(22 Feb 23 at 1:01pm)[DEFN] Sentinel Wrote: The trusted system also exists for a reason.
From what I heard from people, the trusted system barrier of entry/ effort requirement for most Jurrys/MPs to apply, even if they would be accepted.
Alone, the idea that you will be interviewed by a GM in a voce call is very intimidating, and you have to go out of your way just to find out what the trusted system even is.
(22 Feb 23 at 2:42pm)Sevin Wrote: From what I heard from people, the trusted system barrier of entry/ effort requirement for most Jurrys/MPs to apply, even if they would be accepted.
Alone, the idea that you will be interviewed by a GM in a voce call is very intimidating, and you have to go out of your way just to find out what the trusted system even is.
Would it be more approachable if I made it a application? Cuz GM Applications exist, and a major reason I hear for why people don't apply for GM is the application length. Naturally it wouldn't be as long, but it would still require a minute amount of effort to do.
The problem I see is the intimidation factor and the high perceived barrier of entry. A simple application system here on the forms would be better, but I think a google form would be best.
(22 Feb 23 at 12:18pm)[DEFN] Sentinel Wrote: I mean this completely respectfully, but anyone who chooses to just capture someone and press a button and have it be over with shouldn't have been recruited to the divisions in the first place.
An MP's/Jury's goal isn't to do activities. It's to use their cap to get a reward from the terminal. That is the only thing they are incentivized to do (in game at least). Activities can just be seen as an obstacle to that goal. The system created solely by the rule (without divisions' internal policies) incentivizes people to do the bare minimum required of an activity, then terminal.
But you don't see that (not a lot anyway). A lot of people try to make their activities interesting. I feel like I can't do worthwhile activities, so I don't cap people anymore.
Ether because the capper cares, or because of internal policies---the COs caring---, they try to make activities fun. Sure the rule forces activities to happen, but the only reason they are at all enjoyable is because the players in cap classes giving enough of a shit to meaningfully play along, despite them gaining absolutely nothing from it.
My point is, you can get people to do something, often with better result, without legally requiring them to do it.
I think it should be left up to the captive whether an activity is done or not, if the whole capturing system is meant to be fun for both parties involved, then let the captive choose. I feel like I can speak for the majority of players when I say being capped isn't fun, especially when you're forced into hitting stone props or something of that nature. That being said, some people still might enjoy hitting props or being asked riddles, so let them have that choice. As for the captor's fun, it's still fun being able to defend your cap while you get back to base safely and proceeding to defend from any MACE/SU that try to save the target, so I don't think a lot would be at stake if it was left up to the captive whether an activity is done or not.
People don't know what they like until they're exposed to it. If we leave it up to preference, nobody except a select few would ever choose activities.
Definitely sounds preachy, but it's a well-documented human behavior.
Even when people are exposed to something, they won't mmediately like it.
If people got everything they liked, everyone would one-hit kill, move at mach 5, and be invincible.
It's just not a valid metric, in my opinion.
Something to take into account for sure, but by no means should it be a deciding factor in how something is designed.
Yeah doggod, right now we HAVE to do an activity, even if neither party wants it.
Like you cap could be begging you to just terminal them, but nope. Fuck you. You are legally obligated to make them take a sates' capitals quiz.
(22 Feb 23 at 4:41pm)[DEFN] Sentinel Wrote: People don't know what they like until they're exposed to it. If we leave it up to preference, nobody except a select few would ever choose activities.
Definitely sounds preachy, but it's a well-documented human behavior.
Even when people are exposed to something, they won't mmediately like it.
If people got everything they liked, everyone would one-hit kill, move at mach 5, and be invincible.
It's just not a valid metric, in my opinion.
Something to take into account for sure, but by no means should it be a deciding factor in how something is designed.
People have tried it; they have been forced to for months now. Saying people don't know what they want until they try it doesn't make sense here.
