Uchiha Obito

All of this conversing, and I must say this, you used juxtaposition improperly. It makes me cringe to see improper usage of a term, but juxtapositioning is a pairing of two different things for comedic effect, much like an oxymoron.

Wyzcrak

I was taught that to juxtapose was to place two things side by side so that you could compare or contract them. No definition I ever learned required the use or intent of comedy. Sure, you can be funny in comparing or contrasting something, but "being funny" (or even trying) isn't required if you're going to juxtapose something.

Here's dictionary.com's take on the word, which seems to support what I was taught.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=juxtapose

What source can you reference for me if I want to learn more about the definition you were taught?

__________________
Steam Community? Add me. | Join #tacticalgamer | Search Results Legend | New Posts Forum Filter | Postbox Toggle | Live Thread Review | One Line Results | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

Uchiha Obito

I h8 joo.


lol, call it the failings of the texas school system, but this for some reason has always been the definition I've always had reinforced. Of course, if the intarweb says it's true, I'm most likely wrong lol. I'm not going to delete my post though, then these two posts don't make sense, and anyone who's bored enough to read through them later gets all confused and it's very annoying. ^^

SloppyJoe

Wow, a lot of emotion there Mateo. I'm not trying to strike any nerves. What started as a discussion about looking into the perspective of the player and trying to take that perspective into account in delivering information to them or not has seemingly opened up a can of worms.

I certainly never suggested the admins are or could be perfect in regards to PCS. PCS has objective and subjective parts. The objective part would be that the idea of PCS is a focus on objective based team oriented play, the subjective parts tend to deal with how to achieve that. As long as there is a subjective part, there can never really be perfection, only trying or striving for it.

I agree with you about trying to learn. It's very rare someone new just gets it right off the bat. That being agreed upon, I guess the question is, how can they learn? Certainly the MOTD helps (to those that bother to read it), scrolling or flashing rules helps (to those that pay attention to them), the SOPs in the forums are essential, and direction to the resources are essential as well. I would guess that these things are in place to avoid sucking up an inordinate amount of admin time. Given that the more common situation is something like this:

Player 1337dood refreshes server list, ah here's one that is playing my favorite map, PCS_junglerescue and it's got 12 players! Loading... Hits OK on MOTD page without reading it out of reflex. Alright, got in right at the spawn time. Hey, what is up with this looooong spawn time. Ah whatever, 20 seconds and I'll be off killing suckers. Here we go! Kill kill kill, rush rush rush, slayed! Huh? What did I do? I was owning the other team? Whoa... I gotta read SOPs (what is an SOP anyway)? I just got off work and I want to play not read!

I would guess that the best thing to do is direct the player to the resources, and do the warn-slay-kick-ban procedure if they are not willing to do it. If they aren't in the mood to read and they just want to play, ok, maybe another time their curiousity and their situation will be more conducive to checking it out, reading the forums, before leaping into the server. It shouldn't take an inordinate amount of time to deal which each of these singularly, but maybe if there are a lot of them at once it might get overwhelming.

As for "they argue every little point", I dunno, I guess some people learn by recipe, that is something like, here is what you do, OK, I do that, done. I'd hope that most people want to have an understanding of what they are learning as well, and unfortunately, that comes with questioning. I generally think that questioning is good, but sometimes it can be in the wrong place and too much at once. Sometimes the spirit of questioning manifests itself in argumentation. This can spark a fire. Instead of asking, "I'm curious, why is such and such done in such and such a way?" it can come out like, "Huh? That is so ****ing backwards! WTF! Why in the aych ee el el do you do it that way?" The latter approach is essentially striving for the same information as the former, but with the unfortunate side baggage of an antagonistic confrontation. Either way, and how much tolerance an admin might have for the latter, the player should be directed to the forums, unless the conditions are ok for the admin to teach the player while in-game.

Also, when a player has to "un-learn", regardless if it's for the better or not, to that person it means challenging their own already set ideas. In the least this sets up a kind of sumbliminal confrontation without the person realizing it, and their questions will probably come out more like an argument.

The skating by with little effort thing is common because many people have the "I just want to play" attitude.

I agree with you about the daycare thing. I agree with you about educating players willing to learn. I agree with you about cutting off players that show no indication of a willingness to learn. One thing I have been trying to explore is an understanding of some players behavior that may show hesitation or even aspects of a confrontational attitude and why.

I agree with you for the most part about admin abuse being a myth. I can't truly say I have seen actions that I would call abusive. By that I mean really hating on a player, using everything you can against them, and/or doing so consistently. I have seen admins have "pissy" days where one might cuss out a player or something, but I'd put that in the being human catagory rather than admin abuse. Being a myth also implies that it could also never happen. It could.

