Pardon the Interruption...

Yet what are you trying to do to make it better, I ask. As far as I can see, nothing.

You are to damned lazy to even come up with a solution, you want someone else to do it for you. Trask did it in One post, One post. And yet it's taken you eight, and you've yet to mention how the situation can be fixed. Before you spout out telling me that I'm lazy, do me a big favour look in the mirror first.

I've already told you my solution:

I'm going to make you guys useless. Everything you can do I can do better, and I can do it without trying to dictate to everyone how they run their Sithspit.

You're going to make them useless without giving them even time to respond to your thread or allow the whills a chance to respond? Perhaps you should reword that to something more like "I am going to make you guys useless if it isn't change."

Give MORE people a chance to respond before you start throwing around absolutes and insults. And that's for the both of you.

If they had shown signs of changing at any point in this process, sure. I'd have been happy to play ball. But since they haven't and nothing that anyone has said has lead me to believe that the problem will be fixed, I'm going for it. Certain steps were taken as soon as the bank was closed.

By all means, the Whills are welcome to rectify this most recent kriff up. But the damage has been done.

I'm going to reiterate that the thread linked to above is not for venting, only a place to list things. I don't think we need the whills to fix things, but we will if both sides (and I hate to have to use that word, as there shouldn't be "sides" between the players and the guilds) don't stop aggravating each other.

I'm not going to comment on the specifics of the new regs, because, simply, the economics of JvS is outside of my area of specialities. I'll contribute where I can, but specific questions are best answered by those that know their way around the economics.

I will, however, comment on the how and why the councils work the way they do.

The GRPEC is in the process of working through the nitty gritty of how the new systems are going to work, and when I say in the process, I do very much mean in it - things are going to be changed, altered, rephrased, rethought, through the course of the next few months as we all adapt to the new set up and work through the teething problems. It is very much the case that the Councils are open to input and that changes will happen if we're convinced by the discussions we have with you that they need to happen. Yes, we're answerable to the players. And if what you say convinces enough of the councillors that something they're responsible for needs re-discussing, it'll be re-discussed. Do bare in mind that some things are above our 'pay-grade', so to speak.

We're also required to take actions in the interests of the community according to our best judgement of what is the appropriate course of action, which sometimes means having a discussion, making a decision, and putting it into action off of our own backs, for the purposes of expediency and simply getting things done. Because changes do need to happen sometimes, and sometimes, what is needed doesn't always corroborate with what is wanted - such as people wanting 50,000 ships in their fleets in 1.0.

In this case? Yes, I agree that it's possible the overarching changes that have lead to the current Economic guidelines would have been better off had they been discussed with the players before the decisions were made. However, ultimately, that decision was made by the Whills, just as it would have been if we had had a many-months-long discussion on the matter. They have, in their estimation and their deliberations as a council, decided it's what's best for the community as a whole. The onus is on the players guild councils to try to decide the best systems to put in place as a result of the changes. Something that is still, again, a work in progress. The Whills - who, ultimately, are in charge here - have oversight of everything we're doing, and they haven't been letting us just go off on our own and do what we want.

When we make decisions, they're not because that's how we want things - it's because that's how we have come to the conclusion is the best approach for the community as a whole, through analysis and consideration, not based on whim and personal interests, and definitely not based on being lazy. Sometimes, yes, the "best" approach is in fact the one we have had to pick out of the lesser of two-or-more evils. And yes, sometimes, we get it wrong and need to reassess things, but these things can only be reviewed with the benefit of hindsight and actually seeing how the system is or isn't working. It takes time.

Constructive feedback, ideas, all these things are welcome - but please, can we try and at least keep things in a positive and amicable mood? In the long run, it's better for everyone if we address the concerns calmly and rationally.

That, incidentally, goes to the Councillors just as much as it does to the non-Councillors. All parties, keep it cool, listen to each other, and accept that some things are decided upon and are beyond our reach and influence, and others are still flexible, or may be opened up for review in the future. The key to finding anything resembling mutual contentedness within these discussions is to keep a level head, take a few steps back, try and keep calm about it, and don't automatically assume the worst of everything that's put out there.

[quote="Dav Man'Sell":2ybjfm6e]I'm not going to comment on the specifics of the new regs, because, simply, the economics of JvS is outside of my area of specialities. I'll contribute where I can, but specific questions are best answered by those that know their way around the economics.[/quote:2ybjfm6e]

Thanks for making this point Dav, who thought it would be an excellent idea to allow non-economic thinkers into JVS's economic system? What qualifications do they have for changing a system that some of us enjoyed because some of them did not? I hear alot of complaints about the banking and business system from those who always disliked it, never used it and are now in positions where they have the power to get rid of it, well kriff, I liked it, I liked the old system and I know many others did. Unfortunately many of them are too apathetic to do anything about it, they just say "whatever" which isn't just an injustice to what they truly believe but it is an injustice to the entire site that they are not voicing their opinions.

