The Cannith Guild Union

[Capricorpus]

Good morning, afternoon, and/or night, folks.

Many of you might know me, some of you might not. For those who don't, I'm Capricorpus, completionist and proud officer of Clan Battlehammer.

The problem:

As someone who browses the forums daily, and posts somewhat less frequently, I've been noticing (as I'm sure everyone on here has) a very large amount of discontent. This issue is, of course, not exclusive to the forums; anyone playing the game has undoubtedly seen more than his/her fair share of disgruntled individuals. Of course, the things that are being complained about are, more often than not, entirely legitimate! Unfortunately, there's a dearth of constructive criticism, and anybody saying that Turbine developers don't listen to their player base just because they generally don't feel a need to respond a dozen times to a dozen similar threads is being silly.

As a Turbine developer, it's undoubtedly overwhelming to see a massive amount of posts on any given subject. Furthermore, since most of the forumites can't seem to agree on anything other than "things are broken and something should probably be done", as a developer and/or producer, I'm sure it's difficult to determine what exactly the player base DOES want. This is, of course, made even more complicated by the fact that the majority of players aren't even active on the forums!

So, what's the point of my long-winded wall of text?


My proposed solution:

As stated in the previous paragraph, one of the problems Turbine undoubtedly encounters is a lack of unity among their player base. How can they "fix" something when nobody can agree on how it should be fixed, or even on whether or not anything is broken? Complaining on the forums is unproductive, and undoubtedly depressing for the developers to look at - who wants to read a 30 page long thread where 50 different people spend time bashing the product you worked hard on without offering any realistic solutions? So, here's what we can do.

We, the players of Cannith, can form a group that I've tentatively termed the "Cannith Guild Union", which would work as follows:

- Every Cannith guild that's interested can choose someone to represent them. Each representative gets one vote.
- These guild representatives will meet and discuss things, laying their opinions out for discussion with others
- After discussion, there will be a vote. Based on the result of that vote, someone (a representative of the representatives - I'd be more than happy to fill that role, but I'd also be more than happy to have a vote about who should do it) attempts to contact Turbine with an opinion that, presumably, should reflect that of a large portion of the Cannith server. Assuming Turbine is interested in hearing about it, and I don't know why they wouldn't be, they would be able to know the general feelings of a lot of people, phrased eloquently and in a non confrontational manner, by speaking to one person.

So, what are the advantages of this?

Instead of a whole bunch of people posting things on the forums, much of which isn't constructive in the slightest, our goal would be to be able to approach Turbine with a clear opinion that's been discussed and agreed upon. Additionally, we want to attempt to offer solutions when possible. As it says earlier in this post, one of the key advantages could be the ability to have a mature, non-confrontational discussion with realistic expectations and goals.

Another advantage would be the larger sample size for opinions - as I also mentioned earlier, most players aren't active forumites, and with this solution, their opinions would be given equal weight. Obviously, the people who don't go on the forums would have a harder time finding out about this, but if we can actually get this started, broadcasting in /advice or something would be a way we could potentially overcome that obstacle.





At this point, I've been writing this for more than an hour, and I'm getting antsy. I'm aware that I haven't fully explored every facet of how this would work, but I think I've mostly outline my basic proposal. I genuinely believe that, should people choose to do this, Turbine will choose to give us the time of day, and I really hope people don't respond in a typically sarcastic and/or pessimistic way.

If you've got any questions and/or comments, please post and I'll do my best to respond. If you've read my entire wall of text, I salute you.

Cheers.

~ Cap

[FranOhmsford]

Having perused your suggestion I have a few issues:

1. Unions are Bad Mmkay!

2. So basically any guild that doesn't join doesn't get a say - Lovely - NOT!

3. 95% of the people in the big guilds who do join WON'T get a Say - One Person per guild = Rofl!

4. As someone who regularly posts on these forums and who does attempt to make constructive suggestions wherever possible AND as someone who plays this game very differently to yourself I will continue to do things my own way thank you very much. {Not having a go at you personally or your gaming preferences - Just saying that those preferences should NOT be given preference over other people's.}.

