New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements

1

@emperor_penguin said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

I have repeatedly and extensively sought out user feedback (with discussions, surveys, polls, etc) and took an activist-type stance on behalf of much of the community that you tend to disvalue so much.

Yes, ftx has also run polls regarding what kind of maps people would like to play in ladder. Very few people voted, and the results were pretty much useless.

while disvaluing and dismissing majority opinions...

I keep seeing this and I can't understand why this is inherently a bad thing. A lot of the ideas people give are just plain bad and should be dismissed "for the good of FAF".

I have also put a lot of effort into learning gameplay/variance/aesthetic/etc criteria for evaluating maps/ladder/tmm better

Yeah ftx has a designated team for this, what is your point exactly? I know there's been an outrage on some of the maps archsimkat has put in the ladder pool recently, and I dont know what system he's following, but he's already receiving help to bring better maps to the pool.

with particular focuses on what types/styles of maps/gameplay/etc are desirable for different FAF communities/player-types. That is a large aspect of the sort of stuff a good Player Councilor should do imo, and you dismiss/neglect a lot of it.

You seem to really want to satisfy everyone on faf, but this is simply just not possible. Some people like one pool, while others will hate it. In what groups of "FAF communities/player-types" would you split the community up, anyway? And would you let them decide what maps to play? You do realise this will A. make it harder to match with players in matchmaking, since your preferences may not overlap/be similar and B. allow people to farm rating on maps they're good at and create unrealistic competitive leaderboards?

Also, saying ftx ignores these things is extremely ignorant. Like I said there have been polls and they were useless. The lower rated players would just flood the polls and vote 1 star on 20km maps and 5 stars on 5km maps. Does this represent the entire community? No. Yet, ftx implemented a system that made it so that lower rated players have to play less 20km and more 5km, whereas higher rated players get to play more 20km and relatively less 5km.

So far the only real issues with ftx as a PC that people have brought up are:

  • Lack of lower rated tournaments, which is due to a lack of TD's, not something he can be blamed for. If you want lower rated tournaments, host some.
  • Unfriendliness. I don't struggle with this myself, but I can see why people would think this way. Besides this, ftx has done a great deal of work for FAF. People mention to add an additional councillor role who would interact with players and this might not be a bad idea, but it is not a reason to remove/replace someone from his position when he's done so much good for FAF.

profile picture credits to petric

2

See I have done a great deal of things for faf: I have hosted at least 1000 lobbies, I have streamed a total of 1000 hours and invested a few hundred of dollers in tourney funds and streaming donations and subscriptions and I have coached people and tried to be helpful wherever I can and so on.

Yet on the other hand noone would ever consider me for the pc role, because I can be or quite frankly am sometimes a brat.

See how much perspective I have on things and using all my perspective I have to say that ftx is an ever bigger brat than I ever was and ever could be and that even by a magnitude.

Merit is one thing. Ftx has overstepped boundaries for too long and has helped creating and sustaining a toxic culture of extreme edginess that festers in our little community and he has pissed of way to many people in the process.

All the good things aside, I never questioned any of them, yes he is a huge asset to the community and man: thanks ftx for all the hard work!! I love faf too!!

But for the same reasons Francias, Suzuji and I are not worthy of being a councillor, for these reasons and even more so for these reasons ftx is not worthy of being a faf councillor.

If he behaves well and shows that the countless criticisms in his behaviour that have been raised inside and outside of this thread have had an effect on him, and that he takes peoples well formulated concern in his ways serious : sure he can be pc again.

But currently he is showing people the middle finger, never admits to any misconduct and for that alone he should not be pc.

So stop listing his achievements, or his ideas, we are all well aware of them. It's time for ftx to to show some remorse and good will and then we can see.

3

I will answer your questions, @Swkoll. However, let's not ignore this:

@morax said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

@spikeynoob said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

@FtXCommando and @Morax i have one last question on this topic. One of u will lose, of you are that one will you still contribute in these areas even if u are not PC? Are you willing to commit to any specific responsibilities?