[quote="Dav Man'Sell":2ybjfm6e]We're also required to take actions in the interests of the community according to our best judgement of what is the appropriate course of action, which sometimes means having a discussion, making a decision, and putting it into action off of our own backs, for the purposes of expediency and simply getting things [i:2ybjfm6e]done[/i:2ybjfm6e]. Because changes do need to happen sometimes, and sometimes, what is [i:2ybjfm6e]needed[/i:2ybjfm6e] doesn't always corroborate with what is [i:2ybjfm6e]wanted[/i:2ybjfm6e] - such as people wanting 50,000 ships in their fleets in 1.0.[/quote:2ybjfm6e]

I can understand this, but where and when are you authorized to make this call? If the site was truly democratic we would create polls in which people would vote for these changes, that is the perfect system, albeit with flaws but it is better than you guys making the call and saying "it's for the good of the site"

Furthermore if there was a poll we complainers would see just how much of a minority we are and you could use overwhelming site approval of your policies to shut us up. Also... I don't want to be this guy, but when you say the "Whills approved it" how many councilors are Whills? How many Whills had a biased opinion when they should not have? I do not know the answers, which is why I'm asking

I just want to point out for the record: I glanced thru some of the new threads Eralam posted about: I barely as able to keep in line with some of the older rules, simply because my math was wrong, or I misread the last change: with these new ones I'll be hopelessly lost, in all honesty. I'm a rather smart person, but i've never had a head for economics, and these new rules make the RP for econmics a lot tougher.

I did glance at one and I'd like to question it as well

[quote:1hbfg34z]The Galactic Role Play and Economic Council has decided that for each major purchases (a one go thing) a character buying something to be used personally or a faction were to be given an allowance to continue their adventures in the galaxy. Please note that this is a monthly allowance given to each and everyone of you if you do decide to make an official purchase in any registered business.[/quote:1hbfg34z]

Yes I did notice the sticky at the bottom that said still under discussion, but I'd like to comment my two cents on the matter. You want people to RP out buisness transactions, go thru the motion of explaining in depth where products come from, what their made of, ect. Yet if you wnat to buy something you don't need to have money to get it: All you ahev to do is wait a month, the GRPEC will give you money to get whatever you want.

The old system at least, as long as you kept the buisness running, in good shape, with RP to support it you got money for it. The same with managing the planets, as long as RP was present you got the taxes. This method here seems wrong.

I just have one question really, only and this is something I would like explained to me in depth if at all possible. Okay so here it is:

So we get a monthly allotment basically to buy things, build things, etc correct? - Got it.
Okay so with that said, who IC do we get the money from monthly to do this? I mean who pays us IC, for example is it the banking clan or what. Don't get me wrong I like money regardless but how do you as the GRPEC justify paying us IC? If you guys or gals want it to be as close to real life transactions and the like how can you justify to me so that I understand who is paying me this money IC? Has the thought process been thought through all the way on my particular question...

That is my only thing I really am confused as all hell on.

[Zauriel]

Eralam,

We spoke on Friday about the Canon Business problem, you and I, and I told you that it was being brought before the Council of the Whills for further discussion. Regrettably, we were unable to do much with it over the weekend but that does not mean that we are not still working on something that will be beneficial to all users, Guild Membership status aside. It was just...the weekend, my friend, and many of us were off doing things as, well, that's what the weekends are for are they not? :P

Have just a little bit of faith. You should expect something released on the matter within the week.


- Z

I'll be gone for a week. That should give you enough time to get your release out.

[Whill Felix]

Well I for one sure hope we dont take more than a week...I mean, what happens when you get back and they are not done? We get grounded for being naughty Whills who dont work fast enough for you?

I go ahead with my plans and you guys get to make as many announcements as you want without having to worry about Big Bad Eralam trolling them.

Ok, so just to clear something up with regards to monthly allowances, It's pretty much like the max amount in said month that you can spend. For example, you might work for a faction or a business or just be collecting money some other way, and of however much you get paid, you can only spend the amount specified in the monthly allowance.
so say you earned 200 million credits in a month (maybe you killed a few important people), of that amount, you can only spend 150 million credits. This is more so for like purchasing of fleets, vehicles, mass production of weapons.
This Monthly Allowance is not something the GRPEC gives you, it is a limit on how much can be spent on major purchases, given re-registered businesses will still have bank accounts they want to earn money into.


