yes, but it's unfair to associate me with illegal thingsPolyspora wrote:
he like kids[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Can someone please tell me what Igor did. I am so lost.
show more
But the way you represent it and the past....
btw i don't think we should discuss it here.
honestly, i'd probably prefer to hear your thoughts out on that one. shouldn't have to solve it alone, and i think some here may be more willing to consider this than impressions may have seemed.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.
problem is that this is only more fuel to the fire, it really wont fix much, there still will be drama, but now you've got people to blame for accepting x person or not, you can critize that persons contribution list if you have access to it, people will exploit the sytem further trying to copy each others contribution, it's just not a solution to anything
With all due respect, everything you're saying either will always be an issue regardless of the system of denizenship you use, or is specifically an issue we try to keep away.
We're aware that people might exploit the system by copying others, that's why we don't share explicit lists of what things we consider to be significant contributions to OT. People will always blame someone if they don't get a role they want. Drama will happen regardless.
Back when the only criteria was time and post count, there'd be drama over people immediately leaving after getting denizenship. Arguments are only inevitable, because we are all human.
this system doesn't really help with people leaving after denizen tho, adding extra steps to the process can not aliviate someone being burned out of OT and using the fact they got denizen as an excuse to leave
is there anything this system actually fixes?
There isn't really a way to keep people from leaving, especially due to burnout, and it's not like I think people should stay here forever. However, if someone stays here longer and is incentivized to make more meaningful, high-quality posts that are able to be enjoyed by OT at large, they will make OT a better place to be.
What this system does fix is the high amounts of people (particularly from gen 7) who would post solely to get denizen and nothing else.
Denizenship is a mark of some sort of significant contribution to OT, and what better way to measure that than to have contribution as a requirement?
Also, I suggest you reply to this in a fresh post without quoting it because there's just. Something wrong here. Lord knows what happened with the bbcode
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
if this has been the system, or close to for the last 2 years, and this change just only adds a human verification in the way, why do you actually think this system is going to work better?
people have been critizing the previous system too, this really just doesn't improve much at all
i dont think people are going to stop trying to just flood to get denizen either, most people who beg arent ellegible in the first place, people are also going to keep quitting after obtaining denizen, burnout is still a thing
The current system of deciding denizenship has not changed since Penguin. While things have been added upon it, like denizens submitting their own contributions and denizenship being able to be removed, how we decide denizenship hasn't changed. No system that will change how denizenship is fundamentally decided has been implemented.
Are we having two different conversations here? I'm starting to think we are.
I was working off this line, did I missunderstand it?, from what I understood you said that contribution was already a factor since 2 years ago
well, either way:
it could similarly be said that this system was implemented inconsistently or may not have been necessary, using my initial presidency as an example to justify that perspective.
since i'm not personally privy to the reasoning and discourse within ot!government, i can't claim it's faulty, but from this point of observation, this would be yet another fault line of class disparity, however marginal it might seem (since a user can more or less do what they want regardless, and ot!government at best might serve as an organized committee that can distribute posts & media). all users have no genuine difference of functional power other than abraker as a gmt. the soft intangible power of denizenship would be hard to meaningfully gauge beyond that though.
women bad = new denizen system bad
Anyway I already give up yesterday at this drama
the introduction of revocable denizenship was interpreted as a scary precedent toward unfair misuse of power and extrajudicial removal of people from the list of denizens.
people turned it into an unreasonably hyperbolic avalanche of complaints and severe misunderstandings about what qualifies denizenship and what qualifies it being revoked.
ghouly tried to clarify, people began to antagonize her and unfortunately failed to sit and listen for a moment.
after establishing that revoking denizenship is done in significantly fringe cases, and that nobody else is in danger of it at the moment, we seemed to have accepted it and quieted down.
(though I do agree that there should have been more of an elaboration in the original statement)
show more
Liking kids isn't a wrong thing(it is)igorsprite wrote:
yes, but it's unfair to associate me with illegal thingsPolyspora wrote:
he like kids[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Can someone please tell me what Igor did. I am so lost.
But the way you represent it and the past....
the things i did in the past were not illegal, but they were questionable indeed, and it was a long time ago and i don't do those things anymore.Manishh wrote:
Liking kids isn't a wrong thing(it is)igorsprite wrote:
yes, but it's unfair to associate me with illegal thingsPolyspora wrote:
he like kids[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Can someone please tell me what Igor did. I am so lost.