(22 Feb 23 at 4:41pm)[DEFN] Sentinel Wrote: People don't know what they like until they're exposed to it. If we leave it up to preference, nobody except a select few would ever choose activities.
Definitely sounds preachy, but it's a well-documented human behavior.
Even when people are exposed to something, they won't mmediately like it.
If people got everything they liked, everyone would one-hit kill, move at mach 5, and be invincible.
It's just not a valid metric, in my opinion.
Something to take into account for sure, but by no means should it be a deciding factor in how something is designed.
I can see how it's a bit flawed but I just think it's unfair to mandate something that not everyone wants to participate in. Most of the activities are self-explanatory so they don't need to have a first experience with it to understand it and understand that they don't want to participate in that activity, some examples being crucifixion, gladiator pits, having them fight antlions, etc.
Let me ask you this, who defined those as the activities? Because it certainly isn't the rules being complained about. They don't mention specifics at all.
I'm just saying those because those are the most common ones that I see, if there is room for other creativity in the activities, most people don't take any steps to go further than those.
If an MP or NPU points to complaints of all the activities being copy-pasted, that does nothing but show a self-imposed creative restriction.
Let me also state that reasoning MATTERS. If the post started off with "there is not enough support in place to make activities consistently entertaining", that's workable.
But as long as the argument consists of "system bad, me no like, remove whole thing"; I'm sorry but nothing will come of it.
From what I heard from people, the trusted system barrier of entry/ effort requirement for most Jurrys/MPs to apply, even if they would be accepted.
Alone, the idea that you will be interviewed by a GM in a voce call is very intimidating, and you have to go out of your way just to find out what the trusted system even is.
Would it be more approachable if I made it a application? Cuz GM Applications exist, and a major reason I hear for why people don't apply for GM is the application length. Naturally it wouldn't be as long, but it would still require a minute amount of effort to do.
Ancient GRID CmD, prior SU Major/GB COL.
Credit to SEVIN.
An MP's/Jury's goal isn't to do activities. It's to use their cap to get a reward from the terminal. That is the only thing they are incentivized to do (in game at least). Activities can just be seen as an obstacle to that goal. The system created solely by the rule (without divisions' internal policies) incentivizes people to do the bare minimum required of an activity, then terminal.
But you don't see that (not a lot anyway). A lot of people try to make their activities interesting. I feel like I can't do worthwhile activities, so I don't cap people anymore.
Ether because the capper cares, or because of internal policies---the COs caring---, they try to make activities fun. Sure the rule forces activities to happen, but the only reason they are at all enjoyable is because the players in cap classes giving enough of a shit to meaningfully play along, despite them gaining absolutely nothing from it.
My point is, you can get people to do something, often with better result, without legally requiring them to do it.
Definitely sounds preachy, but it's a well-documented human behavior.
Even when people are exposed to something, they won't mmediately like it.
If people got everything they liked, everyone would one-hit kill, move at mach 5, and be invincible.
It's just not a valid metric, in my opinion.
Something to take into account for sure, but by no means should it be a deciding factor in how something is designed.
Like you cap could be begging you to just terminal them, but nope. Fuck you. You are legally obligated to make them take a sates' capitals quiz.
People have tried it; they have been forced to for months now. Saying people don't know what they want until they try it doesn't make sense here.
I can see how it's a bit flawed but I just think it's unfair to mandate something that not everyone wants to participate in. Most of the activities are self-explanatory so they don't need to have a first experience with it to understand it and understand that they don't want to participate in that activity, some examples being crucifixion, gladiator pits, having them fight antlions, etc.
If an MP or NPU points to complaints of all the activities being copy-pasted, that does nothing but show a self-imposed creative restriction.
Let me also state that reasoning MATTERS. If the post started off with "there is not enough support in place to make activities consistently entertaining", that's workable.
But as long as the argument consists of "system bad, me no like, remove whole thing"; I'm sorry but nothing will come of it.