[quote="The Illusive Man":9mqfy0wc]
Thanks for making this point Dav, who thought it would be an excellent idea to allow non-economic thinkers into JVS's economic system? What qualifications do they have for changing a system that some of us enjoyed because some of them did not? I hear alot of complaints about the banking and business system from those who always disliked it, never used it and are now in positions where they have the power to get rid of it, well kriff, I liked it, I liked the old system and I know many others did. Unfortunately many of them are too apathetic to do anything about it, they just say "whatever" which isn't just an injustice to what they truly believe but it is an injustice to the entire site that they are not voicing their opinions.[/quote:9mqfy0wc]
Please note that while many of our brothers and sisters in the former GRPC do not know the exact specifics of JvS economics (which over the coming months they will be learning, much like us former GEC's will be learning the specifics of the GRPC operation), It was a decision by the Whills and the High Councillors to merge the two councils, for a multitude of reasons. A couple of which were that the GEC was sort of becoming somewhat out dated in the fact that JvS has moved on from the days when credit counting was required, a major factor of which was a lack of supporting RP, which has just about all but been taken care of as everyone improves their skills; with this comes the reason that JvS is about writing Story Lines and Role Playing, which is something that should be concentrated more on, then having to count numbers (which yes was fun for some, but for others it was more of a hindrance in certain situations).
Illusive, the GEC had positions open for application for many months prior to this, in which you could have applied to a position of 'power'.


[quote="The Illusive Man":9mqfy0wc]
I can understand this, but where and when are you authorized to make this call? If the site was truly democratic we would create polls in which people would vote for these changes, that is the perfect system, albeit with flaws but it is better than you guys making the call and saying "it's for the good of the site"

Furthermore if there was a poll we complainers would see just how much of a minority we are and you could use overwhelming site approval of your policies to shut us up. Also... I don't want to be this guy, but when you say the "Whills approved it" how many councilors are Whills? How many Whills had a biased opinion when they should not have? I do not know the answers, which is why I'm asking[/quote:9mqfy0wc]
I think we were authorized to make calls, when we as players demanded that the councils be made to make such calls, at least that is what I remember the original intent was. I think that has changed since then....

If the site was truly democratic, then we would have polls that every single player was forced to take part in. However this is not the case, because a majority of players don't tend to go near the OOC forums and vote for things. If you go through all the polled threads on JvS, whether major or minor, you would find a small main group of people who were always on them. I don't think you would find any major poll or thread on JvS that has a large majority of players voting or taking part in it. Wherein lies the problem of having a 'democratic' voting system, because the only results you would get, would be that of the minority that actually votes and voices opinions.
I mean, I could point out, using this thread and the original thread allowing players to voice an opinion about the GRPEC merger, that it is only a minority that are actually complaining. If you go through, page by page, you will find almost exactly the same people in each thread, raising concerns. Which interestingly enough, is getting change made in your favour. Meaning a majority out there, who are unconcerned, are being made to do what you want.

Because whilst it may not seem like it, a FEW people are dictating the will of ALL the people. While I realise this argument can be turned on the councils, It should be noted that the Councillors come from all sorts of RP walks, that represent a more general view of the site, as compared to the few complainers, who tend to represent major business role players (which is representative of real life, the government makes a decision and big business doesn't like it because it benefits everyone and not just them). As a 'governing' body, we make decisions that are meant to benefit the whole, not just the few.


with regards to how many councillors are Whills, I do not have that information either, however from what I can tell, as a player and councillor, It seems like very few people are on both the councils and acting as Whills (especially since between the two, you'd be pretty damn busy working for free).
But once again, the Whills are elected from a wide range of people, all of whom have different views and opinions. With regards to biased opinions, there really is no unbiased person, because while someone who hates the system is biased against it, someone who loves the system would be biased for it. Which is a different matter entirely (it sort of dips into the realm of philosophy, which is not the topic here....)



Look I really hope this didn't really get too out of hand, I apologise if it did. But I really hope my point has gotten across.

[Whill Felix]

After reading that most excellent post below mine, I realised I have missed something I should have commented on. Illusive Man, there are no councillors who are Whills.


The Lix.

[size=60:3mwpptj6][quote="Prarr'ebecc'aelios":3mwpptj6]Ok, so just to clear something up with regards to monthly allowances, It's pretty much like the max amount in said month that you can spend. For example, you might work for a faction or a business or just be collecting money some other way, and of however much you get paid, you can only spend the amount specified in the monthly allowance.
so say you earned 200 million credits in a month (maybe you killed a few important people), of that amount, you can only spend 150 million credits. This is more so for like purchasing of fleets, vehicles, mass production of weapons.
This Monthly Allowance is not something the GRPEC gives you, it is a limit on how much can be spent on major purchases, given re-registered businesses will still have bank accounts they want to earn money into.