5. Oh and Unions are and always have been a bad idea that gives far too much power to a minority - Completely the Opposite of what they were designed to do btw!

[Capricorpus]

1. Unions are Bad Mmkay!
5. Oh and Unions are and always have been a bad idea that gives far too much power to a minority - Completely the Opposite of what they were designed to do btw!

You seem to very much dislike the "union" terminology - if you'd prefer, you can think of it as a "group of people". It obviously isn't a union in the typical sense, and if you've got a better name, I'm all ears!

2. So basically any guild that doesn't join doesn't get a say - Lovely - NOT!

Since, regardless of whether or not this succeeds, it won't (and shouldn't be) the sole source of feedback Turbine will be receiving, I'm not sure what your issue is. The majority of people that play DDO don't really participate much, if at all, on the forums, so you aren't losing any opinions by consolidating a whole bunch of them.

3. 95% of the people in the big guilds who do join WON'T get a Say - One Person per guild = Rofl!

The idea is for the representatives of each guild to base their votes on what the folks in their guilds want. Although having more than one representative for exceptionally large guilds could be discussed, it wouldn't make sense for divach ruin to have 30 representatives. Guild size based on active members might have to be taken into consideration, but not to such an extent that it would overwhelm small guilds, many of which contain the top spenders and players, who would presumably have more to say.

4. As someone who regularly posts on these forums and who does attempt to make constructive suggestions wherever possible AND as someone who plays this game very differently to yourself I will continue to do things my own way thank you very much. {Not having a go at you personally or your gaming preferences - Just saying that those preferences should NOT be given preference over other people's.}.

I'm not entirely sure what part of my original post told you so much about how I play the game, considering only the first sentence or two made any reference to my characters at all. Additionally, since I didn't mention the word "preferences" once, I'm not sure what you think mine are, but you're welcome to disagree with them without even hearing them.

I assumed I made it clear in the original post that this would not be a way to convince Turbine to give anyone's "preferences" greater weight. The idea was to gather and consolidate opinions, and then approach Turbine with them, in an attempt to give the collected opinions more poignancy.

I'm glad "doing things your own way" is working out so well for you, and I wish you nothing but the best of luck in continuing to do so. I'm sure it's been very effective so far!

[Stoner81]

Really nice idea Cap I can certainly see where you trying to go with this.

Stoner81.

[Capricorpus]

Really nice idea Cap I can certainly see where you trying to go with this.

Stoner81.

Thanks, hopefully other people will agree!

[gDra]

I don't mind so much whether it is server, guild or another form of representation of the players. Important to me is Turbine supporting this idea and responding to the opinions and suggestions.
So before an official statement on this appears I will hold my breath.

Just leaving this here, as it's related: https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...uncil-in-LOTRO

[FranOhmsford]

The idea is for the representatives of each guild to base their votes on what the folks in their guilds want. Although having more than one representative for exceptionally large guilds could be discussed, it wouldn't make sense for divach ruin to have 30 representatives. Guild size based on active members might have to be taken into consideration, but not to such an extent that it would overwhelm small guilds, many of which contain the top spenders and players, who would presumably have more to say.

I was thinking more about Guilds such as ATCZ, Templar and Silver Legion than the likes of Divach Ruin.

I had serious issues with one guild a while ago PRE their opening up of Guild Rectuitment {Since when EVERY SINGLE person from that Guild I've run with has been great!}.
Strangely enough Cannithtrade which I know you also follow is famously anti that guild for the very reasons that I now have no issues with them.

So I know for a fact that the people you're likely to get as representatives will not be truly representative of the Guild as a whole.

I'm not entirely sure what part of my original post told you so much about how I play the game, considering only the first sentence or two made any reference to my characters at all. Additionally, since I didn't mention the word "preferences" once, I'm not sure what you think mine are, but you're welcome to disagree with them without even hearing them.

I assumed I made it clear in the original post that this would not be a way to convince Turbine to give anyone's "preferences" greater weight. The idea was to gather and consolidate opinions, and then approach Turbine with them, in an attempt to give the collected opinions more poignancy.

