The PPC Posting Board - Latest posts

... that theming my team after the event that killed all of them off didn't end well.

Who knew?!?!

hS

1: Foxic is an electric lifter - the head and arm lift up. However, Craig forgot to put a bolt in the arm (on account of being too busy helping Sabretooth return from the dead) so when he drove it over the floor flipper, it couldn't self-right. Craig is... not a lucky man.

2: You know what? I'd design Foxic. It's an excellent spinner killer, and I have this on fairly good authority. Craig is partly based in North Carolina and he attends RoboGames fairly regularly. The old Foxic fought Last Rites (insanely destructive horizontal bar spinner and current BB champion Tombstone with the serial numbers filed off) to a complete standstill, so it should be able to hold up against Carbide's considerably lighter blade. Tactically? Do what you do against any spinner and rush them before they can get up tae speed now, boys a head of steam. The jolts will damage the weapon armature (this is particularly true for horizontal bars and flywheels, less so for verts and drums) and transmit shock through the machine. We saw in the Eighth Wars that Carbide's bar broke down on Terrorhurtz's Hardox wedge, because that's what works well against horizontal spinners. It's... less good against vertical spinners, as we saw against Aftershock and Sabretooth, but it still works.

Me personally, though? I think I'd go for long lifting forks and a shock-mounted, heavily armoured wedge. The wedge can absorb the impacts, but the forks are the primary component; if they're low to the ground, they can sneak under the blade and lift Carbide up, controlling the fight that way. Bung in some powerful drive motors and you're laughing. =]

It's heavily fictionalized, and it tends to be in the broadest possible metaphorical terms, and it's not like anyone is going to point at Plort and be like "look at this if you want to know the actual history of the PPC." Every Boarder can tell their story their own way in Plort. It's not an Official Telling of Events that everyone has to accept. I think that's the difference between Plort and what Cat has suggested. So, I don't think there's any need to shut down that side of it, for you or for anyone else. I mean, if you don't want to do that anymore, that's one thing, but I didn't mean to tell you not to do it. {= (

This has been Just My Opinion.

~Neshomeh

...I would like to apologize for spilling these issues in the first place. I thought Nord's issues were common knowledge in the PPC, due both to past habits and things said in the IRC channels. I also felt it was relevant information to bring up in this context.

I'll try not to do that again in the future.

I have spent a great deal of time recently being informed that people will bow to oldbies' desires, regardless of how those oldbies phrase them, and despite the fact that those oldbies have no actual authority.

I believe this problem will be significantly worse when you create people with actual authority. I think it will be worse than the way people treat the Permission Givers, whose powers have nothing to do with running the community.

Here are some hypothetical scenarios for your consideration:

-Boarder X feels bullied. Boarder X thinks 'oh, but I'm not a Community Manager, no-one will care'. Boarder X does not raise their problem.

-Boarder X feels bullied by a Community Manager. Boarder X thinks, 'no-one will act against a respected Community Manager'. Boarder X does not raise their problem.

-Boarder X is a Community Manager who feels bullied. Boarder X thinks, 'people will think I'm abusing my authority if I say anything'. Boarder X does not raise their problem.

All of these situations have happened recently, with 'oldbie' taking the place of 'Community Manager'. In fact, if you substitute 'Discord mod' in one of them, all three have happened to the same person.

I stand opposed to this suggestion.

hS

Here you go. This category includes in-universe stuff, too, but sub-categories could be added for greater clarity if that becomes a problem. If anything's missing, please add it.

I'll also point out that the Fill the Plothole page says nothing about hS or anyone owning it. A few words to the effect that anyone can start a game could easily be added.

We have a great resource for preserving knowledge. Let's use it, aye?

~Neshomeh

My intent wasn't to mock, but to showcase the likely outcome (as I saw it) of the proposal. I'm sorry.

I'm sorry for using Plort in this way, and for creating it in such a way that it could do so. I can't make the setting go away, but in future I will refrain from creating history for it, and will limit myself to designing shields for people.

hS

While I agree with you and I get it, this seems a bit harsh to Key, who is after all trying to help. We wanted more people to speak up. We should probably not mock them when they do, even if we don't agree with them. {= /

Also, Plort kind of does this? That's not what it's explicitly for, but I at least have encoded some of my negative experiences in that way...