Waiting to hear @FtXCommando reply to this... then I’ll respond to other posts.

I too would like to hear FTX give a straight answer to this question, as his response made it seem like he would NOT commit to helping FAF/the general community (not just his friends), unless he is kept in power.

.

In regards to Skwoll's questions:
As my PC Application states; "while I am ready and willing to support tournaments and events in all the ways reasonably expected of the PC, including as outlined [in the tournaments section of my application], I feel that the PC position has grown too extensive and would be better-served by an additional elected position, which I’ve tentatively dubbed ‘Tournaments Leader’.

So, if I am elected PC, I would promptly hold an election for the ‘Tournaments Leader’ position and would accept applications from any reasonable candidates that are in line with FAF’s standards and would do a respectable job. The accepted applicants would then be put to a vote by the overall FAF community, and the winner would become the new ‘Tournaments Leader’.

The ‘Tournaments Leader’ would be part of the PC team and would handle almost all tournament-related responsibilities of the PC and could bring additional visions and ideas for better-serving the tournaments side of FAF. However, if for whatever reason, the ‘Tournaments Leader’ fails in his duties, I would take over and handle things properly."

So, there would be an election specifically for a 'Tournaments Leader' that would enable proper vetting/etc of any potential candidates. However, if for whatever reason, there was some problem, and I ended up handling tournaments more directly;

  1. My default stance would be to continue to support the Ladder League Invitationals and LotS. Potential changes, if any, to high-level tournaments (such as LotS), would be based on community feedback, with a very strong weighting for the feedback of significant contributors to LotS, pros/previous LotS players, and good casters.

  2. What additional events I would personally run and how often I would run them would depend on community feedback. I would do polls/surveys/discussions/etc specifically for determining new tournaments/events. In particular, I would give significant weight to the opinions of contributors, TD's, casters, and previous tournament participants, in addition to the more general community feedback, in determining which additional events to personally run with what frequency.

Regardless, I would work to ensure that people who want to make proper tournaments for FAF would be reasonably able to do so with a reasonable level of support from the PC/PC team, and I would endeavor to improve the system for creating new tournaments, perhaps with things like optional tournament templates that have thorough instructions associated with them for aspiring TO's.

0

@emperor_penguin said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

What additional events I would personally run and how often I would run them would depend on community feedback

I was told:

I would also encourage and support additional tournaments and event creation, including for things like ‘Average Joes’ tournaments and “Map Gen’ tournaments, etc.

Do you not actually have a plan to help further the lower level tourney scene unless someone does it for you? Are you expecting to vote in someone who will do it? Helping newer people is supposed to be the point of your application. is it not?

1

This thread looks like a dispute between bile and antacids.

2

@ftxcommando

In addition to a large quantity of discussions and surveying, I've made dozens of FAF-related polls over the years, largely in regards to user preferences for what they want to play/change. The user feedback I've received has substantially impacted my opinions on a large variety of things (such as with map design, things needed for good gameplay/variance, community desires, coding/development efficiency, balance concerns, moderation problems, etc).

I've acted by making suggestions and acting as an advocate on behalf of community concerns/desires. I've often found you personally to be the biggest obstacle to getting community desires/concerns properly solved, FTX. However, I have also acted on feedback I have received to create maps by request for undeserved niches as well as with improvements that I incorporated into mapgen based on the feedback I received for what was desired in maps/gameplay/etc.

I'm not denying that you've done a number of good things for FAF, FTX. I'm stating that you've also caused a number of problems, and you contribute substantially to a more toxic/dismissive/condescending atmosphere. You respond to people a lot, however, you often respond with dismissiveness/condescension/etc, and you stifle some potential innovations. The ways you respond often make the overall impacts of many of your responses net negatives.

