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

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>

© 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.