statement of unease

[Mecca]

All Phytotron did was spam-jack (spammed and then hijacked) the thread. There is no way Phytotron thought his second post wouldn't derail the thread... Just don't do it again, problem solved.

Sie laufen nach wohnzimmer.

[Word]

Sie laufen nach wohnzimmer.

"You run at living room"?

(Yes I know you just wanted to smuggle in "laufen")

[Z-Man]

(Yes I know you just wanted to smuggle in "laufen")

And fishing for bans. One week for him, too.

Look, you're probably all trying to convince me it's a silly special rule. You don't need to. It is a silly special rule. But actually, it's not a rule at all: it's just a cheap pre-test. The real rule is that you should not troll, and every time you use one of those words, I know you're trolling. You just save me time justifying it to myself. So don't, k? I have no problem keeping this up.

[2020]

The point of recording is so that it can be posted so people can see it, Z-man. Not to catch you out. And then you, and everyone else can have an opportunity to comment etc.

I get what you mean with having to take time to respond. However, you've had quite a few years, and to simply say the ladle is not self-organised is an example of something we could talk about. Clearly you think "crazy" is the issue, and having been a math teacher, you would have thought I'd get some kind of respect. Sounds to me like you are simply not that interested. Which is fair enough. Each to his own. I just think the idea may have a more realistic chance of being discussed reasonably by the community of players without Phyto shouting it down as soon as it is posted, and made a little easier with the initial engagement of the triumvirate. Your comments, descending from on-high, still carry a lot of weight. I am simply trying to avoid the problems that have happened in the past, and setting up an open and clear engagement so players have a reasonable chance of considering it.

For example, if the initial response is like Phyto's, something about a blanket criticism of "idiocy" or "can't be done", as levelled against the tronic progression, then there is no chance for a new mind to engage the re-invention that I am presenting, the detail, and possible mechanic by which it can happen. Doesn't this sound sensible to you?

The invitation remains open.

[sinewav]

For example, if the initial response is like Phyto's, something about a blanket criticism of "idiocy" or "can't be done", as levelled against the tronic progression, then there is no chance for a new mind to engage the re-invention that I am presenting, the detail, and possible mechanic by which it can happen.

I don't believe this a good idea can be destroyed that easily. There is clearly a lot of emotion here, and since there is also a historical undertone I've decided to do some research on Tronic, 2020, and Phytotron (because, you know, I think it's kind of fun). Disclaimer: The following is my commentary based on a number of threads I've read.

_________________ start thread summary ________________________

It appears the conflict between 2020 and Phytotron regarding Tronic can be traced to "win the Tronic Spoon!" (Mar 20, 2006). After a few preliminary discussions, 2020 opens a thread suggesting a tournament.

i have no idea how to organise the event...
since organisation isn't my strong point...
so
if you have any suggestions which requires no centralised organization
and makes use of self-organising on the part of teams...
please write here

There is a bunch of banter, then some thoughtful discussion on how to pick a time, what servers to use, and what tools to utilize for organization (wiki, IRC). There is some talk about brackets from Kamp. Lucifer takes the reigns and hammers out a tentative schedule and adds some content to the wiki. Phytotron (Oscilloscope) makes a positive contribution about organizing the tournament.

After reading a comparison to traditional sports organization, 2020 makes a call for self-organizing:

I think the major difference is, there is no set initial positions on a seeded tree. We just turn up, and who-ever turns up, self-organise their games, and a tree is formed, until two teams end up in the finals...

Lucifer then points out how unrealistic it is for everyone to show up on time and improvise a tournament. DrJoeTr0n adds:

2020, nothing personel, It seems to me that you're still trying to invent the wheel with using a square...Look, This is not an original Idea...This is NOT going to work. It hasn't before.

2020 concedes, temporarily.

More discussion on organization. The first Spoon happens with some success. Things start to get sketchy and there is a lot of confusion even with the schedule and wiki page outlining the philosophy of "Spoon." Frustration ensues.

Eventually rules will need to be created and followed.

2020 calls again for self-organization, but doesn't seem to expand on the idea; just let's it hang. Then, more discussion about problem-solving.

[S]elf organising can only go so far. If we have another one of these (I hope we do), let's have someone in charge next time.
Set rules, deadlines, the whole shebang.

2020 implores the community to think differently about organization, but offers no thoughts on how to problem-solve.

if i had been driving this thing
we would have crashed a long while back...

Interest in Spoon takes a major dive.

as an enthusiastic player from anarchic wanderers
this is a little frustrating
since we are waiting for other teams to play...

only ONE MATCH actually played in nearly 2 weeks?

And finally, things fall apart. Phytotron adds to gnorty's frustration and an avalanche of negative feedback ensues from everyone (also, page-break #2 for Phyto in that thread, haha).