I'm glad "doing things your own way" is working out so well for you, and I wish you nothing but the best of luck in continuing to do so. I'm sure it's been very effective so far!

Honestly we don't find ourselves in the same groups very often {maybe a handful of times ever!} BUT you are quite famous on Cannith so I feel safe in stating that our Preferences most probably do not align.


As for consolidating opinions - Honestly you're NOT!

All this will do is give a larger say to a small few.

There's on average between 50 and 70 people in Cannithtrade when I log on {And alt} and if you took the majority of opinions in that chat channel as a cross-section of the whole server you'd be doing a massive disservice to the game!


I regularly have massive differences of opinion with the two gamers who introduced me to DDO - I can't see the effect of something like this being good for the game.

And being one voice in a "Union" as you call it would NOT Stop me from posting my opinions on these forums either.

In fact if I allowed myself to be shouted down by a small number of people in said "Union" my opinions and suggestions would not even reach the Devs or the Majority.

So I will continue to post my views on these forums where they can be seen by all thank you very much.



Oh and yes...If you want to consolidate views then by all means do so BUT a better way to go about it would be to actually find likeminded people to form your "Union" so as to be sure that differences of opinion would be less likely to blow up into fullgrown Rows!

And the name Cannith Guild Union does rather come across as a One Off "This is the only view that matters"

We already have Guilds and Chatchannels and Websites and Vent/Teamspeak etc. to find like minded individuals.

We absolutely do NOT need a Meta-Guild that stomps all over the opinions of the Majority just because the "Representatives" put forward to vote have more strongly held views {and yes those representatives would have the strongest views - It's Human Nature.}.

Let's take a "Korthos Army" Guild of Blind Invites as an example - If it has a Core of 20 veterans who know each other well and play the same way BUT also have 300 others who have no say then it's NOT a valid cross-section!

How about my own Guild - With just the Four Active Players {11 total accounts at this time} - Would a group of 20 similar guilds be considered a valid Cross-Section either?


Oh and last of all - What minimum level requirement are you going to apply before accepting a Guild as part of this "Union"?

[Capricorpus]

I don't play LOTRO, so I don't know what went on there, but my plan is to attempt to group up independently before going to Turbine, instead of holding our breath for them to come to us.

[Braegan]

Interesting idea. I'll keep an eye out for future development into this and if I think of anything to help I'll let you know.

/cheers.

[Capricorpus]

I was thinking more about Guilds such as ATCZ, Templar and Silver Legion than the likes of Divach Ruin.

I had serious issues with one guild a while ago PRE their opening up of Guild Rectuitment {Since when EVERY SINGLE person from that Guild I've run with has been great!}.
Strangely enough Cannithtrade which I know you also follow is famously anti that guild for the very reasons that I now have no issues with them.

So I know for a fact that the people you're likely to get as representatives will not be truly representative of the Guild as a whole.

Well, ATCZ is significantly smaller than the other three, despite the recent influx of new members, but the point is as follows: I'm aware that no system can be perfect, especially when it's something like this. However, I think we've got a better chance of being listened to in a group rather than each of us posting our own opinions, therefore, I'm attempting to formulate the best imperfect solution I could think of.

Hope that makes things a bit more clear!

There's on average between 50 and 70 people in Cannithtrade when I log on {And alt} and if you took the majority of opinions in that chat channel as a cross-section of the whole server you'd be doing a massive disservice to the game!

I agree wholeheartedly. The people in that channel can voice their opinions, but so can everyone else. Therefore, like I said earlier, I'd like to make an effort to make this concept actually go mainstream so even the less public guilds and players can participate, if they so choose.

I regularly have massive differences of opinion with the two gamers who introduced me to DDO - I can't see the effect of something like this being good for the game.

And being one voice in a "Union" as you call it would NOT Stop me from posting my opinions on these forums either.So I will continue to post my views on these forums where they can be seen by all thank you very much.

Disagreement is healthy, and nobody's asking you to stop posting your opinions, whether or not you were to join this group.

