This goes _at least_ to all resource owners, other opinions of course welcome, too. Known to me (from SF): Dave, James (Quozl), Kurt, Bob, Carlos. Maybe Sven (as domain owner). James once said: > The infrastructure owners basically respond to noise level, kind > of like a government without representation. I used to listen to > the INL council, but it dried up. That I like to change: direction based on reason, not noise. My (as of so many before and next to me) goals causing those reasons: - primarily, short-term: produce new player base. - mid-term: produce clue, friendly + fairness atmosphere. - long-term: league quality, self-reproducing player base. The balanced basic game should _not_ change, but some aspects (of the game and organisation around it) _should_ change in favour of those goals, since the times and conditions around have changed. Changes can mean better or worse. An even slightly changed game will produce its own new balance if necessary, no need to stick with old concepts about balance when nobody/ not enough like(s) to play by them anymore. Even if it might mean worse for the moment and the game does not behave _identically_ as it used to 15y ago, once the critical player base is there, forking won't hurt anymore as much as now, and then everybody could have their personal favourite again. But until then, ... take the pain until the worst is over. Support is easier to get rolling and focus when the direction is clear, making it easier for by-standers to follow the lead (or oppose) it. If they don't know where it goes or how it works, they rather sit and wait (or worse just complain noisily from last row). With little time at hands for so many of us, some (like me) like to have some affirmation that efforts invested aren't wasted because somewhere up in the chain it's blocked by intention or stuck by negligence. On the other hand, if the whole fairness system (blessing) is not going to be supported anymore anyhow and everybody is free to connect with any self-made client, then please say so, and forget about the rest. Fairness can't be without rules and _active_ control. And that's something every game needs to be fun. =- James Quick wrote on Sat 7.Apr'07 at 10:36:41 +1000 -= > Supported: what does that mean? If it means I'll agree with > everything the governer says, no. If it means I'll do whatever > the governer says, no. If it means I'll help manage > infrastructure the governer needs, yes. (I prefer to call it "directors" rather than governor, be it a group or single person. The actual role/ title depends on the functionality supported by the community, but anyways) What if the "director" decides some feature to be in/ out for netrek to which you (owner) disagree, but the director nevertheless wants to release blessed clients and a reference server for people to join and see what the latest directed standard is? Would you ... - deny blessing for those clients? - still grant blessing for those not in line with the standard? - deny running such a server on your sponsored machine? - penalize (or even censor) it on the meta-server(s) (or other resources like www) to push your preference? - (still, if at all) grant favoured position on metas (www)? > Enforced: what does that mean? If it means I'll block an IP > address just because the governer says, no. I'd have to > understand the reasons and accept them. If it means I won't try > to circumvent a block placed on me by a governer, no. None of what you listed. "Enforcing" just with regard to the blessed clients, which are blessed only by the standard directed by the directors, see above. Banning for non-official server is as always up to the admins running them. I don't mind servers and clients straying away from the "official standard", but I want to have some _well supported/ pushed_ reference servers and clients to attract players, and the people to rely on those as standard (and not complain about cheating). Of course those directors, too, will listen to people outside of the body (i.e. community) and possibly even get inspired by servers "ahead of the standard" (maybe incorporate them just because of pure popularity). But hopefully decisions will be made and implemented faster with a handful (3-5 people) deciding rather than waiting for some noise level of the whole crowd to reach the pain limit of one or the other resource owner before things change, and then be accepted as part of the game without "cheating" shouters. If it's in, it's in, deal with it: upgrade. Life means change, and with it survival of the fittest. This applies to the game itself in the game world, as well as the players with a therefore necessarily changing game. If practice shows a decision is bad, then (ideally) the director has enough insight to correct it. Still, it requires _consequent_ application of blessing control, so that at all times there is at least 1 accepted working standard for all, no trespassers! To make this less noisy about producing keys (blessed binaries) back and forth, 2 versions could be valid at any given time: the last accepted standard and the new probation standard, so that when a new version fails, just the keys are dropped and everyone falls back to the previous version. > > What shall it be? > > An interesting question. But you can't rely on my answer alone, I > do not represent anyone but myself, and then only half the time. Ok then, this goes to all infra-structure providers: I see these duties for directors of each type of netrek standard: - define standard (per type, at least Bronco, Paradise). (that's the only thing they _must_ do themselves, the "work" resulting from it can be delegated) - ensure blessed (complying) binaries distribution, meaning: - control that only approved code is blessed for each type it's supposed to work with! (or check the source when some complaint comes in) - separate source from binary to make above control possible: people other than maintainers produce binaries. If not directors themselves, then trusted delegates. (not 100% safe, but still better, involves more active eyes and therefore more collective consciousness + acceptance and trust) - run reference servers and ensure that only standard approved blessed clients can connect. - Push the different resource areas: www content, marketing, metas- + key-admin. Or assign people in charge (sub-directors). (Or those might be assigned independently by the owners directly) If the owners are willing to fill the role of directors, then go ahead and do. Otherwise the questions remain: - will you support it? - who if not you should do it? Installation and replacment ideas per Message-ID: <20070401155739.GC13991 at sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> -- © Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give.