~Neshomeh

Like I said, the only incident that I actually tried parodying in a mission was probably the one with either zdimensia or 7.65x54R, I forget which, and even then I didn't name names or actually reference the event itself, just what would have happened if someone had tried something similar to what they did. This was also a while after they were unanimously permabanned, so they probably wouldn't know (or care); it's possible that they may still find our written works, though, which is why I still only vaguely referenced it.

In general, I just feel uneasy regarding the handling of drama for entertainment value - I'm not saying it can't be done, but I feel that if the people involved were still around they would be offended on so many levels. I don't know how to handle this, honestly. I just don't.

Perhaps the old saying, "It seemed like a good idea at the time" may be relevant here. (Eep, I actually thought that way before reading hS's and Zingenmir's posts.) A general rule I like to follow is that if you propose an idea with the thought that it seems good, it usually isn't.

The rendezvous between the convoy and HMS Thornbird has been brutal. All four ships are damaged: most critically, Convoys Centre and South have lost their sidewalls and are flying unshielded, and a shot from Tango 3 has just taken down Convoy South's wedge entirely. They'll need to take a turn without maneuvering to repair it; whether they break formation to do so is up to you.

Convoy North has mostly escaped damage, but a freak hit has taken out her hyper generator. Until it is repaired, she can't jump out - and neither can Thornbird, which has also lost her thrusters (ie, she can't maneuver without her wedge up).

The enemy have taken hits of their own. Tango 2 (north) has just lost all power; this will take two turns to repair, so if you can hit her before the end of next turn, she'll be destroyed. Tango 1 (east) is flying without weapons, though she's sure to fix one or the other soon. Tango 3 (west) is still running smoothly.

At this point you're free to offer your own plan of whatever complexity you like. However, if you'd prefer a simpler game, you can select from one of these options:

HMS Thornbird

A) Fire missile at Tango 2 to destroy her. Vector ENE (ie, move 1E) and fire lasers on Tango 1 if she comes into range.

B) Fire missile at Tango 3's East point. Hold position (ie, vector one hex NE) and fire lasers on Tango 1 if she comes into range. Ignore Tango 2 entirely, as she is heading out of the combat area fast.

C) Ignore Tangos 2 and 3. Fire missile at Tango 1's current endpoint and hold position (as above) to fire lasers.

Convoy

1) All ships adjust vector 1E and shut down wedges. Next turn will be spent on repairs.

2) All ships refrain from maneuvering. Convoy S spend the turn repairing the wedge. Convoy N repair hyper, Convoy C repair shields.

3) Convoy N and C accelerate along this vector (ie, adjust endpoint 2NE). Convoy S vector SE on thrusters and make for the hyper limit independently.

Since all four ships are close together, one captain can command the entire convoy if you want. Just pick a letter and a number. :)

hS

I'm amused by the idea of telling history in general in the style of a Greek tragedy, but no. Not here.

Yes, it would be potentially useful to have perhaps a 2-3 sentence summary of past events and a link or two. It would give context to people who weren't around, and might help prevent history repeating itself. A page like that could be linked to at times when it's relevant.

But I don't think it should be a wiki page. I don't think it should be brought up at regular times. If you want to make hosting Grand Concilliary threads to deal with new issues an annual thing, okay, go ahead; I can't exactly stop you, though I do strongly suggest that hS isn't constantly saddled with setting it up and running it. But if a record of past events is to be a thing, I propose it be a document linked somewhere--perhaps the wiki page about the Board, or else somewhere much more infrequently seen--and only be brought up when it is relevant. That is, when a similar incident occurs or when someone sees one brewing and wants to head it off (such as the new Discord server/PPC2? I don't know much about the latter, but I understand they were similar and Granz had no knowledge of PPC2).

I more or less understand the idea behind your proposal: we are, as a community, built around making goodfic from bad. And if you were to make other Board events into a play somehow, I probably wouldn't object--but not these ones. Not the serious ones, the ones that involve doxxing and bullying and painful arguments and people crying and losing their trust in parts of the PPC or in the community as a whole. Not the ones that involve accusations (valid or otherwise) and bans and leaving posts. Make a brief summary, link the archives, but do not make an entertaining play out of it. These are not topics for that. Not now, not ever.

~Zingenmir

1/ What is Foxic (as of the last season) supposed to do? It's got... sort of serrations on its back? But no moving parts? Our best guess was that they want to slip under other robots and carry them around, but, uh... that doesn't actually work?

2/ What would you design as an anti-Carbide robot? From what we've seen in the last two seasons, fellow spinners can't damage either its weapon or its armour; it doesn't care one bit about getting flipped; and... uh... have any of the other weapon designs done anything ever?