Um, I'm not sure about what you are saying about enforcing every infraction as being abusive. I think maybe we have different ideas on what admin abuse is. For me, it's picking on a player or a couple players in particular (the opposite of favoritism) by enforcing rules on them and not others because for some reason the admin doesn't like them, or, enforcing rules that do not exist or over-enforcing existing rule (like, forget the warning, forget the slay, just go for the ban), for the joy of exerting power.

Enforcing infractions should be done! I by no means would call that abuse. As long as it's done with equality in mind. If you have policies about enforcing infractions by going through the logs, why not do it? As long as it's not picking on a player or a certain set of players over another, that sounds dandy.

Oh Mateo, you have no idea that I have no idea of the amount of crap you put up with .

Equality is very important. Using power for discipline puts the spotlight on you. You are center stage, baby. All eyez on U. If you don't show consistency, punish on some days and not others, some people and not others, some rules and not others, then as an admin you are going to be seen as, at best, an inconsistent a**hole, or at worst, "abusive".

I agree that TG members should have heightened scrutiny to some extent. I hope by this you don't mean like skipping warnings and going for like a kick or ban right off the bat. I'd imagine the punishments coming faster and without in-game debate, but not skipping procedure because of the TG tag.

Hey, that's fine. But if I were to classify a couple general types of admin off the fly, I'd call the characteristics of one the "enforcer" and another a "facilitator".

An enforcer would put efforts into securing the status quo. The way things are, are good, and we should put our efforts into fencing that up and maintaining the core. Don't let outsiders and their problems or influences corrupt the core keep them on their side of the fence. Don't let the core deviate.

A facilitator would put efforts into growth and understanding. The way things are, are fine, but can we expand, learn more, and question the status quo? The fence is needed, but can be moved. The core is needed, but can be dynamic.

Enforcers are definately needed at bare minimum in order to preserve the good things that are already there. Facilitators are needed for growth, if growth is something that is desired. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

Admins can have attributes of all of one or all of the other or any mix in between. And sometimes that can change depending on the situation or what is needed.

You seem to be an iron-clad enforcer Mateo . And that is fine. You don't have to be anyone's mommy.

Iron-clad. Sure, if the status quo is good. If members are generally happy, the turn-over rate is low, there are enough people to play with on the servers, and they typically play in accordance to the rules, peachy. Don't need to deal with new people and their immaturity, don't need to teach, don't need to waste time making allowances or trying to convert players over. Just need to enforce. And again, that's fine for this situation. Very efficient.

If the situation calls for growth, a more facilitating shift will be in demand.

----------------------

As an end note:

Enforcing the rules is very important. Enforcing them equally and consistently is even more important. If rules are not enforced equally or consistently, players will start to, at best, be confused (which can in turn create more work for admins in the clearing up of that confusion), or at worst, players will start to feel singled out or picked on, even if it's not really intended. If enough of this happens, in socio-economic terms, the player may become unhappy, and enough unhappiness over time may cause the player to seek happiness elsewhere. If players start leaving, then the situation that was once good for enforcement mode will now call for growth, which in turn will call for a more facilitating attitude to bring in new blood.

But having a balance of enforcement and facilitating attitudes to some degree or another to begin with may not only keep problems from getting out of hand, but also keep growth steady and bring about improvements every now and then through expanding on the findings of exploration using discussion and/or experimentation.

Also, I'm not suggesting that a facilitating attitude includes playing the mommy or counselor, but certainly it involves being open to new perspectives, questioning of the norms through non-confrontational dialog, and trying to understand where others might be coming from in order to see how the bigger picture is operating.

Wyzcrak

Could you create an executive summary version of the points you're making in that last post? In 200 words or less? I got lost in your excess, and I want to understand your points.

__________________
Steam Community? Add me. | Join #tacticalgamer | Search Results Legend | New Posts Forum Filter | Postbox Toggle | Live Thread Review | One Line Results | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

SloppyJoe

Sorry, you're just going to have to take your time with them. When trying to dig deeper into an idea or issue, especially in a dynamic ongoing discussion, sometimes there can't be an executive summary.

But I promise I'll start back up with the usual "D00d! I pwned u last night on cs_havana! lol lol wtf i r 1337!" posts as soon as I can.

Mateo

Actually, I'm the facilitator, although I wear the enforcer hat well. Check the forums and see who has led PCS training the past 6 months. Go ahead, I'll wait.....

I don't really care what makes members happy. If they are unhappy, they can go to one of the other 11000 servers.

What people fail to realize is that PCS is ever evolving, but not debatable here. It's not something that you can pick or chose.

At its core, PCS is 2 simple rules:

1. Play as a team
2. Always uphold the objective.

The interpretation of those 2 simple rules vary over time, map, and situation, but it's not up for a vote. You play by those simple rules and our understanding of them, or you don't play here.

Apophis has always said that what Tactical Gamer is, and what we are trying to achieve, will not be for everyone. PCS is a perfect example of that. Not everyone gets it, nor will they.

We try to facilitate players that want to learn, but we aren't going to change PCS to suit what some new player wants. We aren't going to alter PCS to make it more palatable to a wider player base. We don't care about turnover.