But the way you represent it and the past....
btw i don't think we should discuss it here.
I feel like there's been some type of mass hysteria regarding denizenship. To me at least, it feels like people are feeding off of other people's negative feelings rather than looking at things objectively. Quite frankly, though, I'm not sure how to solve it. Anything I say will probably fall upon deaf ears.
been hesitating to say anything here, since it's hard to determine where things really stand beyond the basics of how denizenship plays a role in user dynamics. i don't know what to make of the rest regarding what any one user did, or to what extent these events might affect denizenship. i'm not sure if it's one way or the other regarding negative feelings, and i'm not sure i can discount these concerns either. they're reasonable questions to have about something that began to hold some intangibly unnatural significance within OT.ghoulybits wrote:
I feel like there's been some type of mass hysteria regarding denizenship. To me at least, it feels like people are feeding off of other people's negative feelings rather than looking at things objectively. Quite frankly, though, I'm not sure how to solve it. Anything I say will probably fall upon deaf ears.
honestly, i'd probably prefer to hear your thoughts out on that one. shouldn't have to solve it alone, and i think some here may be more willing to consider this than impressions may have seemed.
I will be acting as the messenger for the parliament and in a few hours, I will be dming messages to people who reached 8 months of activity and is qualified for denizenship.
Upon receiving my message, if you wish to receive denizenship, you will send me back a list of contribution back which I will then present back to the parliament and decide whether you qualify.
I understand that you guys don’t want to become a denizen under this system but if you wish for real change, become denizen, get voted into parliament and maybe even president, and fix the system.
I wish you all the best,
ShinRun
Upon receiving my message, if you wish to receive denizenship, you will send me back a list of contribution back which I will then present back to the parliament and decide whether you qualify.
I understand that you guys don’t want to become a denizen under this system but if you wish for real change, become denizen, get voted into parliament and maybe even president, and fix the system.
I wish you all the best,
ShinRun
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
This is how I've personally found that denizenship should be granted since before I held a role in the government, back when Penguin implemented his policies. Trust me, the "x person does not deserve denizen" conversation happens so fucking often behind the scenes that it's kind of ridiculous.Patatitta wrote:
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.
quote="ghoulybits"]
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.[/quote]
This is how I've personally found that denizenship should be granted since before I held a role in the government, back when Penguin implemented his policies. Trust me, the "x person does not deserve denizen" conversation happens so fucking often behind the scenes that it's kind of ridiculous.Patatitta wrote:
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.[/quote]
problem is that this is only more fuel to the fire, it really wont fix much, there still will be drama, but now you've got people to blame for accepting x person or not, you can critize that persons contribution list if you have access to it, people will exploit the sytem further trying to copy each others contribution, it's just not a solution to anything
Patatitta wrote:
quote="ghoulybits"]This is how I've personally found that denizenship should be granted since before I held a role in the government, back when Penguin implemented his policies. Trust me, the "x person does not deserve denizen" conversation happens so fucking often behind the scenes that it's kind of ridiculous.Patatitta wrote:
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.
problem is that this is only more fuel to the fire, it really wont fix much, there still will be drama, but now you've got people to blame for accepting x person or not, you can critize that persons contribution list if you have access to it, people will exploit the sytem further trying to copy each others contribution, it's just not a solution to anything[/quote]
With all due respect, everything you're saying either will always be an issue regardless of the system of denizenship you use, or is specifically an issue we try to keep away.
We're aware that people might exploit the system by copying others, that's why we don't share explicit lists of what things we consider to be significant contributions to OT. People will always blame someone if they don't get a role they want. Drama will happen regardless.
Back when the only criteria was time and post count, there'd be drama over people immediately leaving after getting denizenship. Arguments are only inevitable, because we are all human.
mmh. i actually think those are some good points.
granted, i also doubt it's particularly new as a subject. the exploitation of systems for gain is not uncommon, and i think part of what influenced that was how denizenship came to be encouraged over time. some discourse similar to this came up back then too, with discerning how contribution would be scaled and imitated.
but at some point, i'm getting the sense that some of the conflict is also in the intentions being relatively informal, while may denizens will still see this and find reason to need some security in more solid distinctions
granted, i also doubt it's particularly new as a subject. the exploitation of systems for gain is not uncommon, and i think part of what influenced that was how denizenship came to be encouraged over time. some discourse similar to this came up back then too, with discerning how contribution would be scaled and imitated.