My best bet would be an axe - it's flat enough that a good blow would hit something delicate - but I've not seen an axe that actually seems worthwhile. They don't hit hard enough to do any damage.

Hmm... so how to increase the force behind an axe? Maybe a heavy flywheel that you spin up inside the robot, then have the axe snap onto it? If you make your axe lighter than the flywheel, it should keep the momentum.

Of course, the problem with that is that you get exactly one shot, which isn't worth much. ^_^ Plus, hitting either a bot or the floor would probably send you flying. Not the best plan in the world.

hS

Please tell me you didn't just admit to pushing through your own ban in order to set the precedent you want.



hS

"Remember that time the entire Discord behaved so badly that virtually every mod was sacked or quit? Good times, good times, never trust those failed mods again.

"Remember how long we spent discussing how terrible a beta Ekyl was that one time? Man, if that guy ever volunteers to beta for you, just ignore him, he's awful.

"Hey, remember when Ix had that breakdown? Oh what a laugh. Hey, Ix, why're you crying, isn't this fun to think about?

"Hey, remember that time hS and Neshomeh totes came out in favour of homophobia? What? Oh, gawds, shut /up/ already hS, you do the whole 'that's not what happened' rant every year.

"Remember that time Cat-on-the-Keyboard proposed an idea that would never let anyone move on from anything, ever again, and would dredge up every painful experience we've ever had in the PPC, and how everyone was all like 'that's a super plan!'? Wowsers."

This is by way of being a humorous parable explaining why I think this is an awful idea.

hS

You mean 'Jacer's Permission thread'. It was not a ban thread when I stepped in to try and stop people I knew to be quick to anger from lashing out at a newbie who'd posted a misguided 'let's all get along' comment.

For the record, it didn't work: they attacked her along with me (for the crime of missing a single word in one format-scrambled post) and Neshomeh (for saying that the Constitution says not to flame people), and drove her out of the PPC community.

And no, since I'm positive someone's goimg to think it, the newbie I'm talkong about was not Jacer.

Go and look at the thread, if you're going to throw it up here. To my memory, I posted once or /maybe/ twice before stopping, waiting for the attacks on me to take a break, and then posting an apology for the abovementioned crime of not knowing something that was only mentioned in a long misformatted rant.

Oh, look, I've just demonstrated why that 'let's dredge up every argument we've ever had and spread them around for all time' notion down-thread is a bad idea.

hS

The fact is, the PPC is pretty huge now, even if we didn't count lurkers. (Lurkers, we love you, you don't need to lurk.) In a group that big, A) there are going to be some people who don't get along, not because either has wronged the other, but simply due to a difference in personalities, outlooks, or writing voices; and B) it's essentially impossible for all of us to interact with each other within a reasonable time frame. The Lounge/Chat isn't visited by everyone in the community, and even those who use it are blocked from being on all at once due to time zones, sleep schedules, and work/school/social obligations. Even the Board, while our official hub used by presumably everyone, isn't going to see every Boarder in every thread. We have different interests. It's a good thing, though, that we have such a large and diverse cast of characters set of persons present, with the variety of viewpoints and experience that brings. While I can see the potential for communication breaks, I vehemently oppose shutting down the chat to "force" everyone to only interact on the Board. I understand that it may feel to Boarders who don't use the chat that said chat is a source of drama, since such drama has leaked out onto the Board over the years, but there has been so much smart and fun discussion in the thousands and thousands of hours in between that I wouldn't give up for all this world. Not to mention the role-play channel in the current Discord chat: pages and pages of non-canon character studies and insights into the way Boarders's agents think. (9.73 MB of RP, in fact; you'd better believe I've been backing that up since day one!) I don't want to deprive any part of the community of the abilities to engage in easy, non-space devouring RP (except on doctorlit's hard drive, lololol) and plain, day-to-day, natural dialogue. I like the idea someone had of making regular "reports" to the Board on some of the discussions and #recsandplugs suggestions taking place in the chat to help keep the entire community more engaged with each other. But again: we're a huge group of n people, and I honestly don't think we'll ever see a discussion in any community space with all n participating. And I don't see that as an automatic bad thing. We can be members of the same team—coworkers, really—with the goal of making our writing setting the best it can be without everyone knowing everyone else on a close, personal level.

As for specific cases:

-Scapegrace: I do feel that Scape makes an effort to reign in her more negative reactions to things, and is overall a more positive contributor to the community than a negative one, so long as the improvement continues.