As anyone that has been in a real PCS or Captain's Game can attest, they would have it no other way. PCS is the best that CounterStrike Source can hope to achieve.

SloppyJoe

OK, PCS is pretty cut and dry at it's core. I totally support that. Personally, I was drawn in by it and now that I've played here long enough I think I have a good grasp of what it boils down to in-game.

But it seems like I'm getting two messages from you. One is the clear black and white message...

The black and white being: PCS is X, we understand PCS, we play PCS, for people that don't, they get the highway.

That's the clear, easy, cut and dry part. If this were the case there wouldn't be any gray area in enforcement. It would be, if you get it then you play, if you don't get it you're banned. Simple rule, simple enforcement.

No one is suggesting that PCS be altered, but it's the "facilitating players that want to learn part" that is the more interesting. Just by saying this, it's clear that not everyone knows, lives, and breathes PCS. Therefore, they may show some interest in it and not even know any of the rules, or they might understand part of it and still need to learn more. Therefor, adjustments need to be made to mold players that have potential. Sure, cut out the players that don't have any willingness or potential, that's fine. But given that the remaining set of players are somewhere in the in-between, things are no longer so black and white.

Now we're talking about processes that involves teaching players PCS and punishing activities that deviate from that aren't we?

Can't just have a simple, if they get it they can play if they don't they are banned, rule.

Now you've got to deal with warnings, procedures and policies, consistency, and everything else that these fledglings need in order to graduate into the PCS class. All of these potentials have different attitudes, are at a different state in their understanding of PCS, and come from different backgrounds. This is still a very dynamic pool to work with. So yes, in order to -effectively- train this dynamic pool of recruits, they still need to be understood and related to in terms of differing backgrounds, attitudes, and current level of PCS understanding. The more you can understand them, the more you can relate to them, the more you can relate to them, the more effective and the quicker you can train them through common connections.

And yes, infractions do need to be enforced in order to ween them away from non-PCS behavior and in order to keep the others from being contaminated by their wrong-doings. And yes punishments need to be handled consistently and with care so that problems from not doing so don't don't rear their ugly head.

And this pool of people to deal with also includes members that generally play PCS and have already graduated, but regress for some reason or another (bad night, too much beer, etc). In order to deal with them well, relatedness helps. And punishment is probably called for as well (otherwise how would it look to the recruits if the recruits were getting punished but members weren't?).

So, when it comes to those that aren't even considered to be "in", sure things are simple, get rid of them. But anyone with a "foot in the door" is going to be in need of certain individual understandings and relations from the "teacher" in order to effectively "join the team". And the whole lot of them ought to be looked at from the bigger picture perspective as well (for example, how will punishing one for one thing and not another for the same thing tide over?).

Also, I'm not emphasizing "happiness" to mean bending over backwards or altering the rules to make players happy. But including care in the procedures that are done in this whole process of creating and maintaining PCS players as to not alienate or cause unhappiness in the players because the procedures are carried out cold-heartedly, unfairly, or inexplicably.

I'm also suprised that you don't care about turnover. If you had 2 other players left to play CS:S with, would you extend your efforts further to bring in more players and teach them PCS?

Wyzcrak

Call it extending, changing, adapting, redesigning, or whatever. Nothing about what Mateo's talking about within the context of not caring about turnover is going to change, even if the servers empty. PCS isn't for everyone, even if it proves to be for no one.

__________________
Steam Community? Add me. | Join #tacticalgamer | Search Results Legend | New Posts Forum Filter | Postbox Toggle | Live Thread Review | One Line Results | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

Root

If we only had 2 other PCS players, we wouldn't change PCS to increase the numbers. We'd still continue to look for people who would be suited to playing PCS in it's current form.

Root

__________________

GhostintheShell

What's really sad is that when he said "If you had 2 other players left to play CS:S with.."

I immediately thought "So that leaves me and who else?"

__________________
Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter.
Ernest Hemingway, "On the Blue Water," Esquire, April 1936

Phantom

I though more along the lines of "So Apo, Wyz........... wait where does that leave the rest of us, dangit"

__________________

Root

I changed it to PCS because that's what we do. I don't ever see us only having 3 PCS players. Apophis runs the place, Cing is part of the furniture, I have no life (and therefore nowhere else to hang out). There are plenty of hardcore PCS players.

Root

__________________

lucky15234

Wow, when threads get this long y even read them?

__________________

Wyzcrak

I'll likely start deleting posts in which you display such blatant disregard for proper spelling. At least attempt to spell words correctly. To avoid even that is disrespectful at worst and unacceptable (to me, your humble moderator) at least.

__________________
Steam Community? Add me. | Join #tacticalgamer | Search Results Legend | New Posts Forum Filter | Postbox Toggle | Live Thread Review | One Line Results | Free Remote, Encrypted Backup

Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.