2020 goes on at length about his dream of a massive self-organized tournament. Another outburst of criticism ensues, though even worse this time:

You're starting to piss me off, 2020. You don't know what you're talking about, and worse, you're too arrogant to come and say so. Thank you for the spoon, no thanks for the shitty attitude.

The thread gets forked at the bottom of page 12 and dies a painful death on 13.

_________________ end thread summary ________________________


So as it turns out, Phytotron did nothing to pervert Tronic. In fact, his commentary was hardly significant especially compared to the rest of the community. While 2020's enthusiasm was responsible for the Spoon (at that time the most successful tournament) it looks like Lucifer was the one who did a large portion of the groundwork to make it happen and laid the mechanical foundation for Ladle (see "SPOON - Lessons Learned").

But what we did see was a good idea that, regardless of criticism, became realized to some extent. We have a enormously successful tournament, even though it didn't grow to "Tronic" proportions. So even if you post an idea and it gets met with lot's of resistance, there is a chance some genuine good will come out of it. Don't be afraid to speak your mind.

[Z-Man]

The point of recording is so that it can be posted so people can see it, Z-man. Not to catch you out. And then you, and everyone else can have an opportunity to comment etc.

I wasn't suspecting any intended foul play, but you do understand that a conversation that gets recorded is a lot different than one that is not, right?

Sounds to me like you are simply not that interested. Which is fair enough. Each to his own.

Well, I'll admit I'm not interested enough to join a social network and install some software just to hear it. I don't like extensive pre-talk if it can be avoided. I get annoyed at people on IRC starting their conversation with "Can I ask a question?" YOU JUST DID THAT. Just ask your actual question right away and save us both some time, geez. I do get that someone asks 'you there?' first, because if what they want to say is long enough that they want to make sure they don't say it in vain. Anyway, I digress. Our offer still stands: post your idea here, we'll keep the heckling out. Or send it via PM. I would say the same thing if Peter Molyneux or Warren Spector or Steve Job's ghost posted here that they had a great idea they wanted to discuss via video chat: just tell your idea already. If you don't want to write it up, fine, talk about it, record it and post the recording. I hate listening to such things (see recent rant about video tutorials), but I'd do that.

I never received the invitation you sent, by the way.

[Phytotron]

(also, page-break #2 for Phyto in that thread, haha)

Woohoo! Nice catch. I never noticed it back then. I am King of the Page Breaks!

[Lucifer]

So as it turns out, Phytotron did nothing to pervert Tronic. In fact, his commentary was hardly significant especially compared to the rest of the community. While 2020's enthusiasm was responsible for the Spoon (at that time the most successful tournament) it looks like Lucifer was the one who did a large portion of the groundwork to make it happen and laid the mechanical foundation for Ladle (see "SPOON - Lessons Learned").

And, just to point out, I took the model of the Spoon and the lessons learned and created the AFL, which ran twice, and the only reason it didn't become ongoing was because of the amount of work a few people had to put into it. But people are still asking when we'll do another one....

Edit: Of course, the reason I bring that up is because 2020's idea spawned numerous events, and besides me, led to a significant upsurge in tournaments in general. Don't forget the sumo tournaments, and all the others. There's been a lot, and it all goes back to the Spoon. 2020 can't take credit for all of that, but we also can't ignore his role in making it all happen.

[2020]

Thanks for the summary, Sinewav. I remember it well. I have a slightly different take on it. I think the community tried to organise things, which turned out to be the Spoon, using traditional methods of organisation. Then we went ahead with the Tronic Ladle, using self-organising principles, challenge board etc. And by we, I mean the players just turned up and made it happen. The proof was in the players doing their part, self-organising. Is this accurate, according to your research?

(I know you were researching in order to find out why Phyto has been so antagonistic towards me, but I am more interested in progressing things...)

[2020]

The invitation is to meet one of you, Z-man Lucifer Tank Program, on g+ or skype or something. It remains open for the month. (As it happens, I am house-sitting, and the internet connection is shite, jeopardising not only a clean recording, but play this sunday at the ladle...)

I have been transparent in my communication since day 1. I am just skeptical of the linear structure of forums and its tendency to be hi/spam-jacked. And I am attempting to create the conditions for a fair hearing on a new variation, rather than a barrage of old thoughts, regurgitated and unthinkingly ejaculated (a horrible image for sure...) It seems to me, that for any chance for it to be heard, I need to interact with one of you to find out what is the basis of your skepticism, so that I can have a chance of dealing with it. Conversationally, not textually. Without bringing out the underlying assumptions and judgements, there is a very high chance of repetition, and hence, no real progress. Is this reasonable?

[Z-Man]

My scepticism comes precisely from the form of delivery you want to insist on.