but at some point, i'm getting the sense that some of the conflict is also in the intentions being relatively informal, while may denizens will still see this and find reason to need some security in more solid distinctions
ghoulybits wrote:
With all due respect, everything you're saying either will always be an issue regardless of the system of denizenship you use, or is specifically an issue we try to keep away.Patatitta wrote:
quote="ghoulybits"]This is how I've personally found that denizenship should be granted since before I held a role in the government, back when Penguin implemented his policies. Trust me, the "x person does not deserve denizen" conversation happens so fucking often behind the scenes that it's kind of ridiculous.Patatitta wrote:
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.
problem is that this is only more fuel to the fire, it really wont fix much, there still will be drama, but now you've got people to blame for accepting x person or not, you can critize that persons contribution list if you have access to it, people will exploit the sytem further trying to copy each others contribution, it's just not a solution to anything
ghoulybits wrote:
We're aware that people might exploit the system by copying others, that's why we don't share explicit lists of what things we consider to be significant contributions to OT. People will always blame someone if they don't get a role they want. Drama will happen regardless.
Back when the only criteria was time and post count, there'd be drama over people immediately leaving after getting denizenship. Arguments are only inevitable, because we are all human.
Polyspora wrote:
thats a confusing quote wtf is happening
The quotes seem to be fucking broken lmao no amount of editing is saving my soul
tried to make it more reasonableghoulybits wrote:
The quotes seem to be fucking broken lmao no amount of editing is saving my soul
ghoulybits wrote:
With all due respect, everything you're saying either will always be an issue regardless of the system of denizenship you use, or is specifically an issue we try to keep away. [/quote]Patatitta wrote:
quote="ghoulybits"]This is how I've personally found that denizenship should be granted since before I held a role in the government, back when Penguin implemented his policies. Trust me, the "x person does not deserve denizen" conversation happens so fucking often behind the scenes that it's kind of ridiculous.Patatitta wrote:
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.
problem is that this is only more fuel to the fire, it really wont fix much, there still will be drama, but now you've got people to blame for accepting x person or not, you can critize that persons contribution list if you have access to it, people will exploit the sytem further trying to copy each others contribution, it's just not a solution to anything
We're aware that people might exploit the system by copying others, that's why we don't share explicit lists of what things we consider to be significant contributions to OT. People will always blame someone if they don't get a role they want. Drama will happen regardless.
Back when the only criteria was time and post count, there'd be drama over people immediately leaving after getting denizenship. Arguments are only inevitable, because we are all human.[/quote]
this system doesn't really help with people leaving after denizen tho, adding extra steps to the process can not aliviate someone being burned out of OT and using the fact they got denizen as an excuse to leave
is there anything this system actually fixes?
Patatitta wrote:
We're aware that people might exploit the system by copying others, that's why we don't share explicit lists of what things we consider to be significant contributions to OT. People will always blame someone if they don't get a role they want. Drama will happen regardless.ghoulybits wrote:
With all due respect, everything you're saying either will always be an issue regardless of the system of denizenship you use, or is specifically an issue we try to keep away.Patatitta wrote:
quote="ghoulybits"]This is how I've personally found that denizenship should be granted since before I held a role in the government, back when Penguin implemented his policies. Trust me, the "x person does not deserve denizen" conversation happens so fucking often behind the scenes that it's kind of ridiculous.Patatitta wrote:
I think this shows the problem with the current system, nothing is specific, is way more abusable than the previous one, it feels less transparent, this is just going to lead to more drama, I just prefer having the "oh x person does not deserve denizen" from time to time than for whatever will come with thisghoulybits wrote:
Here's the thing that makes this incredibly tricky: there sort of isn't a way to define that. Not for a lack of trying, but if a specific list of things you can do was created, 1. It'd probably be used as a template for others to mindlessly copy and 2. It'd probably be missing a whole hell of a lot of things that could also satisfactorily be considered a contribution. However, what I can do is tell you is the general guidelines I use to determine the scope of someone's contribution to OT.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Answer me this: What counts as a contribution? There's been a lack of explanation at that end.
Did this person put effort into their posts?
Did their posts involve the community in a fun way?
Did their posts further the lore of OT?
