M4nic_M1ner's world of PR

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by M4ster_M1ner, Jul 18, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Source of a lot of fun on EMC. :)

    I don't see that it is necessary to threaten the people, like "you will be banned for / from this or that."
    How does this make people feel? I don't quite understand where this comes from on / to EMC.

    Nominations without reason / description, joke nominations, and invalid nominations won't be taken into consideration.
    Joke nominations will be used exclusively for amusement.

    How about that?

    AFAIU it is just nomination, not voting anyway.

    What is the merit in threats?
    It smells like typical bureaucratic style from past centuries.
    Do authorities around you treat you like that?
    That's molesting and harming.

    And it does not work, especially not when you're trying to stimulate and support a community where membership is based on free will and free decision, where people come to play and have fun.
    (You can do that in North Korea, where they shoot people when they try to flee and emigrate.)

    Of course rules are needed, but the difference is in the way rules are chosen, how rules are communicated and how applied. The difference is in how you make people feel - and that's what matters in the end.
    607, NINJATTILA, mba2012 and 4 others like this.
  2. It's just a reminder/warning. Such as; if you grief in the wild, we can track you and will ban you.
  3. Because that doesn't say not to false nominate, and doesn't discourage it. :) Each false nomination is another thing staff have to go through, check against previous records, and denominate.

    While joke nominations may be thought of an amusing thing... they're really not....
  4. It was meant as replacement for the threat.
    In addition to
    Please do not make invalid or false nominations as this only annoys staff who have to go through them and delete them.

    No threats needed ... better PR ... happy members. :)

    PS: you really shall publish the list of nominations after closing, and publish message from the jury - explanation of who, how and why the "winners" were chosen. Makes good PR.
  5. You are the only one I have seen to complain about the PR of this event being run to recognize the hard-working players of EMC.
  6. Nominating is completely confidential, so that would be more than inappropriate.
    xI_LIKE_A_PIGx and PenguinDJ like this.
  7. You know I'm very sensitive when it comes to threats and violence inherent in the system :rolleyes:
    xI_LIKE_A_PIGx likes this.
  8. It's not a threat....

    And besides, with the way you worded it, it's no longer a rule, but a request, and requests to do something are often ignored more than a rule to do something.
    PandasEatRamen and PenguinDJ like this.
  9. I mean not to publish who nominated who.
    Just who was nominated, perhaps with explanations.
  10. No... because then anyone who wasn't nominated but felt like they should could get really upset...

    I'm sorry, but keeping it completely confidential is by far the more fair and safe way of doing it. Please, consider community spirit over politics, even just this once.
    PenguinDJ, hashhog3000 and Kephras like this.
  11. Let's relate this to the academy film awards, a large panel nominated what they believe to be deserving films in each category. Then the smaller panel chooses the actual winners.however, it is only ever learned who won, not who was in second or lower, and no reasons for the decision are ever passed.

    Some people will not even know they were nominated, what if they were a previously banned player trying to keep people from knowing that, and that has to be risen into consideration when making your public list. I see more people getting upset than happy with your "good PR"
  12. I'm curious too, I admit. But ultimately, it's as Jack said - it becomes a list of who "didn't make the cut" and would do more harm than good. Some people might handle it more gracefully than others, but you and I know there are at least a few people who'd see their name nominated, but not victorious, and wonder "Y u no pick meh?"

    Jack, Alex, and I trust the rest of the staff as well, are handling this very carefully to make sure it reflects on all of us in the best possible way. Anything that serves as a divisive influence or causes drama should be avoided here.
  13. Is that a good reason to put over having open community?
    I doubt. (But I'll try to ask a professional.)

    Seems like protecting the community from themselves. Protecting the people who perhaps will be upset because not nominated? Hmm, I won't be upset, no need to protect me from myself, thank you. I expect that 98% do not need nor want that protection ... but I might be wrong (?)

    Keeping nominations and whole process secret is politics, and IMO not very good one.
    Sure, any decision implies trade-offs, but IMO openness is better.

  14. Sorry to tell you but even after all this time I really do not think you get it. Rules are not there for.the 98% Who follow them, they are there for the 2% who don't. Do we have to protect the community from itself? Most certainly, maybe if every player were at the desired maturity level you expect them to be manic, this would not be the case. However we do have people that will lash out over anything, so rules and enforcement of those rules protect the community from those people. Who, come from within the community to begin with.

