What's new
  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 April 2024 is YE 46.3 in the RP.

Should We Refine the Technology Approval Process?

Wes

Wes

Founder & Admin
Staff Member
🌸 FM of Yamatai
🎖️ Game Master
🎨 Media Gallery
Alright, there's been a lot of tech forum drama lately.

I propose the following solution:

First, split the C&I Forum into:

1) a tech review and discussion
2) a tech voting forum where the playerbase would do all approvals. All topics would be poll topics posted by a moderator.

During part 1 (discussion), any player would be allowed to modify the wiki version of the submission to make it fit better, or to be more fair. After a period of a three days or so (perhaps a wekk), the final, refined form would be quoted and voted on.

Second, develop a checklist of requirements each tech submission should meet (such as Does the nation have the resources to build this, Does this ship have all the necessary description needed to draw it? etc)
 
I agree with most of it, save the wiki editing part. Wiki is fine for stuff that has already been predetermined, but to edit new things could cause even MORE drama.
 
I think this is reasonable enough. However, I think that the GM's of the nations in question need to weigh in as well.

Also, if we did this, I think we would need to log who edits what, to avoid, say, Cora getting spiteful and blanking one of Zack's submissions.
 
I think it is a great idea. And if something gets edited on wiki keep in mind it saves previous versions of the article.
 
I don't think the wiki part is a good idea... sometimes, a bit of technology is like a work of art, and artists get pissed off when someone else takes the brush and paints a mustache on the Mona Lisa.

Otherwise, yes, a discussion and refinery process would be nice... if people were to discuss and refine. I've seen a good number of tech posts simply go ignored from the time of posting, all the way until they're eventually approved a month later.

Example: https://stararmy.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4150

Last post was in Jan, no "Not Approved" or "Approved" just left to rot. I think the "refinement" that needs to be made is simple attentiveness. Not to little, not too much, attentiveness would be just right.
 
I am kind of iffy about the polls. If they weigh heavily into whether a submission will be approved or not it might become a problem.

For example, say Elysian players don't want Yamatai players to have this radical new technology, they just vote no, Yamataian vote yes, etc. Then it basically comes down to a popularity contest. Voting would be nice if it is pulled off professionally...but isn't that one of the problems we are having with the tech forum right now anyway?
 
Not pointing any fingers, but if I were, they would point to pretty much everyone on the site. It's human to subconsciously want to 'win', and approving your opponents technology doesn't exactly help that point. If people dislike the submission or its submittee, people will find reasons to hate it.

Everything else except the polls and editting a wiki without approval, I think is a good idea.

Putting an actually time on when things will get approved will certainly help the forum along if it is done right...nobody likes to see their submissions become stagnant and left to die.

As was said before, editting a submission to make it more 'presentable' might step on more toes than one would want. Perhaps only edit it to include a list of suggestions, and not actually touch the actual submission? But I don't see why one could not simply just do that on the forum-side submission discussion.
 
Omega20 said:
Also, if we did this, I think we would need to log who edits what, to avoid, say, Cora getting spiteful and blanking one of Zack's submissions.
Click to expand...
All wiki edits are logged and can be reverted if bad. All changes are also emailed to me and Andrew for review.
 
Omega20 said:
Cora getting spiteful and blanking one of Zack's submissions.
Click to expand...

Oh, don't single me out. OK? There are others who hate Uso's "science" more then me. The reason I hate him, is his dismissivness towards counter arguments. Like say, stating over and over again that FTL speed maxamums were unnessesary for a Faster the light engine. Which is, frankly, dumb.
 
Moonman, you should understand here that people such as Chris and myself did not just wake up one day and decide to take a 'take no prisoners' approach to the mans tech. People have given him many, many chances in the matter. And he has shown a tendency to always try to take as much of the cheese as he can run with. When you give him the benefit of the doubt of "oh, well, it seems a overpowered, but he said it won't be used that often,â€
 
Cora said:
Like say, stating over and over again that FTL speed maxamums were unnessesary for a Faster the light engine. Which is, frankly, dumb.
Click to expand...

Define the maximum speed of a petrol powered, 4-stroke engine.

You can't, without first defining the size of the engine, the gearbox ratios it is attached to and the vehicle it is put inside.

(I would have put this in the relevant thread but time constraints saw it end before I was able to)
 
Vesper said:
Moonman, you should understand here that people such as Chris and myself did not just wake up one day and decide to take a 'take no prisoners' approach to the mans tech. People have given him many, many chances in the matter. And he has shown a tendency to always try to take as much of the cheese as he can run with. When you give him the benefit of the doubt of "oh, well, it seems a overpowered, but he said it won't be used that often,â€
Click to expand...
 
Don't assume anything, you're making an ass out of yourself.

Vesper votes no, since he's one of the few who can understand the scientific half speak Uso fires off to try and get his tech approved. And generally Zack either misapplies, missinterperets, or just uses the science wrong.
 
I agree with moonman, there are plenty of people who will vote no on a simple poll just because they have some personal bias against the technology, even when the technology does not violate any of the rules of physics or this site.

But things do need to be changed, I would personally like to see better Mods. Kotori is actively trying to get threads off topic and I have it from Doshi that he is no longer going to participate in the teching.
 
I don't like the idea of a polling system because people can not be held responsible for their decision - it can be made on whim or for reasons beyond power-balance and science. It simply becomes a popularity contest - and that's inately dangerous.

Oh ... and I'm not that popular.
 
I believe it is high time for spring cleaning in the SARP.

Any new inclusion in the setting should be made so that it would have the approval of a plot GM and then be approved for use. Anything new planned to be added to the setting would be then discussed in the GM-only section of the site.

(remember those tech cliques Doshii Jun brought up before? Yeah, that)

Therefore, I move to abolish the contributions and tech submission forum until further notice.
 
Kotori said:
Therefore, I move to abolish the contributions and tech submission forum until further notice.
Click to expand...

I dislike this idea. Wes advertises the site as a universe that its players can openly attempt to add to.
 
And what of those small things which are designed simply out of the pleasure of designing, with no direct plan to incorporate into a plot? The small things that make the setting as interesting as it is?

For example my Kawaii. I've never used it, I don't think anyone else has, but I think the setting is better for having it.
 
You have a right to. But let us face facts:

The tech forum is a mess. It's badly in need of restructuring and reorganising and generally making it so that we can balance the power levels behind the submissions.

Putting it on the hold for a time while it is overhauled and adapted for wiki-format would help mitigate many of the problems in allowing the members to tweak and arrange settings on overpowered technology so as to better fit the setting itself.

Controlling member submissions - which is the root of the problem - was tried before and it failed *points at Uso Tasuki*. Things went sour and the problem persist. The problem still needs to be solved.

Thomas, the idea for now is to get another GM to agree with you on a submission and then present it to Wes after it's been tidied up. Once Wes nods along, it can be included but it makes it so that stuff Wes doesn't like doesn't come in and stuff that he likes comes in without those extremely annoying debates and the drama they cause.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top