Are their posts memorable or distinct?
Please note that not all of these conditions have to be filled.
I can't speak for how other members of the OT!Gov do their business, but literally all I look for is just... some indication of effort that a person cares about OT and the people within it. It isn't an especially high bar, and there's lots of room to do things there.
Why are people acting like this is some sort of new change? Things have been like this for close to two years now. Nothing has changed in that regard.
problem is that this is only more fuel to the fire, it really wont fix much, there still will be drama, but now you've got people to blame for accepting x person or not, you can critize that persons contribution list if you have access to it, people will exploit the sytem further trying to copy each others contribution, it's just not a solution to anything
Back when the only criteria was time and post count, there'd be drama over people immediately leaving after getting denizenship. Arguments are only inevitable, because we are all human.[/quote]
this system doesn't really help with people leaving after denizen tho, adding extra steps to the process can not aliviate someone being burned out of OT and using the fact they got denizen as an excuse to leave
is there anything this system actually fixes?[/quote]
What this system does fix is the high amounts of people (particularly from gen 7) who would post solely to get denizen and nothing else.
Denizenship is a mark of some sort of significant contribution to OT, and what better way to measure that than to have contribution as a requirement?
Also, I suggest you reply to this in a fresh post without quoting it because there's just. Something wrong here. Lord knows what happened with the bbcode
Thanks for finally explaining what being a denizen is.ghoulybits wrote:
Denizenship is a mark of some sort of significant contribution to OT...
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
2 years is not much, considering OT lifetime.ghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
While that is correct, my point still stands that any adjustments that the government should have made have already been made, and by now there isn't a single person who isn't a denizen who has ever known another system besides Penguin's.Polyspora wrote:
2 years is not much, considering OT lifetime.ghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
But in the life time of when the OT!Gov was form and when denizenship was introduced, it’s basically half the timelinePolyspora wrote:
2 years is not much, considering OT lifetime.ghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
i'm not a denizen and i know another system xdghoulybits wrote:
While that is correct, my point still stands that any adjustments that the government should have made have already been made, and by now there isn't a single person who isn't a denizen who has ever known another system besides Penguin's.Polyspora wrote:
2 years is not much, considering OT lifetime.ghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
hasn't really changed because this system was not implemented yet, different systems has different weaknessesghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
if this has been the system, or close to for the last 2 years, and this change just only adds a human verification in the way, why do you actually think this system is going to work better?
people have been critizing the previous system too, this really just doesn't improve much at all
i dont think people are going to stop trying to just flood to get denizen either, most people who beg arent ellegible in the first place, people are also going to keep quitting after obtaining denizen, burnout is still a thing
?? I'm... Not really sure what you're talking about here.Patatitta wrote:
hasn't really changed because this system was not implemented yet, different systems has different weaknessesghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
if this has been the system, or close to for the last 2 years, and this change just only adds a human verification in the way, why do you actually think this system is going to work better?
people have been critizing the previous system too, this really just doesn't improve much at all
i dont think people are going to stop trying to just flood to get denizen either, most people who beg arent ellegible in the first place, people are also going to keep quitting after obtaining denizen, burnout is still a thing
The current system of deciding denizenship has not changed since Penguin. While things have been added upon it, like denizens submitting their own contributions and denizenship being able to be removed, how we decide denizenship hasn't changed. No system that will change how denizenship is fundamentally decided has been implemented.
Are we having two different conversations here? I'm starting to think we are.
"Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago."ghoulybits wrote:
?? I'm... Not really sure what you're talking about here.Patatitta wrote:
hasn't really changed because this system was not implemented yet, different systems has different weaknessesghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
if this has been the system, or close to for the last 2 years, and this change just only adds a human verification in the way, why do you actually think this system is going to work better?
people have been critizing the previous system too, this really just doesn't improve much at all
i dont think people are going to stop trying to just flood to get denizen either, most people who beg arent ellegible in the first place, people are also going to keep quitting after obtaining denizen, burnout is still a thing
The current system of deciding denizenship has not changed since Penguin. While things have been added upon it, like denizens submitting their own contributions and denizenship being able to be removed, how we decide denizenship hasn't changed. No system that will change how denizenship is fundamentally decided has been implemented.
Are we having two different conversations here? I'm starting to think we are.
