On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote:

>> - For most people (everyone but the super clue) written communication 
>> in netrek is not received (read) by everyone at the same time. Most 
>> people read messages when they have the time.
> This is because people are lazy - not because they wouldn't benefit from 
> hearing the messages sooner.

No. It's because reading messages while playing is a skill that is 
learned. Most of us that have played this game for over ten years can see 
and identify a dist.carrying message in the corner of our eye while 
dogfighting because we recognize its pattern.

>> - Written communication is very many times faster to receive (read), 
>> especially in netrek.
> No it isn't.

So what you're saying is that you read slower than you talk. Fine. 
However, that is not true for most people.

Most people type slower than they talk, but this is not an issue in this 
discussion since netrek communication is mostly done with macros and 
macros are several times faster than speaking.

> The effectiveness of a person at communication has little to do with the 
> medium. Great communicators can use both effectively. Most people, 
> cannot type as fast as they can speak. Most people, communicate more 
> effectively with voice. I challenge your claim - I've played fun team 
> games where the members of the team sat in the same room, and we talked 
> over top of the monitors. If you can't perform team communication with 
> your voice - I suggest practice. :-)

I've played probably 100 times more hours than you so don't suggest I 
practice to reach your skill in anything that has to do with netrek.

>>> Voice is more efficient.
>> This is not true in netrek. In netrek, written communication is extremely 
>> more efficient than voice dito.
> No it isn't. The proof is simple - newbies don't read messages. They 
> need to learn to use text, and even then, people don't read what they 
> write until seconds or more later. The most effective netrek players are 
> right on top of the message window - but the most effective netrek 
> players would also be on top of a voice channel. You are not performing 
> a legitimate comparison. Voice is active and in real time - text is 
> passive and read in batch. It is true that some content is more 
> effective in each, but it is not true that "written is extremely more 
> efficient than voice". You are incorrect.

Arguing that something doesn't work because newbies don't use it properly 
is a faulty argument. Newbies wouldn't use voice communication correctly 
either, nor would they understand when someone told them to "escort their 
five babies to organia now goddammit you twink or I'll eject your sorry 

As for your second argument that clue would be on top of the voice 
channel, this is also an altruism. That doesn't mean anything though, 
because fact remains that in netrek written communication is both sent 
(macros) and received (read) quicker than voice (and the signal to noise 
ratio is much lower).

>> How can you even begin to claim that voice communication in netrek is 
>> more efficient? Ctrl-T on the keyboard instead of holding the "send 
>> message button" and saying "Ok guys, I'm now carrying five armies to 
>> orgus, no sorry I mean Organia. Is anyone up for giving me an escort? 
>> Hello? Do you guys have sound activated?".
> If that's the only message you send ... sure.

During the game the only messages you need to send are RCD's.

>>> If you isolate voice - you end up with people NOT getting important 
>>> team messages.
>> Why? What kind of important messages? Have people missed important team 
>> messages for the past 15 years due to not having voice communication?
> Yes?

Such as?

> I think this is a problem of imagination and tradition. Because you've 
> relied on written for so long, people have made written more efficient.

I don't know when macros were introduced to netrek, but they were there 
when I started playing and by that time netrek was not very old. Since 
then, nothing much has happened to netrek communication. It's still 
perfect as is. So this thought of yours that netrek communication has 
evolved during the years to the perfect state that it's in today is not 

> I've lost what point you are arguing.

I'm letting you know why written communication is far superior to voice 
communication in netrek. You keep arguing it's not, without any experience 
or counter arguments.

> The point I disagreed with you on is that we need multiple channels.

We don't *need* any channels other than for chatting. Like I've said 
several times, it's a good idea to add voice channels to netrek, but if 
people think it's going to help game play then they are wrong, at least as 
far as experienced players are concerned. It may be easier for a complete 
newbie to play the game with voice communication though. A voice channel 
would pretty much only be good for chatting. If one or more voice channels 
are added to the game and newbie players like you think this is a new way 
to communicate in-game specific things to your team mates (instead of 
using RCD's) then that would be bad for the game.