Oh and yes...If you want to consolidate views then by all means do so BUT a better way to go about it would be to actually find likeminded people to form your "Union" so as to be sure that differences of opinion would be less likely to blow up into fullgrown Rows!

I WANT differences of opinion, so everyone can discuss. Hopefully, people who disagreed with one particular decision that was voted on and agreed upon by the vast majority would be able to tolerate it for the greater good.

And the name Cannith Guild Union does rather come across as a One Off "This is the only view that matters"

We'd certainly want to matter, but we certainly wouldn't be the ONLY view that mattered, not to players or devs.

We already have Guilds and Chatchannels and Websites and Vent/Teamspeak etc. to find like minded individuals.

The idea isn't to find like minded individuals, the idea is to bring player opinions to Turbine in a more effective manner than what's currently happening.

We absolutely do NOT need a Meta-Guild that stomps all over the opinions of the Majority just because the "Representatives" put forward to vote have more strongly held views {and yes those representatives would have the strongest views - It's Human Nature.}.

Please refer to my earlier response involving "the few people who disagree tolerating stuff for the greater good".

Oh and last of all - What minimum level requirement are you going to apply before accepting a Guild as part of this "Union"?

As of now, my plan is to allow any real guild to join. By "real" guild, I don't mean a level requirement, I mean no bot guilds and/or people creating their "guild of one" just to get another vote.

ATCZ would get a vote, and, should they choose to do so, CinnamonBunnies would get a vote.

The balance would come from
1) Exceptionally casual players who don't care at all wouldn't bother joining
2) Uneducated, semi-casual players would be able to hear the perspective of the more serious players, and formulate opinions.

[Memnir]

I'd prefer to speak for myself, thank you.
And it would be tons more effective if everyone in those guilds did likewise.


One post is easy to ignore, even if it purports to represent the opinions of many. However, a multitude of posts is harder to ignore - and it's traditionally taken multitudes of posts to get Turbine's attention, let alone action, on any issue. In addition, it would be far to easy to ignore, since there is no way for Turbine to verify that the number of individual players the Union would claim to represent was accurate - or how many individuals in each guild actually agrees or disagrees with the mass-opinion post that the Union may put forth.

As such, I'd not trust any mass-entity to be able to express my views in the exact ways I hold them. Perhaps my misgivings are different from many other players' feelings on an issue... my views would almost certainly be muted or excluded as a result of not being in the majority of those in the Union. I do not want to lose my voice, or have it misstated, be inaccurate, or be in any way diluted as a result of it being in the hands of another to represent.



I applaud the idea, but I think it's not going to be as effective as encouraging more people to constructively raise their voices and opinions on the forums. Better to be an actual chorus of voices acting as one, then one voice trying to be as loud as a multitude.

[Braegan]

Well,As of now, my plan is to allow any real guild to join. By "real" guild, I don't mean a level requirement, I mean no bot guilds and/or people creating their "guild of one" just to get another vote.

Just curious on this point here. Would exceptions be made to long standing players that prefer to maintain a solo guild? I can think of at least a few that do this.

[Capricorpus]

I'd prefer to speak for myself, thank you.
And it would be tons more effective if everyone in those guilds did likewise.


One post is easy to ignore, even if it purports to represent the opinions of many. However, a multitude of posts is harder to ignore - and it's traditionally taken multitudes of posts to get Turbine's attention, let alone action, on any issue. In addition, it would be far to easy to ignore, since there is no way for Turbine to verify that the number of individual players the Union would claim to represent was accurate - or how many individuals in each guild actually agrees or disagrees with the mass-opinion post that the Union may put forth.

As such, I'd not trust any mass-entity to be able to express my views in the exact ways I hold them. Perhaps my misgivings are different from many other players' feelings on an issue... my views would almost certainly be muted or excluded as a result of not being in the majority of those in the Union. I do not want to lose my voice, or have it misstated, be inaccurate, or be in any way diluted as a result of it being in the hands of another to represent.

Breaking quotes into segments to respond to point by point is getting tedious...