    Why must even this event become a debate with you? Why not let an event that is designed to give deserving players their due recognition run its course at least the first round, before openly accusing its creators for "threatening" , while it is only their intention to see the deserving people that would normally go unrecognized, get a chance to shine.

    u have to remember that this is the internet, not your country, not your previous country, and not your house. The rules we have are internet rules for an internet community to help give us the good internet people. Because believe it or not, our community is strong because of our rules. For the most part they keep back the lower life forms that lurk the internet, because it is a waste of their time. like I said, the rules are not for the 98% that wouldn't do it. It's for the 2% that would.
  15. Nominations are published.
    And it is different, because there the community votes (over 5700 members), and not "staff."

    Who thinks threatening makes good PR?
  16. Sorry, but you misunderstood that point.
    It's not about rules, but about the idea of protecting the community and people from themselves.
    I think 98% do not need it nor want it.
    Who here likes to be in a kindergarten?

    Well, that sums it up very well.
    And we are at the old discussion about the nature of the EMC (community). :)

    Because EMC is so far open to respect opinions and suggestions?

    And for this very reason it is needed - even necessary - to avoid threats and similar.

    I hope so.
    What matters - in the end - is how you make people feel. The 98%, not the 2%.
  17. I feel like you're being unnecessarily petty about this, giving the staff a hard time for trying to do something great that will recognize outstanding members of the community for their contributions, and bringing up points completely tangential to the matter at hand. I feel like your concerns are based entirely too much around unrelated experiences in real life or historical case study and don't reflect on the situation at hand. And I feel like you're brushing off every (perfectly reasonable) explanation you've been given for why things are set as they are.

    I'm not saying this to cause confrontation, and I don't wish to start an argument with you. I simply wish you would recognize that you're making up a problem (or several) when in fact there are none. Please, I implore you, just drop these silly arguments, nominate a player or two you feel is special to EMC, and move on. There is nothing to be gained from picking this fight and the worse it gets, the less likely it is the staff will want to go through any of this again in 3-6 months.

    And that would be the biggest shame of all.
  18. You're right. I'm sensitive around some things and topics and the art and intensity of my response here is not based on this one ban threat alone, but on previous experiences within EMC and outside, on Internet and outside of the Internet.

    The idea to give recognition to members for their friendliness and helpfulness is of course very good, natural and very welcome.

    (And it does not need to be peppered with any threats...)
  19. I must be playing somewhere else then, because if 98% of our players disagreed about how our protections were handled as much as you do about, well seemingly everything, I would notice far few people playing here.

    Tell me manic, when does constantly pressing the same opinion so harshly leave that arena and become insulting to the people who work hard to try and provide the best community? Because I can tell you that no one who does this job is happy when they one off your post like this. You constantly"share your opinion" in such a demeaning manor it is honestly hurtful. We try hard to appease every player, but can not do it. However, I rarely see a player who do openly disagrees with just about everything we do, yet instead of leaving, stays and complains about it.

    Is that me saying "please leave"? Of course not, I would love for us to be able to all log in one day and see a simple post from manic saying, good job EMC, you are perfect in every way. However I know that dream is impossible because the changes you ask for will not yield a successful community. You may think it will, and if you were to start your own community based off those ideals, and it is successful, then you showed us. But what I am saying, is that, maybe you should look at things for the simplistic things they are here, instead of searching for grievances constantly. Does that not get tiring? Searching for the shortcomings of a community just because you know they will let you say them?

    It's an old saying, just because you CAN say it does not mean you SHOULD. Not saying that anything you have said it's crossing any lines, but instead of overtaking a thread about awarding the kind deseving with your pressing agenda, why not acknowledge that just about every staff member has commented on your ideas, we have heard you . If ever there is an opportunity to make a change that benefits the community and you, we will make that change. But like you said, it's about the happiness of the 98%, which manic, after nearly two years of being a mod I can say, you do not solely represent.
  20. To conclude this; you're 100% free to share your opinion - although I have doubts that the majority will agree with you - but please don't do it here on this thread. It's purely for topics concerning this project only, not a political debate. :)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.