I was working off this line, did I missunderstand it?, from what I understood you said that contribution was already a factor since 2 years ago
I think you might have? I'm not sure what you mean by "human verification" being added. This current system has been implemented for a while, so I'm also not really sure what you're talking about there.Patatitta wrote:
"Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago."ghoulybits wrote:
?? I'm... Not really sure what you're talking about here.Patatitta wrote:
hasn't really changed because this system was not implemented yet, different systems has different weaknessesghoulybits wrote:
So far, we haven't encountered anyone who has gotten to the qualification stage who has blatantly copied what another person has done in order to become denizen.Patatitta wrote:
if the main difference is people copying threads vs people doing low effort posts, I think copying is worse, and even if you think you dont, is it really worth it to go through all this extra work and risk just to change one for the other?
Also, I'm going to remind you again that this has been the system for nearly two years now. Any changes have already occurred long ago.
if this has been the system, or close to for the last 2 years, and this change just only adds a human verification in the way, why do you actually think this system is going to work better?
people have been critizing the previous system too, this really just doesn't improve much at all
i dont think people are going to stop trying to just flood to get denizen either, most people who beg arent ellegible in the first place, people are also going to keep quitting after obtaining denizen, burnout is still a thing
The current system of deciding denizenship has not changed since Penguin. While things have been added upon it, like denizens submitting their own contributions and denizenship being able to be removed, how we decide denizenship hasn't changed. No system that will change how denizenship is fundamentally decided has been implemented.
Are we having two different conversations here? I'm starting to think we are.
I was working off this line, did I missunderstand it?, from what I understood you said that contribution was already a factor since 2 years ago
by human verification I meant the adding the asking in dm for a list of contributions
what I understood from your posts is that contribution was already taken as a factor, and that this change only adds the requirement for that list
what I understood from your posts is that contribution was already taken as a factor, and that this change only adds the requirement for that list
It's less of a requirement and more of a convenience for the OT!Government in cases where it was hard to find contributions made by various denizens.Patatitta wrote:
by human verification I meant the adding the asking in dm for a list of contributions
what I understood from your posts is that contribution was already taken as a factor, and that this change only adds the requirement for that list
could this system be changed for the list to only be a requirement for edge cases, while keeping the previous system?, I still disagree a bit in the philosophy in genreal but i'm way more ok with thatghoulybits wrote:
It's less of a requirement and more of a convenience for the OT!Government in cases where it was hard to find contributions made by various denizens.Patatitta wrote:
by human verification I meant the adding the asking in dm for a list of contributions
what I understood from your posts is that contribution was already taken as a factor, and that this change only adds the requirement for that list
congrats! we got to 2100 posts with some dumb shit
Welp, looks like we'll have to deal with this new denizenship system.
What new system? There is no "new" system. It's the same as it was before you even got here.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Welp, looks like we'll have to deal with this new denizenship system.
Let me point it clear here:
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
I don't fucking care about it anymore.
pretty much. it's hardly more than a glorified hall of fame on the basis of recognition for subforum contribution, though i did want one thing for clarification-- does denizenship have intra-forum political relevance? if for example it was needed to apply for ot!parliament/ot!government/ot!president, then it would have much more significance than it's worthYyottaCat wrote:
Let me point it clear here:
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
well, either way:
or at least i think people generally recognize that now.Polyspora wrote:
nobody said otherwise
nobody said otherwiseYyottaCat wrote:
Let me point it clear here:
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
u shouldn't cared about it in the first place, not owning denizenship doesn’t mean u lose any privileges (maybe except the presidential election) in this community[ Sebastian ] wrote:
I don't fucking care about it anymore.
Denizenship is required for OT!Government roles AFAIK. I know for sure that you have to be denizen for 3 months in order to run for presidentAchromalia wrote:
pretty much. it's hardly more than a glorified hall of fame on the basis of recognition for subforum contribution, though i did want one thing for clarification-- does denizenship have intra-forum political relevance? if for example it was needed to apply for ot!parliament/ot!government/ot!president, then it would have much more significance than it's worthYyottaCat wrote:
Let me point it clear here:
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
Now that I think about. I should've never been this angry over the change. It's so small, and I won't even be able to qualify for another 6 months.