[2020]

You may be skeptical of video and recording, but I am simply wanting to keep things open, and attempting to initiate a better engagement. The skepticism I was referring to was related to past responses to variations of the tronic pogression, from:

Look, from your past ideas, I extrapolate that this idea now is probably crazy. I don't know yet whether it's good crazy, bad crazy or just crazy crazy .... (And we completely ignored the crazy crazy growth plans). I need time to apply possible filters to your new idea before I can comment on it.

As well as the attempt to excite some players to producing a "business plan" sometime 2009, another attempt at trying to legitimise the process. By the way, I only recently stumbled across the school masterserver you set up, Z-man, - remember I am not a techie, far from it, and to produce the results I was aiming for, I needed help in various fields. That is, the same level of teamwork we see on the grid, extrapolated to the real world. That is still what I am hoping for.

Again, my request for chat, voice, video, whatever, is to overcome the problems we get in to with text, and especially with forums, and give ourselves the best chance of progress. It need not be you, Z-man, if you are too busy or just don't trust the medium. It is simply a request, that is all. We will make do, whatever happens.

[Z-Man]

You may be skeptical of video and recording, but I am simply wanting to keep things open, and attempting to initiate a better engagement. The skepticism I was referring to was related to past responses to variations of the tronic pogression, from:

Look, from your past ideas, I extrapolate that this idea now is probably crazy. I don't know yet whether it's good crazy, bad crazy or just crazy crazy .... (And we completely ignored the crazy crazy growth plans). I need time to apply possible filters to your new idea before I can comment on it.

Oh that. Three words for you: "One Million Players". Or was that teams? I can't remember. It should be obvious that that was one of the things in need of filtering away in the past (and to see it as an inspirational goal rather than a real one, for example).

As well as the attempt to excite some players to producing a "business plan" sometime 2009

And you kept that under similar wraps. Remember how I didn't want to know anything about it back then? That was because I didn't agree with the goals. And now I don't even know your goals. All I have are two buzzwords, 'teamwork' and 'open source'. That is not enough to make me interested in a conversation.

[2020]

Oh that. Three words for you: "One Million Players". Or was that teams? I can't remember. It should be obvious that that was one of the things in need of filtering away in the past (and to see it as an inspirational goal rather than a real one, for example).

It didn't need filtering -- it informed the structure of the ladle, the validity of it being that the ladle has maintained stability over the years. The ladle is not a centrally organised thing, and has the potential to scale to at least thousands, and perhaps millions -- something that traditional organisational processes find very hard to do (something which people tried to implement with the spoon). That is, the target of a million players was essential for the design. Not something to be filtered away. It would be like you designing the back end structure of armagetron without thinking about it being a networked game. Such a filter -- to only have a computer-locked version -- would have deprived us of this incredible game, and your subsequent design of the fortress settings.

There is much dismissal in your perception. I have not done that with you and your game design. The fact that we are still playing ladles is evidence of my thinking and faith in people. It is proof.

As well as the attempt to excite some players to producing a "business plan" sometime 2009

And you kept that under similar wraps. Remember how I didn't want to know anything about it back then? That was because I didn't agree with the goals. And now I don't even know your goals. All I have are two buzzwords, 'teamwork' and 'open source'. That is not enough to make me interested in a conversation.

I did not keep it under wraps. You made it clear you did not want to know, because it appears to be about making money. But people still don't seem to understand that the open source movement needs a properly "open source" economic system. And everyone that I know who is even vaguely committed to the open source movement, has a job. That is, they are getting paid. Partly for what they love, and partly because it pays the bills. That is, they are selling themselves. For money.

I think you've got a good enough game here. And I remember the first time I contacted you, right when I started playing the game. And I asked you what your intentions were. I needed to know you wouldn't be corrupted by money, that you would not "sell" this game once it was developed enough. That's partly why I dreamed up the Tronic Progression. It is a realistic way to generate money for this game, to honour the effort you put in as a designer, and for everyone who has contributed patches.

Is this game good enough? I still think so. And now I've come up with something that might actually fit rather nicely with open source. But only if you listen with an open mind. I don't mind intelligent, I welcome it. I don't mind critical, to a point. But closed, or dismissive, or negative means I am damned before I open my mouth. So, perhaps you can understand my reluctance in wanting to voice the idea? In this same text medium? It does not bode well... hence the invitation to break the pattern and engage on perhaps more neutral, and more human, ground.

[Lucifer]

I did not keep it under wraps. You made it clear you did not want to know, because it appears to be about making money.

Um, I wanted to follow along and potentially participate, but you kept this group of people behind closed doors and explicitly asked me not to join if I wasn't going to commit. That's "keeping it under wraps".

But people still don't seem to understand that the open source movement needs a properly "open source" economic system.

There is an "open source" economic system. ESR has written millions of words about it, as well as many others. It's there, it exists. It often involves money, but is more bartering than money.