Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

    Discussion for the post made here:

    http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...community.html

    "Everytime I read your posts I do it with Morgan Freeman's voice in my head as if he is narrating your life" - Aimed

  • #2
    Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

    Heavy accusations.
    Skud


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

      It is neither heavy nor accusational. It is simply a statement of the position of the community and game management.

      "Everytime I read your posts I do it with Morgan Freeman's voice in my head as if he is narrating your life" - Aimed

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

        Seems a bit too vague for me. I'm just going to take a step back and watch this unfold.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

          no idea what's going on. what are the differences you speak of?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

            I have seen tid-bits of what you have spoken of but never in such a big, maybe i have not been perusing the forums enough?

            If this is happening at this level, i agree, it should be resolved, have other courses of action been taken by teh admins before a public announcement about it? Not trying to sound nosy or sarcastic. You can send me a PM if it seems more appropriate.
            |TG-Irr| di1lweed1212

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

              I guess I'm interested in the timing of this. It seems to me that while one admin has stepped down, for the player-base things have calmed down considerably of late, and while the drama of the announcement sates my appetite for soap opera, it seems oddly timed. That doesn't mean future conflicts won't happen, but I've been feeling the community itself is less divided as of late.

              But maybe I'm missing some sort of splinter group. Just to be clear: if it exists, I am unaware of it, so please keep that in mind as I say the following:

              if the entire premise behind TG is that we are a niche community that serves a very specific, focused ideal and those who don't agree with that focused ideal should find somewhere else to play, are you helping things by preventing ephemeral resources such as PMs and Teamspeak from being used?

              What I mean is this: I understand completely that you don't want your forums to become "If you like X but not TG's Y, join us at www.othersite.com!" That type of thing actively detracts from TG, makes our forums less worthwhile to visit, and generally creates a sense of division within our community.

              But a few friends sending PMs back and forth or talking on TS about some other community? It seems like an insecure overreaction to get involved in that. If they're a better fit somewhere else, let them find it. TG as a niche community only stands to benefit from a free market of ideas.

              I have no idea if that's even what was intended -- I am unaware of the precipitating event for this announcement -- but can only respond in the way it came across to me.
              .

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                Within the BF4 sub-community at TG, the differences in expectations seem to be primarily over how the TG BF4 server should be configured to "suit" TG. This seems to stem from a difference of opinion about what TG is or how TG should be.

                The fact is that while we can have different views and opinions, we shouldn't let those views and opinions cause division within TG. It's when those differences are irreconcilable that we run into community problems that result in unpleasant actions.

                We've seen the massive discussions over incredibly minute server configuration changes. Civil discussion is good, knowing that in the end not everyone may get exactly what they are expecting or even want. In that end, it's necessary to be able to reconcile with it and be able to play with the community, for the good of the community.

                That's probably an unnecessarily complex way of saying "You can't make everyone happy." But rather than being unhappy, we're encouraging people to try to look past their expectations and preferences with an open mind and accept that BF4 is not likely to meet everyone's preconcieved expectations. Hopefully in the process it helps avoid division within the community.

                [MENTION=34399]di1lweed1212[/MENTION]
                This has been mentioned before many times, but been lost in the depths of long threads that seem to ignore it. Courses of action have been taken to try to resolve it quietly which seem to work at times, and sometimes not. We wanted to come out and make this clear. The division has got to stop so we can focus on building and moving forward.

                It's not more complicated than that. Does that help?

                "Everytime I read your posts I do it with Morgan Freeman's voice in my head as if he is narrating your life" - Aimed

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                  Not really. My point was that while it's been a little bumpy, at least here on the player front things have been smother now over the past, say, two weeks than they were in previous few weeks.

                  It's not that I disagree with you: I absolutely do agree that civil discussion is welcome; incivility is not. It's just a bit odd that when I feel like we're actually getting to the point where the recrimination is at its ebb, we get this message rather than at its high mark. But I may see things differently than others. Certainly there may be things happening behind the scenes I am not privy to. I guess this is just me saying, "Gosh. I thought things were actually going pretty well lately."
                  .