hmmn. then it might become a problem if people express discontent or outrage as a result, because that then could qualify as a privilege and distinct class of power (edit: not functional power like the gmt, though)ghoulybits wrote:
Denizenship is required for OT!Government roles AFAIK. I know for sure that you have to be denizen for 3 months in order to run for presidentAchromalia wrote:
pretty much. it's hardly more than a glorified hall of fame on the basis of recognition for subforum contribution, though i did want one thing for clarification-- does denizenship have intra-forum political relevance? if for example it was needed to apply for ot!parliament/ot!government/ot!president, then it would have much more significance than it's worthYyottaCat wrote:
Let me point it clear here:
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
it could similarly be said that this system was implemented inconsistently or may not have been necessary, using my initial presidency as an example to justify that perspective.
since i'm not personally privy to the reasoning and discourse within ot!government, i can't claim it's faulty, but from this point of observation, this would be yet another fault line of class disparity, however marginal it might seem (since a user can more or less do what they want regardless, and ot!government at best might serve as an organized committee that can distribute posts & media). all users have no genuine difference of functional power other than abraker as a gmt. the soft intangible power of denizenship would be hard to meaningfully gauge beyond that though.
Again, I ask you, what change are you talking about?[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Now that I think about. I should've never been this angry over the change. It's so small, and I won't even be able to qualify for another 6 months.
you need to be a denizen to run for president.ghoulybits wrote:
Denizenship is required for OT!Government roles AFAIK. I know for sure that you have to be denizen for 3 months in order to run for presidentAchromalia wrote:
pretty much. it's hardly more than a glorified hall of fame on the basis of recognition for subforum contribution, though i did want one thing for clarification-- does denizenship have intra-forum political relevance? if for example it was needed to apply for ot!parliament/ot!government/ot!president, then it would have much more significance than it's worthYyottaCat wrote:
Let me point it clear here:
Denizenship doesn’t get you money.
Denizenship doesn’t mean anything in real life.
Denizenship can’t get you any more privileges.
Denizenship can’t make you become somehow above other people.
Denizenship doesn’t change anything about you.
Denizenship means literally nothing outside of a random subforum in a forum half-dead in a game most people don’t care about.
In short, denizenship is quite literally worthless.
You said that you'd make a change to the denizen process.ghoulybits wrote:
Again, I ask you, what change are you talking about?[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Now that I think about. I should've never been this angry over the change. It's so small, and I won't even be able to qualify for another 6 months.
? When the hell did I say that[ Sebastian ] wrote:
You said that you'd make a change to the denizen process.ghoulybits wrote:
Again, I ask you, what change are you talking about?[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Now that I think about. I should've never been this angry over the change. It's so small, and I won't even be able to qualify for another 6 months.
Forget it. I'm just an idiot like always.ghoulybits wrote:
? When the hell did I say that[ Sebastian ] wrote:
You said that you'd make a change to the denizen process.ghoulybits wrote:
Again, I ask you, what change are you talking about?[ Sebastian ] wrote:
Now that I think about. I should've never been this angry over the change. It's so small, and I won't even be able to qualify for another 6 months.
BUT I CAN. Sit down everyone, let me entail a great solution...ShinRun wrote:
Manish I doubt you can come up with something better
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
calm down woman, its just a memeghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
I'm perfectly calm, I just find it incredibly hilariousPolyspora wrote:
calm down woman, its just a memeghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
I change my mind, this is going into a cursed direction now.ShinRun wrote:
ghouly probably packin 10 inches down there ngl
that would be really coolShinRun wrote:
ghouly probably packin 10 inches down there ngl
I think he's talking about the recent changes btw, especially the revoke denizen thing and the interview that he whined about on discordghoulybits wrote:
I'm perfectly calm, I just find it incredibly hilariousPolyspora wrote:
calm down woman, its just a memeghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
uh i didnt think it was gonna go this far sorry lol
Manish has always been a little allergic to reading (as well as like, a solid 70% of the people on here)Polyspora wrote:
I think he's talking about the recent changes btw, especially the revoke denizen thing and the interview that he whined about on discordghoulybits wrote:
I'm perfectly calm, I just find it incredibly hilariousPolyspora wrote:
calm down woman, its just a memeghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
you shouldnt expect people to read something in 2022 tbh, thats ingenuousghoulybits wrote:
