceptable threshhold towards the other guy's arguments but also to try and get the other team to reach as close as possible their own minimum threshold. You can't go too far because after them going below their minimum they'll likely say "f*ck you" and storm out of the chat, but also you can't say yes immediately after reaching your own threshold because the other team might be willing to go lower.
Mathematically:
A = Your minimum acceptable threshold (ex: we keep BoP and give Eq) "How far we are willing to go for this"
B = Their minimum acceptable threshold (ex: a very favorable alliance with no chokepoints for CFC) "How far they are willing to go for this"
obviously A > B as far as own utility is concerned. Ideally, we should strive to try and get to B as much as possible without going farther. By accepting or making possible suggestions on agreements which are closest to A, all we are doing is to get CFC's hopes up and maybe make their B be a little closer to A which is bad.
Our objective is to reach B, CFC's objective is to reach A. The thing about putting all the options on the table at first (in other words, options close to A) is that we lose the opportunity to reach an agreement which is closer to B. Thus, in situations were we are the recipients of foreign demands, it is best to let THEM put the options on the table and negotiate from that point.
I think this ended up being more confusing instead of enlightening but oh well, I can't write good with an empty stomach. I would just like WB to REALLY reconsider his position in the FAM because he is truly one of a kind and his talent is appreciated and needed.
Plus, the FAM is like the mafia, you are FAMily and you can't get out! 
-MZ
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
E_T
|
 |
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001
time: 00:32
|
|
This has been a good read and should be linked to somewhere in a topped thread. Because, before this game is finally over, we will again cross this threshhold more than one more time.
Yes, I'm really sorry to see F-P leave and I really hope that he atleast desides to lurk before making his final choice to leave (I still see that he has the Apolyton ISDG Icon). I have found several of his postings to be very insiteful, on several issues. And of course, as with anyone, I sometimes don't fully agree with them. BUT, I do take them into account in my general/overall planning efforts, because they are issues that need to be addressed, at some point in time and it's better to try to see what can and can't be done to make sure that they become a reality.
When We had started a "OTF" thread, we had it quickly shut down my Ming, because panag had reported it and it was deemed "inapproriate" for a private forum. Because of that and a few other things that he had done, panag was "removed" from the team.
* E_T still curses panag for his arrogant stupidity
One thing that I have learned, from the old SPDG, is that you can't please everyone, with everything. This game won't allow it, because of it's limits in several of it;s respects. But you try to keep interest up, you try to listen to what others have to say (even if you really think that the poster is being a complete moron) and you do the best that you can try to do.
Granted, arguments about this and that and the other thing are going to come up. And Granted, we will have people who feel that there viewpoints aren't being seriously being considered. And yes, people will leave because of them.
The main thing that EVERYONE needs to think about is, if I say something, WHAT effects will it have on the cohesiveness of this team, whether it's in a private forum, via PM, in our secure chatroom or at a public setting (like 1BC). What COULD be the overall and lasting effects on our team (and ultimately, our ability to try to win this game) will be. Is it better for me to just shut up and bite my tounge and let things settle down, for the betterment of the team, or do I add more fuel to a fire? These are the things that we ALL need to think about before engaging our fingers onto our keyboards.
So, for the sake of the team, please engage your brain before hitting that enter key....
E_T
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-12-2003 02:29
Oh no!
|