[quote="The Illusive Man":3mwpptj6]
Thanks for making this point Dav, who thought it would be an excellent idea to allow non-economic thinkers into JVS's economic system? What qualifications do they have for changing a system that some of us enjoyed because some of them did not? I hear alot of complaints about the banking and business system from those who always disliked it, never used it and are now in positions where they have the power to get rid of it, well kriff, I liked it, I liked the old system and I know many others did. Unfortunately many of them are too apathetic to do anything about it, they just say "whatever" which isn't just an injustice to what they truly believe but it is an injustice to the entire site that they are not voicing their opinions.[/quote:3mwpptj6]
Please note that while many of our brothers and sisters in the former GRPC do not know the exact specifics of JvS economics (which over the coming months they will be learning, much like us former GEC's will be learning the specifics of the GRPC operation), It was a decision by the Whills and the High Councillors to merge the two councils, for a multitude of reasons. A couple of which were that the GEC was sort of becoming somewhat out dated in the fact that JvS has moved on from the days when credit counting was required, a major factor of which was a lack of supporting RP, which has just about all but been taken care of as everyone improves their skills; with this comes the reason that JvS is about writing Story Lines and Role Playing, which is something that should be concentrated more on, then having to count numbers (which yes was fun for some, but for others it was more of a hindrance in certain situations).
Illusive, the GEC had positions open for application for many months prior to this, in which you could have applied to a position of 'power'.


[quote="The Illusive Man":3mwpptj6]
I can understand this, but where and when are you authorized to make this call? If the site was truly democratic we would create polls in which people would vote for these changes, that is the perfect system, albeit with flaws but it is better than you guys making the call and saying "it's for the good of the site"

Furthermore if there was a poll we complainers would see just how much of a minority we are and you could use overwhelming site approval of your policies to shut us up. Also... I don't want to be this guy, but when you say the "Whills approved it" how many councilors are Whills? How many Whills had a biased opinion when they should not have? I do not know the answers, which is why I'm asking[/quote:3mwpptj6]
I think we were authorized to make calls, when we as players demanded that the councils be made to make such calls, at least that is what I remember the original intent was. I think that has changed since then....

If the site was truly democratic, then we would have polls that every single player was forced to take part in. However this is not the case, because a majority of players don't tend to go near the OOC forums and vote for things. If you go through all the polled threads on JvS, whether major or minor, you would find a small main group of people who were always on them. I don't think you would find any major poll or thread on JvS that has a large majority of players voting or taking part in it. Wherein lies the problem of having a 'democratic' voting system, because the only results you would get, would be that of the minority that actually votes and voices opinions.
I mean, I could point out, using this thread and the original thread allowing players to voice an opinion about the GRPEC merger, that it is only a minority that are actually complaining. If you go through, page by page, you will find almost exactly the same people in each thread, raising concerns. Which interestingly enough, is getting change made in your favour. Meaning a majority out there, who are unconcerned, are being made to do what you want.

Because whilst it may not seem like it, a FEW people are dictating the will of ALL the people. While I realise this argument can be turned on the councils, It should be noted that the Councillors come from all sorts of RP walks, that represent a more general view of the site, as compared to the few complainers, who tend to represent major business role players (which is representative of real life, the government makes a decision and big business doesn't like it because it benefits everyone and not just them). As a 'governing' body, we make decisions that are meant to benefit the whole, not just the few.


with regards to how many councillors are Whills, I do not have that information either, however from what I can tell, as a player and councillor, It seems like very few people are on both the councils and acting as Whills (especially since between the two, you'd be pretty damn busy working for free).
But once again, the Whills are elected from a wide range of people, all of whom have different views and opinions. With regards to biased opinions, there really is no unbiased person, because while someone who hates the system is biased against it, someone who loves the system would be biased for it. Which is a different matter entirely (it sort of dips into the realm of philosophy, which is not the topic here....)



Look I really hope this didn't really get too out of hand, I apologise if it did. But I really hope my point has gotten across.[/quote:3mwpptj6][/size:3mwpptj6]

I think that was a really well made point, Rebecca. Thank you.