Manish has always been a little allergic to reading (as well as like, a solid 70% of the people on here)Polyspora wrote:
I think he's talking about the recent changes btw, especially the revoke denizen thing and the interview that he whined about on discordghoulybits wrote:
I'm perfectly calm, I just find it incredibly hilariousPolyspora wrote:
calm down woman, its just a memeghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
She needs to chill out.Polyspora wrote:
you shouldnt expect people to read something in 2022 tbh, thats ingenuousghoulybits wrote:
Manish has always been a little allergic to reading (as well as like, a solid 70% of the people on here)Polyspora wrote:
I think he's talking about the recent changes btw, especially the revoke denizen thing and the interview that he whined about on discordghoulybits wrote:
I'm perfectly calm, I just find it incredibly hilariousPolyspora wrote:
calm down woman, its just a memeghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
Relax you got me wrongghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
women bad = new denizen system bad
lmaoManishh wrote:
Relax you got me wrongghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
women bad = new denizen system bad
Where did she get that from? lolPolyspora wrote:
lmaoManishh wrote:
Relax you got me wrongghoulybits wrote:
"new denizen system bad = women bad" do I have to remind you that I am still using Penguin's system
women bad = new denizen system bad
when are we not going to be unreasonably antagonistic
because i sense myself being tempted to antagonize y'all myself, and this is hardly coalition-opposition roleplay anymore
my perspective is that ghouly has been reasonable the entire time, considering how many questions have been given answers, and the significant efforts toward actually trying to understand where we're coming from.
if there's any reason for her not seeming calm at some point, the past several hours of trying to respond and clarify, despite what i'm starting to believe to be people failing to operate in good faith, are probably it.
that in no way disqualifies or discounts the questions made in theory. in practice, though, this is... making it hard to believe this isn't just unironic and unfunny contrarianism from a point of personal vindictive bias.
idk whether to go off further, and give specifics to make into a real problem (;; = ~=)
because i sense myself being tempted to antagonize y'all myself, and this is hardly coalition-opposition roleplay anymore
my perspective is that ghouly has been reasonable the entire time, considering how many questions have been given answers, and the significant efforts toward actually trying to understand where we're coming from.
if there's any reason for her not seeming calm at some point, the past several hours of trying to respond and clarify, despite what i'm starting to believe to be people failing to operate in good faith, are probably it.
that in no way disqualifies or discounts the questions made in theory. in practice, though, this is... making it hard to believe this isn't just unironic and unfunny contrarianism from a point of personal vindictive bias.
idk whether to go off further, and give specifics to make into a real problem (;; = ~=)
What Acromalia said.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
These things take time, I'm genuinely amazed at how professionaly ghoulybits is handling this mess.
"She needs to chill out", I'm sure anyone else would be going batshit insane in her situation. She's plenty chill.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
These things take time, I'm genuinely amazed at how professionaly ghoulybits is handling this mess.
"She needs to chill out", I'm sure anyone else would be going batshit insane in her situation. She's plenty chill.
To be fair, it isn't like any other member of the OT!Government is answering questions right now. Considering I'm the figurehead and all, I can't say I didn't expect it.-Remi wrote:
What Acromalia said.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
These things take time, I'm genuinely amazed at how professionaly ghoulybits is handling this mess.
+1-Remi wrote:
What Acromalia said.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
These things take time, I'm genuinely amazed at how professionaly ghoulybits is handling this mess.
I owe ghoulybits a massive apology. I was hearing about how the "new" denizenship system was awful, and I joined the bandwagon. I attacked people like her and Shinrun over basically nothing. I am really sorry.
A lesson for all:
Improve your reading stamina.
Improve your reading stamina.
its funny seeing her explaining the same thing over and over-Remi wrote:
What Acromalia said.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
Every time someone asks me the same question that I've answered just a couple posts up in the same thread, the urge to include a comment about sleeping with their mother in my response grows tenfold.Polyspora wrote:
its funny seeing her explaining the same thing over and over-Remi wrote:
What Acromalia said.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
cute love you too ghoulybits <3ghoulybits wrote:
Every time someone asks me the same question that I've answered just a couple posts up in the same thread, the urge to include a comment about sleeping with their mother in my response grows tenfold.Polyspora wrote:
its funny seeing her explaining the same thing over and over-Remi wrote:
What Acromalia said.
Why are we being so negative and pressuring a single person?