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                    [MENTION=13736]Zoraster[/MENTION]

                    TG is not a place for people to advertise or organize for the benefit of another site or community. The resources available here are for the benefits of TG, graciously supported by people who want to support TG. If someone no longer wants to participate at TG, it is not acceptable to use these resources to recruit or prepare their exit. It never has been, with much precedent in TG's background to confirm this.

                    To talk about another community as in just talking about it? Yeah, no problem. But to 'talk' as in organize and plan and recruit with intention to leave TG... no. Not at all.

                    This opportunity was taken to make it clear that if people cannot reconcile their expectations with the direction the BF4 title is being taken (which seems to be primarily around server settings), then either they can opt not to play on the TG server or depart civilly. If they choose to depart, there are certain actions that we find unacceptable in that process and we wanted to make that completely plain.

                    I can understand things seem vague and the announcement general. It's not something anyone should read into or try to decipher any hidden meaning behind.

                    This thread was created to help clarify these things. I hope this helps.

                    "Everytime I read your posts I do it with Morgan Freeman's voice in my head as if he is narrating your life" - Aimed

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                      Is that going on?

                      I mean, I wouldn't make a lot about "TG precedent" as TG isn't some court of law, but that's pretty common for a group to have a rule against. I'm just saying that if some friends want to go off and make some site with different goals, more power to them. That's an indication that their goals were different from TG's. No need for a witch hunt, and we don't need to make them some sort of verboten topic. If they're posting recruitment-esque things on the forums or cold calling/pming people, by all means give them the ax. That's just common sense and nearly universally adopted by gaming communities.
                      .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                        So... you are reading PMs...? What "resources" are being used?
                        Skud


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                          [MENTION=17462]Skud[/MENTION]
                          I'm not addressing anything specific. I'm making a statement about the position of TG on such matters.

                          [MENTION=13736]Zoraster[/MENTION]
                          I agree with you completely. TG isn't the flavor for everyone and if someone wants to go try a different flavor... no one is stopping them or blaming them.

                          "Everytime I read your posts I do it with Morgan Freeman's voice in my head as if he is narrating your life" - Aimed

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                            I'm not sure what your post is really about, very confusing.

                            In response to other comments above, I haven't seen anyone post about a different group. I have seen, and have posted myself that I don't care for the lack of a mini-map because in my opinion it takes away from teamwork and BF4 tactics, like you said BF4 is not ArmA3, and without that compass and mini-map weapon assesories serve no purpose, ie: the silencer that keeps you from showing up on the mini-map.

                            As I stated, IMO, play with teamwork and tactics, but let's also play the way the game was designed. And have fun, theirs two words in the title of this group, tactical and gamer, let's do both.

                            A game admin pointed out to me that no one cared for my opinion, and so I let it go... Still play with TG, but don't agree with server settings, but I can live with it. I still have great games w/. TG.
                            Magnum |TG-18th|


                            We stand between chaos and order, evil and good, despair and hope - we are the Thin Blue Line, and we will never be broken.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Discussion: Addressing Division in the Community

                              TG Admins, I feel that it clear that we need more details about what happened. Making a blanket statement about policy after what appears to be a controversial situation is not helpful to anyone. I think that you've done a decent job of spelling it out in terms of policy, however, I feel it's fair for all of us supporting members to understand the details of the reason for the declaration.

                              We have all come to TG for different reasons, the teamwork, the realistic play style, and all the other tenants TG was founded on. But as it has been stated, we are a community, and I think it's only fair we provided the facts that culminated in this thread and multiple TG members being kicked out.

                              I'd like to state for the fact that I have NO idea what this situation is about and no leanings for or against this decision. My point is simply that we as a community should be given the facts instead of a pronouncement of policy and result of it's application.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X