Anyways, I completely understand what you're saying, and I agree with a lot of it.However, I think you've got a couple misconceptions, and you might not have read through all of my original points.

First off, if the forums tended to be filled with well thought out, constructive criticism, I'd agree with you. Since that isn't the case, I imagine the developers have a hard time reading through the massive amount of unproductive negativity, and they might respond better to this.

Additionally, the ideal result, which is obviously not going to be easily achievable, if possible at all, is to be able to contact developers slightly more directly than the forums.

Having a conversation over skype or a live chat with one person would, in my mind, likely be far more effective than having to weigh your words carefully before posting on a public forum. A real, candid conversation could potentially go on, instead of some lawyer-like double-talk.

However, you're definitely correct about one of your points - although your views would be represented in the broader sense, it's unlikely that the group views would completely mirror yours in every possible intricacy.

Despite this, I feel that the potential benefits far outweigh the losses, when you consider how largely ineffective the "tell people to post on the forums and maybe something will change a little bit, if we're lucky" strategy has been.

[Capricorpus]

Just curious on this point here. Would exceptions be made to long standing players that prefer to maintain a solo guild? I can think of at least a few that do this.

Solo guilds, such as yours or Olidia's, would get to vote. Someone creating a guild for his opener just to get a vote would not.

[Memnir]

First off, if the forums tended to be filled with well thought out, constructive criticism, I'd agree with you. Since that isn't the case, I imagine the developers have a hard time reading through the massive amount of unproductive negativity, and they might respond better to this.

Unfortunately, history disagrees with you on this. The overwhelming majority of the time, it has taken massive numbers of negative opinions to get Turbine to pay attention. This has happened time and again since launch. One post claiming to have the backing of many is easier to ignore then 10+ pages of folks all expressing the same sentiment. In a perfect world, this would not be the case - but such is life.


But, I'm not going to argue with you about it. Best of luck with the idea - truly.

[rayworks]

/not signed

I don't want my opinion - or other's - drowned out in a sea of compromise. Any ideas or opinions developed by a group will be watered down and may not truly represent the majority. Better for the devs to see numerous posts/threads rather than one.

[Capricorpus]

...One post claiming to have the backing of many...

You must not have read my post where I expressed my desire, which is admittedly not very likely to happen, for the representative to be able to communicate more directly than via a post in the forums.

Anyways, thanks for your kind wishes, even if you don't personally want to be involved.

[Memnir]

I mispoke... that should read, "One voice claiming to have the backing of many."

Irregardless of how, when, and where it's expressed... one single voice will lack the impact of many. RL unions know this - that's why they have protests, picket lines, and strikes when small group negotiations fail. In this case, I don't think small group talks will ever be a reality for DDO, but even so - asingle representative will lack the impact of all those voices expressed individually, even if they are expressing the same ideal.


Sorry for misspeaking - I'll now bow out and again I wish you well.

[Capricorpus]

I mispoke... that should read, "One voice claiming to have the backing of many."

Irregardless of how, when, and where it's expressed... one single voice will lack the impact of many. RL unions know this - that's why they have protests, picket lines, and strikes when small group negotiations fail. In this case, I don't think small group talks will ever be a reality for DDO, but even so - asingle representative will lack the impact of all those voices expressed individually, even if they are expressing the same ideal.


Sorry for misspeaking - I'll now bow out and again I wish you well.

I definitely understand what you're saying, but I genuinely believe that one person talking in real time might be able to have an actual discussion, which is something that is very difficult to achieve on the forums.

Obviously nothing to apologize for, thanks again for your kind words. It's great to see somebody who you can disagree with while still having a mature, reasonable conversation.

[Kynestra]

I think it would be, if done correctly, a good way to consolidate player concerns in a coherent fashion. Instead of 9000 somewhat different posts complaining about similar things, we would have a platform to approach Turbine with. It would have to be guild leader/officer moderated voting, and as such would be a democratic process, not the mass confusion and only "loud forumites" as many are saying. It all boils down to the implementation, but I for one am:

/signed.