Log in

View Full Version : Groups: A Suggestion.



Halajiin Rabeak
Oct 16th, 2016, 10:25:35 PM
Hey, everybody, I know I don't suggest changes, or things dealing with board rules very often out here in the open. Typically if I have an idea, I go straight to the person who can tell me if it's a good idea or not, and I leave it at that. But as this is a suggestion which affects anyone who plays a character on this board, it's best that I post this so that everyone can see it and voice their own opinions or concerns about it. An open discussion is healthy for everyone, in most cases.

The subject I've been thinking on lately is that of Groups. We've had groups for a while on this board, and for the most part we haven't needed them much, because our active player base was fairly small and for the most part we all knew each other and each other's direct contact information. Communicating ideas or plans was done inter-personally instead of via group messages. But as newer members have joined, this old method does not help or serve them well, and so groups have regained their original importance: structure and clarity for those involved in that group.

We sometimes take for granted the elaborate and rich tapestry of alternative history and socio-political structure we have created here, which is different to any other Star Wars board. We have the galaxy split in half, with a cold war raging between Empire and Alliance. We have Luke and Co. losing to the Empire in the destruction of the second Death Star, thus wiping out all canon characters. We have a very powerful non-canon race whose influence and might can be felt in most galactic societies, in the Cizerack, whose own culture is rich and nuanced enough to fill its own book. We have the Nehantites, a non-canon race of my own creation which has had its own effect on things in strange and interesting ways. I know of no other Star Wars board like ours, and because we are so very different it can be difficult for someone new to grasp just how different we are, and see how they can work within our structure and enhance it with their own play.

This is where Groups come in. Groups give structure, and can provide points of contact for questions or clarifications, and can also give breadth and scope to the factions being played out. Groups should exist to help those who wish to play in a certain faction or subset know who else is playing in it, and gain an understanding of the hierarchy within that group. Hierarchy is important in that we have players here who have spent a great deal of time on their character, and the structure they have already built. This isn't to say that there's not room for new positions of power, but for the most part those positions are limited, and naturally so. Groups should exist for the sake of planning, for understanding, and for cohesiveness.

That's where my suggestion comes in. We have a lot of things in place, and we need to make sure that new players understand how to contact those they might need to for questions, and can receive guidance OOC in their group instead of someone having to say, "Errr, you can't actually do that," after they've posted something. For this reason, it does not make sense for a new player to be able to create a group, as they will not be in a position of understanding to know how that group might already have its role filled, or how it might contradict another existing group. I believe that all groups should require a form of mission statement outlining the purpose and structure of the group, which is clearly visible to anyone who might wish to view the group in order for everyone to have an understanding of what the group covers. To this end, I believe that only moderators should be able to create any groups, period, and the creation should be done after a mission statement is prepared and sent to a group of moderators to review, and either approve, amend, or deny based on need or merit.

I do not suggest this to limit the creativity of anyone, but instead to enhance character and interaction by adding the element of understanding of our wholly unique setting. Too often we take for granted the depth of our comprehension of the intricacies going on here, and that makes it far too difficult for new players to become engaged when there's a form of separation there, and can lead to duplications of groups if they don't know what already exists. Those seeking a position of power within a group should ideally have either demonstrated a clear path to that power in their writing here thus far, or establish a character plotter which can be reviewed to determine whether or not that position is warranted for that character. There do need to be guidelines and structure we follow, for the sake of keeping things cohesive for everyone, so we're not contradicting each other with various departments or factions which would realistically not happen.

To this end, I also feel that the entire list of groups ought to be re-examined to see if there are any which overlap, or contradict, and those issues addressed before further confusion can happen.

As always, I'm open to your thoughts on this, and would be glad to discuss or clarify any of my points if desired.

Lilaena De'Ville
Oct 17th, 2016, 08:10:02 PM
We have held to the rule of...five distinct RPers being needed before a group could be created in the past. Things didn't do much change as we just didn't have new groups being created, but there's no reason not to hold to that now. Your other suggestions sound good to me as well.

edit: the "Groups" are mostly unofficial - only some would be considered actual groups? This is probably confusing but we have the Alliance, and also a group for Rogue Squadron, etc, just as an easy way of finding who is in what subset and for them to talk OOC since we blew up the OOC forums.

Halajiin Rabeak
Oct 17th, 2016, 08:46:37 PM
I was thinking it might be nice to make them more official, so they could be a feature instead of just an extra. They'd make excellent planning grounds as well, and could be a real asset in welcoming new players.

Loklorien s'Ilancy
Oct 18th, 2016, 11:56:24 PM
I'm fine with making groups more official in some way or another. I do like that we have different subsets of groups, like the Alliance and Rogue Squadron that Holly mentioned, or even the Empire, with Intel and the Knights also having their own groups.

I do feel that holding to the rule of five unique members might be something that we can let slide, or at least examine on a case by case basis. I know that if Mitch wanted to make a group for Nehantites, he'd be unable to since there's only four folks I know of (if I'm wrong, apologies) that have Nehantite characters. But, the sheer amount of worldbuilding and history of Nehantish that he's crafted would - in my estimation - be more than enough reason to say 'if you want, feel free to make a group'.

Lilaena De'Ville
Oct 19th, 2016, 10:30:53 AM
That's why the groups at the top link have been unofficial - and sort of fun (we have one for droids, and one for redheads, for example). A Faction would be the official board approved group, and those have forums in the Homeworlds section.

