Saturday, August 07, 2021

Proposal: [Special Case] Don’t force players to use Slack

Cannot be enacted, with 6 votes against to 5 in favour. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:39:55 UTC

In “No Collaboration”, change

Discussion conducted in plain English on the BlogNomic wiki and blog, and the #currentdynasty or #general channels of the BlogNomic slack, are not considered to be private communication.

to

Discussions conducted in plain English on the BlogNomic wiki and blog are not considered to be private communication, but discussions on other sites are (even if they are publicly available).

Some players don’t want to use real-time communications at all, and others would rather use Discord than Slack.

This is a problem when it comes to the No Collaboration rule – this rule allows everyone to be aware of everyone else’s deals, but permits such deals to be made on Slack, where not everyone will see them. This essentially forces everyone to register for, and repeatedly check, Slack in order to be able to play optimally in a No Collaboration dynasty.

The simplest fix to this is to move all collaboration onto blog posts and the wiki, where it will be easy to see and will be archived along with the rest of the dynasty.

Comments

Madrid:

07-08-2021 22:29:09 UTC

Some dynasties have had a pinned discussion post to talk things out in comments to it, so I think it’s alright.

Clucky: he/him

07-08-2021 22:33:26 UTC

people like to discuss the dynasty on the slack

if you don’t want to use the slack that is your call, but preventing dynasty discussing there I feel like would be unfair to the people who want to discuss is there. its not being intentionally exclusionary there, anyone can find and participate in the discussion (whereas if say, there was a blognomic facebook group that 90% of people don’t know about, using that would be a way to exclude people, hence why you can’t)

ais523:

07-08-2021 22:37:10 UTC

As long as No Collaboration exists in its current form and is activated, it isn’t my call – important information that everyone’s meant to have access to (what pools exist) may be there and only there, thus forcing me to check it.

Clucky: he/him

07-08-2021 23:09:24 UTC

then check it. afterall, similar discussions could be happening in any dynasty

the point of no collaborations isn’t so that people only have to check the blog. its just to prohibit private conversations. two people chatting on twitter could be considered a private conversation as no one is likely to find it. two people chatting on an official blognomic discussion forum in a public easily accessible channel is not a private conversation

ais523:

07-08-2021 23:27:56 UTC

If No Collaboration is turned off, there isn’t a reason to check anything other than the blog – pooling discussed on Slack would presumably be discussed in PM, so you wouldn’t be able to see it anyway.

It isn’t about what is and isn’t private, but about what you do and don’t have to do in order to be able to participate without an information disadvantage.

(This also isn’t about the point of No Collaboration. It’s about an unintended side effect – turning it on gives an advantage for checking Slack that wouldn’t be there if it were turned off.)

Clucky: he/him

08-08-2021 00:23:30 UTC

but regardless of the status of the no collaborations rule, there is plenty of dynastic discussion that happens in public, on the slack. I don’t see why the no collaborations rule creates this advantage/disadvantage

lemon: she/her

08-08-2021 00:30:24 UTC

the tricky thing about this rule is that it’s called “no collaboration”, but what it really limits is communication, and i think talking to the other players about the game is part of what makes it fun. on the blog and wiki, there’s no centralized location for discussion, and it becomes very easy to lose random blog posts to the flow of actual gameplay

lemon: she/her

08-08-2021 00:32:10 UTC

i think we benefit from a place for discussion thats separate from the stream of gameplay, basically

ais523:

08-08-2021 01:23:29 UTC

The problem I’m seeing is if explicit deals get made in public on the Slack – people who don’t use the Slack wouldn’t know about them. If you want to “PM” someone about a trade or the like, and No Collaboration is on, you need to do it in public so that everyone can see it – but doing it on the Slack means that non-Slack users can’t see it.

“No Collaboration” has the side effect of forcing all discussion about the dynasty generally to become public, not just deals between players (although that probably isn’t the primary intent behind the rule). So I guess the issue here is balancing the downsides of that side effect with the main intention behind the special case rule.

Janet: she/her

08-08-2021 01:44:48 UTC

imperial

lemon: she/her

08-08-2021 03:55:18 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

08-08-2021 04:17:54 UTC

against

Josh: he/they

08-08-2021 07:56:33 UTC

for

Kevan: City he/him

08-08-2021 08:53:46 UTC

for given how these channels can easily get hours of unrelated discussion overnight.

pokes:

08-08-2021 12:19:15 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

08-08-2021 14:27:13 UTC

@Kevan so why allow discussion on non blog sources at all? Even in a dynasty with no collabs turned off, people unwilling to check other sources would still be excluded

Clucky: he/him

08-08-2021 14:29:23 UTC

In the one dynasty this rule was on for, there was a ton of supplemental discussion in the slack that gave it a bunch of character. Without that discussion it would’ve been a far dryer dynasty

Chiiika: she/her

08-08-2021 14:45:03 UTC

for

Darknight: he/him

08-08-2021 14:46:20 UTC

imperial

Raven1207: he/they

08-08-2021 20:08:44 UTC

imperial

lemon: she/her

08-08-2021 23:05:20 UTC

if this passes, it sets a precedent that No Collaboration disallows any discussion about the dynasty between players *anywhere* but the blog. i don’t see a world in which that doesn’t have a reductive effect on players’ enjoyment & enthusiasm about the dynasty!! what’re we gonna do, have lengthy 70-comment chats in the comment sections of random proposals? how is that better or easier to use than a chat client?

Lulu: she/her

08-08-2021 23:45:14 UTC

against

Raven1207: he/they

09-08-2021 02:06:13 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

09-08-2021 03:53:41 UTC

@lemon no see people are totally gonna enjoy having to browse five different threads, including bookmarking old threads that still have ongoing discussions on them, rather than realizing that most of that discussion is contained to one central place that is easy to follow along /s