Shii Posted:

That’s the thing; it’s not that CZ picked top buildrs to be a part of this task force, it’s that intelligent, well-spoken, creative players typically tend to be good at ForumBuildr too. That’s the same reason the Apprentice team has a lot of faces in this rules committee too.

What I don’t really get is how anyone is complaining; in all honesty, I can’t remember ever being involved on a game/forum that directly let users help discuss and implement rules and onsite policies.

You guys are ****ing about “not being represented,” would you have preferred there be NO players and let the mods and admins “do all the representing?” Cuz that’s your other option. Personally, I think we’ve accomplished a good amount, from letting shock be postable in RP to this new community ban measure, so I don’t see why there’s so much bumhurt going on in this thread.

Maybe next time, CZ can just involve no players in their site policy discussions, and we can see how much better that works out.

QFT.

Not to pat ourselves on the back or anything, but I thought it was a nice gesture to include (along with mods and admins) a handful of users to help us decide policy. This was provided they’d demonstrated an ability to speak critically and thoughtfully on issues — and this doesn’t mean agreeing with our current stance. Of course, they also had to be interested in participating.

I’ll admit that the “troll contingent,” for lack of a better term, was underrepresented. But anyone could understand why this would be the case. There was no reason for us to think any troll worth their salt would be interested in helping us review and refine the rules that are likely to get them banned.

Now, I’ve noted that the people criticizing our selection (despite not recognizing half of the names) aren’t saying they’d do a better job, or that they seriously want to take part in this themselves. But some names have been floated and we’re willing to bring some more people in to participate, provided they’re interested.

We’ll keep you updated.