Also, I said that I'm not one of YOUR trainers, FTX. I don't need public recognition for training; that doesn't mean that I never train in public... However, I tend to prefer more private environments for training so that there are fewer distractions/etc. Not everything is about you...

4

Can you just say what useful information you gathered exactly and what useful things it has helped you to accomplish?

0

yeah,reading most of that is such a huge waste of time,so far i've seen and gone through only what Morax and Ftx have done,i didn't even know what other guys were doing and those huge-huge lists of "I will do that" or "I will make devs make that" is just a huge joke,you don't need to be a pc to implement most of those,just contact the responsible guy for it and it will sort things out,well surely this needs to be a realistic idea,not just "oh we want 4v4 tmm,make 4v4 tmm".
you guys keep forgetting that this is a community project where people dedicate their own time without any payment so things won't go as you always expect.

queuing with a newbie to show him the beauty of tmm and meeting tagada be like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLcRpdZ0Xb0&ab_channel=Tomoko

0

I mean it's about electing you to a role that I have built up from the ground up and am currently still in, so it kinda is a lot about me tbh

So your activism and feedback relates to making maps for your boys, great.

" The user feedback I've received has substantially impacted my opinions on a large variety of things (such as with map design, things needed for good gameplay/variance, community desires, coding/development efficiency, balance concerns, moderation problems, etc)."

This isn't action. You have no activism.

3

And if I poll people, I garuntee most of the playerbase would tell me:
Adds Shields to SCTA
Add Adjacency
Add more Experimental
Buff its T3
DGun one shot everything

And alot of polls will have similarly “useful” answers or results

I’m a shitty 1k Global. Any balance or gameplay suggestions should be understood or taken as such.

Project Head and current Owner/Manager of SCTA Project

1

@biass said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

Do you not actually have a plan to help further the lower level tourney scene unless someone does it for you? Are you expecting to vote in someone who will do it? Helping newer people is supposed to be the point of your application. is it not?

There are many points to my application, which are addressed here. Anyway, I do plan to help with the lower level tourney scene as well as act on community feedback., as I have already gotten enough relevant community feedback to know that there is substantial desire for things like ‘Average Joes’ tournaments and “Map Gen’ tournaments. So, even if there is a 'Tournaments Leader' elected, I could still hold additional tournaments personally in addition to whatever tournaments the 'Tournaments Leader' personally does, in addition to whatever tournaments everyone else does.

1

@noundedelkwoob
I have already gathered a lot of community feedback over the years, and I would continue to do so. In fact, if elected, I plan to gather substantially more feedback per unit time from the overall FAF community than any individual has done thus far in general, as I would be well-positioned to gather such feedback and act on much of it..
If you want to know how I would gather feedback beyond what I already do, my initial application post includes examples of that, including new systems that I would set up for PC that increase community involvement as well as transparency.

My initial application post also shows how I plan to have different map pools available in TMM. So, for example, both conventional ladder players as well as more casual players, can be satisfied. Each individual option combination (such as with different map pools) could technically have its own rating within the coding design that would be used, so sensible different ratings could be used if desired for balance/etc. However, that is something that can get highly technical and warrants further discussion and would be tangential to get into here. You are welcome to pm me about this today if you would like, but you can rest assured that that would be taken care of well.

In regards to FTX's polling based on map-size, that is so imprecise that it's like asking someone what they would like to do today, and giving them the options to either play an unspecified sport with <=5 people on a team or play an unspecified sport with >5 people on a team. You can get some data from that, but it's better to ask more questions so that you can actually get a proper understanding of why someone might like soccer over basketball over baseball, etc. The same sort of logic applies to surveying for TMM. FTX's data gathering there was too basic.