Also, a word on the merging of the Councils; with the changes made to the Economic system, and the focus on RP quality over, to use a colloquialism, "bean counting", the differences in the duties of what was the two separate Councils have become significantly smaller. It's the reason why the merger went ahead - because the decision to change the system, and the basic outline of how the new system would work, was conceived of before the merger was given the green light. It's the change that is why the merger was felt as practicable - trust me, that point was discussed in depth between myself, Atlantis, NT (before he retired), and the Whills. The consideration was made in both directions, as decisions of the former GRPC-ilk were often based on analysing matters that were very hard - if not, impossible - to quantify, which is a vastly different way of thinking to the Economics system of old, in which everything was, by nature, quantifiable, at least in some basic fashion. The merge didn't happen without due consideration towards that side of it, and the general changes to the economics system, that brought the two roles of GRPC and GEC much closer together, was set upon first.

Which is why, in practice, although I and some of my former GRPC colleagues are still finding our feet on the Economics side, there is very much a process of learning going on, one that will go both ways and ensure it truly is a proper merger, not just a cut-and-shut. Atlantis and I are working on some ideas to encourage mutual learning, and the Whills are helping us with some new write-ups, things like that.

The GRPC lost its way a long time ago, and a merger with the GEC isnt going to change that. Eralam has a point, even if he has gone about it in his typically mouthy Manner.

I for one, shall wait and see what happens, and decide which way I lean after the fact.

That being said, you should never straight up decide that these changes are going to be site wide, and every one can eat a wookiee, because we are the grpec and thats just how this Sithspit rolls.

Good luck gentlemen and ladies.

After reading through this, I thought I might just add in a suggestion that might or might not make things easier.

I'll openly admit that when it comes to things like economics and even high-caliber RP, I'm not the sharpest knife in the kitchen. However, sometimes I think that an outside opinion from someone who knows nothing if not very little about the subject in question can prove to be beneficial to providing another point of view that would normally go unnoticed.

Now, my suggestion is that like with most new things that come out, like new software or website updates etc, we do a beta test of any new systems or implementations so that any bugs or accidental loopholes etc can be quickly identified. In this sense, it is through that that I suggest for people to volunteer for each beta test, which would be announced via mass PM to everyone so that no-one is unaware of it, by responding in the designated thread. Sure there'd only be a limited number able to do it, so maybe a way to fairly and randomly select people could be chosen.

This would then also mean that anyone who does not bother to apply for the beta testing cannot argue against the changes made.

Also, if the beta test is made so that it is open for people to see, they'll be able to have a preview of what the changes are and it won't be so much of a shock.

Now, I do agree that this may cause a bit more work for the people involved or who deal with this sort of thing, but I feel it would greatly reduce the amount of complaints and time wasted dealing with complaints or nemoidian fests like these so that they can focus on how to further improve what is already an amazing website.

I love it here and I don't want situations like these to ruin my experience of it.

On a side note, how many of you are aware that guests read these kinds of threads? If they've not even joined and they find a bunch of us, admittedly a minority but still first impressions have an effect, nemoidian to or about each other? I find it humiliating! Either keep it civil and calm, or hide these sorts of threads away from guests eyes as, although I'll admit I've no idea about accurate figures, I'll bet a respectable quantity of prospective new players this site could've had turned away at the sight of it.

Anyway... I apologize if it seems I've ranted on. I just love this site to much for these like this to dampen the experience.

That's all I've got to say on that for now... Thank you if you had the patience to read this all the way through. Feel free to ask me any questions about my suggestion. That you may have.

I dont usually talk in these threads...I hope that is taken into account; when something is so outlandish and serious that it draws a board recluse out of his hole.

The biggest issue here, is the attitude of "since it's for the betterment of the site, we can do it without consulting anyone." Just because it's for the sites betterment, doesn't mean it's the best - a lot of things can and have been done for somethings "betterment", and have been changed back because of outcry; thats how the world works sometimes. In the case of the site, a system that was perfectly fine for the majority, was relatively easy to understand, and was set enough for RP, was basically negated; and a lot of peoples hard earned credits with it. Some of us had years worth earned, that just vanished overnight.

To be completely honest; as a regular joe, I don't WANT to relearn the site rules regarding economy over and over again. I haven't read one sentence in the new GRPEC forum; and when they go officially into affect, I'm going to opt out of the players guild. Not because i disagree completely or something; but because I just want to RP. And to be completely honest; your tacking on so many things to something that was so simple beforehand, that your stifling the RP I had before.


So, honestly, do want you want - Im going to be fine any way you look at it; but for you councilors sakes, I hope you start listening to the people your supposed to be working FOR. Cause there's something seriously wrong when the vast majority starts speaking out against a councils unilateral actions.

Thats all,
- Dante