In your example the Nehantites don't really need their own faction, unless Mitch wanted to start playing the king and making it a political power, so an unofficial group just so we can say, "these are all the Nehantites characters if you want to chat to each other" would be all that's needed, if they wanted it. The Hutts are an unofficial/official Faction. They certainly exist as power players, but not much has been done with them.

Stopping someone from just appearing and saying "I'm founding the New Dark Side Jedi order on Tatooine" and creating a group for it and writing that they've been there lurking in the background for ages is I THINK what you're talking about, Mitch. Yes, we should absolutely not allow newbies to create galaxy changing groups. We have enough going on that another group probably isn't needed, but we could take it on a case by case basis (and use the rule of 5 to gauge interest).

Using the groups above for "official factions" mostly came about because the OOC forums were bombed and we needed a place to talk OOC about faction stuff.

Halajiin Rabeak
Oct 19th, 2016, 11:09:31 AM
I was literally suggesting we overhaul the groups into something like the OOC planning boards and information centers for each group. I think it could be of great benefit to all, and would keep things nice and organized. It'd also allow people to get to know who else is in their faction/group and bounce ideas off of each other in an enclosed setting.

Lilaena De'Ville
Oct 19th, 2016, 02:58:53 PM
Well, that's what they're being used as...now. So are you saying we should delete all unofficial groups in the "Groups" section, then?

Alexia Sturkov
Oct 19th, 2016, 07:19:17 PM
I actually started a reply on my phone where I mentioned making Official Groups and pointing out that there are a lot of gimmick groups like the Droids and Redheads specifically. So, yeah, cool that we are thinking on a similar wavelength.

Unfortunately the group feature is very lacking. Unless I've overlooked them, you cannot sticky threads, so anything official like "how to join threads", faction information, and rosters will get lost in the list of topics. There's a lack of organization abilities. It is better suited just for discussions and little else. The aforementioned kind of info could be moved into the actual faction forum; like I have with TSO. Unless there are features that can be turned on on the admin side of things to make it capable of stickying threads and such, I simply don't think the Groups as they stand are capable of being full functioning, multi-faceted Faction platforms.

I am for having the Admins being involved in all Groups, but I don't think they should be the ones to create every group. As it stands, I am the creator of the Galactic Empire group, and I cannot find a way of passing control of the group to someone more fitting (Like Vince). That means that outside of the Admins, whom I assume can alter anything, only I can access the group "mod" controls. If the Admins create all the groups than they will inadvertently be responsible for policing and editing all groups. Probably not the biggest deal, but definitely something that could get tedious when a group needs several small changes done over an expanse of time.

So yeah, I guess I agree with maybe wrangling the groups down, but in the end I don't think there is much progress to be made other than perhaps removing a few dead groups, like The Fallen (has been shifted into Tenloss) and Uhl Turhaya. I think they are serving a valuable function in that you can find other characters within the categories you are looking for, whether it be a faction specifically or something more general like Scientist, Smugglers, etc.

I think this has become more of a desire for the groups to be more than they can be in their current functionality.

Loklorien s'Ilancy
Oct 20th, 2016, 02:02:30 AM
After doing a little bit of checking, it seems that we're not the only ones who have a problem with how groups was implemented for vBull. The lack of... well, anything really, seems to be a sore spot for more than a few other site owners. I'm not finding any hacks that will allow us a more well-rounded groups experience, sadly. If Holly or Ogre are able to dig something up then great, but I myself can't find much aside from a host of complaints. Geoff is spot on with his assessment about the inability for groups to be faction platforms.

I find that this presents us with a bit of a possible snag, since many groups are made for the sole purpose of inclusion and helping folks find other members of whatever group they're keen to join up with, and though it might behoove us to reintroduce individual OOC subforums, the limited features that groups offer us at least shows a nice collection of people already involved. Our groups also - in my opinion - provide us with a particularly nifty look into the different facets we have going on here. So, while I don't think we should wholly abandon them, I still think that an auditing needs to take place. Large groups like the Empire and the Alliance can certainly be shifted to their own OOC subforums while smaller subsets could still exist within the groups feature. To use the Empire as an example, the main Imperial group would be axed, and replaced with an OOC subforum within the Empire's own subforum. We would leave the Knights and Intel groups as they are, since they are parts of the larger whole. Same with the Alliance. Basically big stuff gets a subforum, and bits of the larger beast will get groups. Planning could take place on either related venue, if that makes sense.

I don't feel that abandoning groups completely would be a good idea, but scaling back what we expect of them is necessary owing to the fact that they just can't function as a fully realized forum platform. So, we take from them what we can. Smaller but integral facets of this board should be allowed to keep their groups, I think. Things like the Skyrim group, the Hapes group, TFA, Eleutheria, all the Mutants stuff, Lupines, Tenloss, and Corellia come to mind. All of these work to - as Geoff mentioned, provide an interwoven mesh as well as a list of other characters in that group that might be able to provide help to new players and also a view into the other RP options we have going on in some form or another.

As far as who gets to create a new group, I have no concrete opinions at the moment. I shy away from admins being group creators mostly because - for me at least - it would break the illusion. If every group was created by an admin, I don't know... just seems jarring, to me.

So, I suppose a scaling back, but not a clean wipe.