We Have Enough Factions (For Now)

Wes · Jun 26, 2017

In the last few years Star Army has experienced a flood of new factions, including several playable ones. This has introduced some issues for the site:

The number of active players has not increased to keep pace with the addition of new playable factions
New factions have been introduced which don't seem to relate to the other factions in the site
It's a lot of work to maintain and grow factions
A lot of recent conflicts between members are closely related to development of new factions (in particular, arguments over submissions)
I feel like the site has lost some focus and we seem to be trying to do too much at one time
We also have an ongoing issue with people creating a new supposedly "NPC" faction and then jealously guarding it to the point where the GMs who would like to use it don't feel comfortable using it.

In response to the above difficulties, we've been discussing putting a hold on accepting new factions for a few months now. At the community meeting in May, we discussed setting a cutoff date for the submission of new playable factions. One date suggested was September 1st but we already have Yamatai, Nepleslia, the Hidden Sun Clan, USO, Iromakuanhe, Gartagens, and the Erestu, plus Asteria. That's 8 active playable factions. Based on feedback, most people think that 4-5 would be ideal. So we already don't need more.

So, here's my plan:

Star Army will not accept new playable factions after the end of July, until at least the end of the year.
Old Playable Factions that aren't being played anymore are going to be transferred to NPC/non-playable status. (e.g. Neshaten, Lorath)
New NPC factions will have to have a plot plan for RP to get approved.
Don't let people "backdoor" factions by claiming their species is for NPC use and then trying to start a plot for them. I can think of recent examples where this happened.
Make it more clear that submitting NPC background factions is for all GMs to use, not for personal use. This is a character-based RP, not a nations RP.
Clarify the difference between people who submit NPC factions and people who actually run playable factions (FMs). Maybe different banners?
Don't be afraid to remind people that the Star Army RP is primarily about the Star Army of Yamatai and while building out the universe is welcome we shouldn't lose focus on the core of the site.
Figure out ways to reward people for building on to existing things instead of making little islands.
Shift focus from making Star Army's universe "wide" to making it more "deep."
Put more detail into the existing playable factions and try to set them up for long-term success.

tl;dr: Hold up guys! We got enough factions; focus on RPing what we got!

As always your feedback is welcome.

Navian · Jun 27, 2017

Why can't you get it through your skull that no one is saying FMs are all powerful.

I never thought anyone was saying that. In fact, my concern is that people are trying to make FMs more powerful, and let them continue to have powers they shouldn't. It appears the problem's not on my end.

Stop trying to 'win' and sit back and actually listen. [...] Stop banging your head against a wall that was never there.

You first?

especially since you have almost no stake in this since you have admitted that it won't really affect you.

Like I suggested earlier, having no stake in this means I'm likely to have a better perspective than someone who does. This isn't a useful argument.

However, never have we said we want to give the SM's power to the FM, or elevate the FM above the SM.

The SM can't exercise authority every single time a GM wants to use something. This creates a power vacuum. What you're proposing would result in FMs filling that vacuum even if, on paper, the SM still has authority. GMs would be left to fend for themselves.

Is it that you don't believe people will ignore the wiki, and that if a GM does something then it obviously has to be an idea they got from the wiki?

Of course people will ignore the wiki. Even FMs ignore their own wiki pages, that's part of the problem. A GM needs to use the wiki as a resource. You seem to have it backwards, if you think getting things from the wiki is bad.

Syaoran · Jun 27, 2017

GMs wouldn't be left to 'fend for themselves' If what they're doing is actually does fit the faction they have almost the whole rest of the site as support. They have the privilege to call in the SM if they think the FM is being unfair. The only time there would be any arguments is if the GM is actually doing something against canon, or the FM is being unfair. Both of these can easily be solved.

The reason you having no stake in this makes you bad for trying to decide is because you're also rather inexperienced in this it seems, and you're not actually thinking about the practical outcomes. You're fixating on one specific scenario for each claim. You're fixated on the fact that some FMs will abuse their power for why they shouldn't have enough power to protect their creations. And you're fixated on the fact that "Wiki is justice" for Why it's okay to leave it up to the GMs with little to no supervision. You're entirely forgetting that we have things in place that can stop out of control FMs, and you're forgetting that if GMs are left to their own devices, we (the site) has to go back and fix things -after- they find out about them. And that results in a messy cleanup.

You're focusing on taking all the power and putting it higher and higher up and centralizing it in one place. But SARP for one is too big for that to work, and honestly speaking, if the wiki was able to be misinterpreted in the first place, someone is going to likely need to go back and ask the FM what they meant anyway.

There is literally no reason to make it so FMs can't say that a GM is being canon that doesn't apply to a centralized power. At least if the FM is making a mistake they don't have such an imposing position and title that someone is afraid to speak up against them.

And no one things getting information from the wiki is bad. I don't even know how you got that from any of my posts. What's bad is that you treat the wiki like it's a perfect system with no failures.

Navian · Jun 27, 2017

The wiki is perfect in the sense that the data is preserved exactly the same, down to each individual letter, from day-to-day. This is contrary to human memory, where, for example, I forgot the distinction between 'hard' and 'firm' canon until I looked it up today, and Raz didn't remember the complete description of SAINT conditioning. This happens to everyone, no matter how much they think they've mastered the wiki's content. So... we can turn to the wiki and check. It works.

Sometimes it doesn't work because the wiki contradicts itself. We have to fix every instance of this in order for the wiki to serve its purpose, although so long as we're not using the pages that contradict the ones we do depend on it's not an immediate problem. Your solution seems to be 'oh, nevermind, the wiki needs to be fixed so let's just ignore it and have FMs make arbitrary declarations' which is like saying 'the law is too complicated and hard to understand, let's just take matters into our own hands'. Uhoh! No--in real life we solve that with judges, not with vigilantes, and we need moderators to step in here, not FMs.

You're focusing on taking all the power and putting it higher and higher up and centralizing it in one place. But SARP for one is too big for that to work

If this is true, we can decentralize it, but we can do so in such a way that it still remains independent and (relatively) free of bias, in the same way that in real life we don't have one judge handle every court case without any other court officials. I don't think we need anything even as elaborate as 'two judges, instead of one!', but there's a lot of other options than having every FM have the power (including the FMs that don't exist or don't care... it seems you're still not considering that side of how this idea is flawed.)

There is literally no reason to make it so FMs can't say that a GM is being canon that doesn't apply to a centralized power.

And you wonder why I can't understand you... what is that, a triple negative? I have no idea what this means.

GMs wouldn't be left to 'fend for themselves' If what they're doing is actually does fit the faction they have almost the whole rest of the site as support. They have the privilege to call in the SM if they think the FM is being unfair.

This is like saying vigilante justice is fine because the victim can always call in the feds if it gets out of hand. It's absurd. I don't see how else I can explain this.

Wes · Jun 28, 2017

Hey guys, what started out as feedback to my post has kind of turned into into an argument between a handful of people and I'm about to go on a family trip so we're going to have to leave it there. I've been following this closely and will go through the feedback a second time when I get back and see if there's any adjustments I need to make.

We Have Enough Factions (For Now)

Navian

Syaoran

Navian

Wes

Founder & Admin

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency