- I am working on a external game at the moment which two vocal councilors have a severe problem with. The rest of the council are neutral/positive and they are ok with it so far. People try to make this conversation about my game, but that's a distraction. I have been anti-toxicity forever since the old forums. I even tried to get biass banned from election, well before any of this drama. Also: I have not invented a time machine, yet.
But nine, you should sort this out quietly and privately in the council
I agree and have tried many approaches but sadly that type of thing does not work, and I think most of the council would support that statement.
But nine, this timing is suspicious
I think it makes absolute sense to talk about an election issue before the vote. Unconsciously, FAF is voting for if they want to reduce or promote nasty attitude, and my duty is to make that a conscious decision. Why is the timing such a big deal? There is a week to discuss it.
FtX and Biass seem to get more done than most people, so maybe their way of acting is actually superior.
You have a point there, but why can't we find people who are both nice and effective?
Could it be that nice-effective people stay away due to nasty-effective people?
I know very solid contributors who left like that.
What percentage of player retention do you aim to achieve before beginning external promotions? Assuming people mainly leave due to toxicity also seems like a big leap
Good questions - I don't know. There are some very obvious things we should work on. Get it touch if you want to discuss.
"Nine2 - I want it publicly stated whether the Russian Discord has the same rules applied to it as the official discord. I then want it publicly stated whether a councillor broke the official rules in relation to postings in the discord."
100%. My position has always been that the council should work out what their rules are and then enforce them. It's true - ask an unbiased councilor. The council moves very slowly.
Toxicity in faf is actually not that bad by any gaming standards.
That may be true about the players but my issue is that the behavior of FAF leadership is unnacceptable. I doubt the people running Fortnite call people names.
"Using the FAF vaults in order to gain playtesting for maps, and then planning to remove the maps later to sell exclusively as a part of said game."
I have discussed this AT LENGTH with the council and even biass himself admitted that it's probably fine now that I cleared up the confusion. Good quality maps from my game were offered for FAF use, I was happy to sign any waiver about not removing them later.
"but nine - you told keyser to get fucked"
I did - in a way that did NOT make FAF look bad, in a PRIVATE chat with just him and me, over an old grudge. Is that my worst offence in my 7ish year history on FAF?
"But nine, you don't do any work"
My work is to reduce toxicity and some other issues with onboarding, which is why I got 2 hours sleep after spending 4 hours writing my opening post, before I had to wake up and pack up my house.
I am trying to fix FAF as I see it. The unbiassed councilors would agree that I am very active in council chat, discussing things with them, passionate, trying to create change.
I'm not really going to go back and forth 100 times in this thread (I have had weeks of that in councilor chat already). Just notice for yourself where all the terrible accusations come from and draw your own conclusions. Also notice that I have NOT been fired as I have so far managed to given acceptable answers to the council. If anyone has any hard questions about my "conflict of interest" game feel free to reach out.
Dear community: You have heard different opinions about toxicity, and you have seen attempts to derail from the actual topic. It doesn't really matter what I think. If YOU personally would like to see less attitude in FAF, then I recommend reducing attitude in the council, and voting for Penguin in the election.