Ladle 37 - Discussion Thread

[Desolate]

The AFL was the first fortress league that we had here. There's been more after that, and a lot of people were against it after these occurred.

[Lucifer]

Ignoring actual facts about what? I wasn't aware we were arguing anything, or that any "unfactual" assertions were made. Fercrissakes, I only suggested a format for organised league play, something I think would be a) easily implemented, b) solve a lot of the stupid problems and controversies encountered recently, and c) fun (for those who like fortress tourneys, anyway).

Oh well.

You suggested a format that was tried at least three times. The first was the Spoon, and the second two attempts were the AFL. It failed all three times. The Ladle has succeeded every single time.

Those are the facts.

[Phytotron]

Well gee, you really put me in my place.

[sinewav]

So why not make them every month. So Why not have all team leaders meet on IRC, say about 15-30 minutes before the ladle.

After thinking hard about this for the last few days, and considering the really good suggestions so far, I'm in favor of moving from quarterly voting to monthly voting. Here are a few important reasons why I think this should be implemented:

• --The current voting system is very, very successful. I really believe it is the best tool we have to make decisions and solve problems. It involves the community, doesn't exclude anyone, and doesn't have the drawbacks of a committee run system (elections, trust).
  
  --We can turn the obligatory drama thread(s) that happen after many Ladles into positive threads where we can discuss ways to improve the game - much like the official voting discussions already do.
  
  --These same threads can be used to sort out issues with "problem players." Rather than an elected group handing out bans, we can review evidence and vote on possible punishments as a community (think of it as a trial by jury)*
  
  --Monthly voting will give teams more incentive to stick together and stay engaged in the process.

I also agree with 2020 when he says "we don't quite make enough of team captains." Although I'm a bit late to the Ladle, I do know some of it's history from the wiki. It used to be that team captains showed up in IRC just before the opening rounds to make final preparations. We could really use that commitment again. If a situation arises between the time the brackets are randomized and the opening rounds, this would be a great opportunity for the community to solve it.

Some people are apprehensive about the voting system; they see it as too much change. What's to stop even more, rapid change when we triple the number of voting instances? Well the truth is, most of the things we've voted for so far have been superficial (sever names, daylight savings time, etc...) Switching to smaller holes was the biggest change since Ladle 21 (when we switched to 6v6). But if you look over the past voting results, you see there isn't as much change as you think. And most of the votes are very lopsided; we rarely have a close vote. I believe this will continue. While the frequency will increase, I believe the number of topics per vote will decrease.

It really is a good game we have here. We just need to tighten up the system a little.


*Personal note: I really don't like the idea of banning anyone from Ladle. I would rather people who have wronged the community voluntarily step aside for a Ladle or two. In my opinion, there are very few things a person should be banned for.)

[PsYkO]

Agreed Sine and Kyle, But I don't think a meeting 15-30 min before the ladle would solve anything. I think this "meeting" needs to be held days in advance and all decisions are made final by Thursday when the challenge board comes out. The only pro I see doing it 15-30 min before is the higher chance of leaders attending and the real time discussion. Putting it up as a secret forum topic for a few days allows leaders to completely mull over the topics, possibly try to persuade (8 angry men style), and makes sure every leader has an ample opportunity to voice their opinion (and feedback!)

This 15-30 min before meeting could be an addition to this, but I don't see it very useful standing on its own.

[Titanoboa]

I don't think a meeting 15-30 min before the ladle would solve anything.

Actually I think that would've been able to stop this post-ladle-36 mess.
We would've met up in irc, dlh would've mentioned the team (players) swapping and the other team capts would've said "Gee SP, that's a joke right?", SP would've defended the idea and the team capts would've said "Well think of it this way...", and then explained why it was a bad thing to do. SP would've replied "Heh, didn't think of it that way, brb gonna fix the brackets back" and we all would've saved a lot of time.
Alternatively if SP's representative for some reason didn't read or understand the valid explanation of why to change it back, the team captains would have a quick vote in the irc and the majority decision would decide what to do.

45 mins would actually be better imo. 30 minutes can fly by pretty quickly if a problem arises.

The worst part of ladle 36 for me was the long hours before it started. We couldn't really do anything about the situation.
Being able to bring it up for the other teams before the ladle would've been worth gold.

[PsYkO]

I disagree due in part to probably half the complainers citing most of their anger was due to us shrugging it off as not a big deal, not the actual act. Their words not mine.

[kyle]

This 15-30 min before meeting could be an addition to this, but I don't see it very useful standing on its own.

That is the way i see it. Having the normal vote and discussion thread all kept the same, having the vote ending the day brackets are made.

And then have this Discussion around 30-45 minutes before hand in IRC and with 15 minutes until the ladle have the Vote If any issues evolve from the time of creating the challenge board to the time of the event.

[sinewav]

...Vote If any issues evolve from the time of creating the challenge board to the time of the event.

Exactly. Think of it as an extra security measure or fail-safe that we'll use rarely. If we do use it, it will probably be to sort out server issues, which are the most likely place we'll have a problem (where to play when this or that server is down?).

[2020]

sinewav's suggestion with the 15 mins before seems sensible
and it will help us start on time

best score within 45 mins also
but i guess this is a voting issue

as for the tronic progression
in the immortal words of the black philosopher dude in matrix
"comprehension is not a requisite of cooperation"
(took me ages to find it
cornel west
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornel_West)

don't worry psychobabble or whatever your name is
i have apologised elsewhere for attempting to use this game as a vector for social alignment

[apparition]

I like monthly votes by team captains and do it on Ladle Thursday. I also like team captains meeting 15-30 minutes before the Ladle. I ALSO like 2020's philosophical meanderings Small Book Big Think ftw.

[sinewav]

I also like team captains meeting 15-30 minutes before the Ladle.

Let's just say 30 since people are often late.

[apparition]

Along with the 4 Seeds System described here: Ranking/Seed System for future ladles, I think having Team Leaders vote on the Thursday before the Ladle and 30 minute before the actual Ladle would work extraordinarily well!

Future question: What types of changes could be allowed after 30 minutes before the Ladle?

[syllabear]

I presume this would be a trial of seeding, and if it were passed, the default for ladle 38 (not the next, the one after this) would be non-seeded, and it would be up to a successive vote to determine if another trial, or further implementation of seeding were accetable?

As for the time before the ladle, I am sure any issues raised would be those that could be discussed and altered in a short time, since there wouldn't be alot of time after everyone arrives, and agendas were discussed.

[sinewav]

As for the time before the ladle, I am sure any issues raised would be those that could be discussed and altered in a short time...

Yes. There might never be a time where a serious discussion is needed. Just think of it as an emergency backup plan - important even if rarely or never used.

And I think we can vote to have seeding for next Ladle. That's reasonable. But you guys in that thread need to solidify a system before we can add it to the list of topics. So get back to work.