-Ekyl: I'm satisfied that his specific mistakes in the past have been recognized by him, and that he understands why they were incorrect. I also believe and that his apologies are indeed sincere, and that any perception to the contrary is due more to his writing voice than anything else.

-Huinesoron and Neshomeh: I'm still a bit boggled that anyone in the community viewed these two, or any other oldbie, in any kind of dictatorial light. From my viewpoint, they both are always calm and reasonable voices in any serious discussion; the only time I can recall when they made an error was with Lily-Gnome during Jacer's banning process, and for God's sake, folks, one mistake in over ten years of competent community service does not a dictator(s) make.

-all other instances: I'm satisfied that all other parties have been sufficiently made aware of their mistakes and understand why they were mistakes, and intend not to repeat them in the future.

—doctorlit

I haven't heard from you in a while. Is the beta thing still going on, or has life gotten in the way?

The idea of Community Managers operating under a Rule of Common Non-Objection seems like it would allow us to get much more done as a community without betraying our basic democratic model. Also not 10000% sure we need them, but if other people feel it's necessary, count me a supporter of the general concept.

Two ways I can see this going wrong:
1. How much objection constitutes enough to call for a full vote? I know, one person should be enough, but. . . what if it's a ban vote and the only person objecting is the person being banned? I think that should count as consensus. . . but actually, now that I think of it, most people who get banned leave voluntarily (e.g. you -- except for this thread, those Sheep and zdimensia fellows). Basically, this is the difference between a regular ban and an IP ban.
2. Community Managers must conduct all their negotiations and debates on the Board once an issue has been brought before the entire community, or if they receive something relevant via another medium, they must post a copy or screenshot (or at least synopsis) to the Board. Otherwise this could very much turn community discussions into moderator discussions.

I also think it's going to be very important to emphasize that participation by non-Community Managers is encouraged. We could make a protocol where threads could be titled, "Community Action Needed: [subject]" and begin with a brief description about how the Community Managers system works (e.g. Subject: Community Action Needed: 7.65x54R (aka Sheep)'s Behavior. Body: It has been brought to my attention that 7.65x54R has been violating the Constitution by flaming and posting NSFW material without warning. We need to decide as a community what to do about this. If there is no objection to what the Community Monitors (me, X, and Y) think should be done, we'll do that; if anyone has any objection (even you, newbies!), the whole community will vote. Here's my thoughts: [begin discussion]).

I'm also in support of not formalizing minor roles, and of making a list. As it stands now, it's kind of like if the Wiki didn't list whether characters were free-to-use or who owned them. I had no idea until recently that hS wasn't in charge of Fill the Plothole.

Also I agree that proxy votes would be messy and complicated, and that we should not do it.

--Key, procrastinating on writing five four(!) papers

To rephrase my position a bit, I think the two things that are absolutely necessary when writing up any reports about past drama is that they be accurate and informative. A serious report abut what went right and what went wrong is definitely useful for that. We should strongly consider going ahead with producing those. I proposed that about two weeks ago down in the discussion of precedents, and the response was "*cricket noises*".

However, Key's got a point about how making those reports something other than a dull bureaucratic snoozefest would be really neat if we can pull it off, especially given that this is a community centered around funny writing. The question is, of course, can we do that? Probably the only way to answer that is to try it and see.

So those two rambling paragraphs suggest it might be a good idea to issue two reports. That's a lot of work. Then again, to make a good non-serious report, you probably need to have written at least the outline of a serious one. So maybe that's what we should do.

I actually suspect any report written about March by a neutral party will portray me in a slightly better light than something I'd write, and I support the eventual (not real soon, everything's still fresh in people's memory) creation of a report, especially if it's something people would enjoy reading.

Heck, one of the reasons I asked to get hurled out the door for a bit was so that we'd have precedent for a temp-ban if anyone posted around real names like that again. It sort of ruins the deterrent value if none of the people who show up in a few years even know it happened.

- Tomash

I'd be willing to help write and suggest on the composition, should it come into existence. I wholeheartedly approve of this idea, as it would provide an annual opportunity to do the following:

a. Look back at what we did wrong now, and how we fixed it
b. Look at whatever is going on then, and use the timing as an excuse to solve everything once and for all
c. Remind each other that we are a democracy and that we solve our problems in a rational and useful way.

tl;dr: I want this to be a thing.

I am free weekdays after 18:00 Eastern Time, Saturdays I'm usually good all day. Sundays I am usually free before 12:00 Eastern Time.