4

@Emperor_Penguin Can you provide us with any extensive evidence of your work for FAF excluding making maps? In your posts it sounds like you've been doing a lot but they are just that, words. You never were in any official FAF position as far as I know and never done anything official FAF related (you weren't member of either ladder, mapping, trainer or modding teams.) You say that's because you didn't like Ftx and that he was rude to you. I remember when you came to ladder team and argued with us about maps and gameplay showing us that you at that time had very little knowledge about map gameplay and yet you didn't take constructive feedback well and just left instead of trying to overcome your weakness and learn. How can you prove to us that you indeed did all the work you are talking about and improve in so many aspects? Your vague statement contribute to nothing and 1 or 2 discord DM screenshots won't do it either. There is very little trace of your work.
Every time someone asks you about it you answer that you have done polls about vague things (I have never in my life seen any of those polls) and "learned" from them but what have they actually accomplished? Have you every presented results to anyone that could take any action? They are not in the statistics mega thread, they were not on Zulip. What good came out of your polls except for you to "learn" and see how bad Ftx is?

0

@noundedelkwoob said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

  • Unfriendliness. I don't struggle with this myself, but I can see why people would think this way. Besides this, ftx has done a great deal of work for FAF. People mention to add an additional councillor role who would interact with players and this might not be a bad idea, but it is not a reason to remove/replace someone from his position when he's done so much good for FAF.

This is effectively my opinion, I'll be voting for FTX, but I do think a friendly face is definitely needed.

3

@emperor_penguin Unless you have someone already lined up you should probably be prepared to have the "Tournament Leader" position go unfilled. You should go into this with the expectation that you are going to run ladder league invitationals and LotS yourself if you want them around. This is in addition to whatever other tournaments you want to run.

I was also hoping you'd pledge to run specific new tournaments yourself and not just have a plan to make a plan. I would expect PCs to have a vision of what they think the tournament scene should look like and a plan to achieve that vision.

1

@ftxcommando said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

This isn't action. You have no activism.

bee6b5e5-0551-4b52-8037-370759dc7517-image.png

I have even repeatedly confronted you directly in support of a number of causes, FTX. Don't lie and say that I don't have activism.

I have gathered community feedback and resultantly actively campaigned and pushed/argued for things and rallied others for them on many occasions (ie: campaigning against not removing/hiding global rating, campaigning for a better TMM with (specific realistically codable suggestions), getting more support/integration for map gen, keeping the 'most recent' tab (where people can see recently made maps) on the vault, etc).

Stop making false accusations, FTX.

1

I would like there to be a more equal level of
evaluating/analyzing/nitpicking/questioning of each candidate, rather than seeing conversation that is dominated by biased interactions, involving things like FTX's forum warriors criticizing his opponents ferociously while ignoring/disregarding FTX's flaws.

I could get my friends to go and post against FTX and criticize/question every last thing about his posts and policies too, but I don't want to stoop to that level.

In fact, after I saw Judah very actively supporting me and passionately arguing against FTX, I actually asked him to take a break from posting in this thread for a few days, as I think it would be better to have a more proper/balanced/constructive discussion.

So, it would be good if others could try to be bit a more proper/balanced/constructive as well and try to act without such bias. After all, the proper goals here should be things like improving FAF, growing the playerbase, and improving the community experience; not getting your friend elected.

0

You completely lost the moment you deemed everyone that disagreed with you "ftx forum warriors"

1

@thewheelie said in New Player Councilor Discussion + Removal Announcements:

You completely lost the moment you deemed everyone that disagreed with you "ftx forum warriors"

I never deemed that everyone who disagreed is an 'ftx forum warrior.' There definitely are certain people here who are heavily biased in favor of their friends and act with substantial bias though.
To quote one of them, "I support my comrade FtX no matter what" -biass
One might say that biass is biased.

3

Alright, @Swkoll, here are some additional specifics: in addition to my previous pledges, I pledge that if I am elected PC, there will be at least two 'Map Gen' tournaments within my first 2 months as PC, and at least one of those tournaments will be an 'Average Joes' tourney and at least one will be open to pros.