Topic Starter
Let me make something clear: The OT! Government controls denizenship. I used to but not anymore.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
OT will turn into a hellhole if that starts happening. And considering abraker's stupid ideas, I would 100% expect him to do that.Patatitta wrote:
...problems start to surge if other people start revoking or get revoked due to not meeting the current criteria or being unhappy with the system, and we're basically 1 step away from that scenario
Dude, you are in the OT! Government. Are you sleeping under a rock?Corne2Plum3 wrote:
They can revoke denizenship now?
bro trying to escapeabraker wrote:
Let me make something clear: The OT! Government controls denizenship. I used to but not anymore.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
OT will turn into a hellhole if that starts happening. And considering abraker's stupid ideas, I would 100% expect him to do that.Patatitta wrote:
...problems start to surge if other people start revoking or get revoked due to not meeting the current criteria or being unhappy with the system, and we're basically 1 step away from that scenario
Anyway I already give up yesterday at this drama
Based unaware innocent Corne <3abraker wrote:
Dude, you are in the OT! Government. Are you sleeping under a rock?Corne2Plum3 wrote:
They can revoke denizenship now?
abraker wrote:
Let me make something clear: The OT! Government controls denizenship. I used to but not anymore.[ Sebastian ] wrote:
OT will turn into a hellhole if that starts happening. And considering abraker's stupid ideas, I would 100% expect him to do that.Patatitta wrote:
...problems start to surge if other people start revoking or get revoked due to not meeting the current criteria or being unhappy with the system, and we're basically 1 step away from that scenario
tl;dr please?
The TL;DR is please be active in the government channels again please please pleaseCorne2Plum3 wrote:
tl;dr please?
I don't know why I was following those random people over something so small. I make these mistakes a lot. I want to be normal and not have so many things wrong with me.
igorsprite had denizenship status revoked.Corne2Plum3 wrote:
tl;dr please?
the introduction of revocable denizenship was interpreted as a scary precedent toward unfair misuse of power and extrajudicial removal of people from the list of denizens.
people turned it into an unreasonably hyperbolic avalanche of complaints and severe misunderstandings about what qualifies denizenship and what qualifies it being revoked.
ghouly tried to clarify, people began to antagonize her and unfortunately failed to sit and listen for a moment.
after establishing that revoking denizenship is done in significantly fringe cases, and that nobody else is in danger of it at the moment, we seemed to have accepted it and quieted down.
i think his denizenship is revoked due to evidence (and a admittance according to abarker) that he is a pedoAchromalia wrote:
igorsprite had denizenship status revoked.Corne2Plum3 wrote:
tl;dr please?
the introduction of revocable denizenship was interpreted as a scary precedent toward unfair misuse of power and extrajudicial removal of people from the list of denizens.
people turned it into an unreasonably hyperbolic avalanche of complaints and severe misunderstandings about what qualifies denizenship and what qualifies it being revoked.
ghouly tried to clarify, people began to antagonize her and unfortunately failed to sit and listen for a moment.
after establishing that revoking denizenship is done in significantly fringe cases, and that nobody else is in danger of it at the moment, we seemed to have accepted it and quieted down.
It hurt reading all of that.
i think people seem to forget its literally just an imaginary title on a forum thread lol
I think this situation would be avoided if you guys only typed "we revoked igor denizenship because he didnt do shit and is a pedo this wont happen again my bad."
lmaoPolyspora wrote:
I think this situation would be avoided if you guys only typed "we revoked igor denizenship because he didnt do shit and is a pedo this wont happen again my bad."
Yeah, totally. People definitely read those posts too!Polyspora wrote:
I think this situation would be avoided if you guys only typed "we revoked igor denizenship because he didnt do shit and is a pedo this wont happen again my bad."
(though I do agree that there should have been more of an elaboration in the original statement)
It was between wall of texts that why some people missed it.ghoulybits wrote:
Yeah, totally. People definitely read those posts too!Polyspora wrote:
I think this situation would be avoided if you guys only typed "we revoked igor denizenship because he didnt do shit and is a pedo this wont happen again my bad."
(though I do agree that there should have been more of an elaboration in the original statement)
imma be honest there has been way too many denizen posts here i just stopped caring to read em lolghoulybits wrote:
Yeah, totally. People definitely read those posts too!Polyspora wrote:
I think this situation would be avoided if you guys only typed "we revoked igor denizenship because he didnt do shit and is a pedo this wont happen again my bad."
(though I do agree that there should have been more of an elaboration in the original statement)