So... About that Turnover...

[Mal Nova]

Waff aint that the reason we get an extra stat point when we join? Because you raised the initial stats for members?

Besides! The strongest are the most devoted and some of the best writers around. Didnt Dana jump up rather quickly cuz he could write?

It is skill and determination in the end right?

[Tamsin]

Yes. Infact, personally I`m not bothered by the current system. Afterall, those who are the strongest EARNED that position through years of dedicated roleplaying.

[Jonathan Meer]

I'm glad you both place such stock in the current system, but until you've had to Staff over the Chubbs system, you really can't claim to have an intimate knowledge of its in's and out's, and its problems. A good long while ago, two Staffers raised up an incredibly long series of problems with the current system, and the rest of us essentially went, "Whoa. Damn. A lot of that's true" (with some minor/major exceptions), and it's out of that that the Turnover was crafted.

In both this current system and the newer system, you'll be able to "earn" strong positions through dedication and roleplaying. The hope is, however, that the Turnover will add another dimension to the gameplay, and sand off more than a few ragged edges.

[Aqua]

What would be freaking awesome was if there was a way to set up a widget/ calculator that would assign each relative account power based on how much was written IC to date. But that's not really realistic and I don't think that that kind of system is what Chubbs is looking for anyway, but it would reward everyone for what they've done in terms of effort thus far and simultaneously exclude the problem with the thing where people get boosts just for having an account (as with the old system). But again, that would give boosts based on amount written and that's something that staff has said is not an option. I'm just throwing out what I think would be a cool idea >.>

[Celena]

In conclusion no turnover?

[Alura]

I love how you guys pretend to have half a clue what we're going to do. It's being discussed.

If we don't do turnover, we will be instead working on improving the current system

[Aqua]

I'm sorry I'm so unintelligent. Perhaps if we were informed about what was going on we wouldn't have to "pretend."

And to defend my own statements (as i cannot speak for others):

http://www.cdbzrpg.com/forum/showthread....light=aqua

^ This was the thread I was referenicng in regards to staff not wanting to use word counts, though i am sure there are other threads with more in-depth explinations. I just remembered this one because, as you can tell, it was my question.

Silly me, pretending to have half a clue.

[Jack]

Aqua, check your PMs?

And to say there will never be a Turnover is silly. You mean to say that even in a couple of years we wouldn't be capable of implementing a new system? It's out of the question right now, but that doesn't mean it will never happen. Does it?

[Alura]

I wasn't even referring to you, Aqua. Way to get defensive.

[Celena]

Aqua, check your PMs?

And to say there will never be a Turnover is silly.

I hope you're not refering to me, because we both know I never said that.

[Jack]

I was referring to the phrases 'no turnover', 'if we don't do turnover', etc. And you did say 'no turnover'. >_<

I don't know if you guys mean just not right now or scrapping it all together when you say we won't/might not do it.

[Alura]

If we choose not to do it, we're not saying we'll never do it, if that's what you mean

[Jack]

If we choose not to do it, we're not saying we'll never do it, if that's what you mean

Yeah, that's what I thought you guys were saying. I was frightened.

[Kaden]

Nobody has said anything definitively and no one is going to say anything definitively at this point.

First priority is getting the code to work again, which will happen within the next three days (probably sooner rather than later).

After that we'll look at what we have prepared for Turnover, what needs to be finished (mostly coding stuff, which was at a bit of a standstill given the recent problems) and then make a decision from there.

[Tamsin]

While I understand nothing definite has been said, I think it`s time that something definite is said.

This state of "a nearby turnover" is having a negative effect on the entire RPG. I may not be a staff member, but it doesn`t take one to notice this. Alliances have mostly gone inactive, fewer people are roleplaying and even big events are starting to be ignored. Basiclly, it`s like someone prepared all the things he needed to move to another house, but the moving truck still hasn`t arrived yet. I know staff never said this turnover is coming soon, but that is the general belief among members. That is why some have decided to retire IC-wise until the Turnover occurs, even though it isn`t clear wether the Turnover will actually occur or not.

I`m not saying you should give a approximate time of the Turnover. I`m not even saying you should give a definite yes or no. But please, consider making an official announcement that will clarify the situation so the RPG can return to a stable run of affairs and not remain in this "expectation" of the Turnover.

[Jonathan Meer]

I'm pretty sure that if Staff knew whether or not they were going to do the Turnover, they'd let us know. The fact that they haven't signifies that they're still considering not doing it. Saying you don't want a "definite yes or no", then saying that you want an announcement to clarify the situation is essentially contradictory. At least two Staff members have made the situation perfectly clear.

Yes, this current state is pretty crappy. Hopefully the decision will be expedient, all of the coding will be finished quickly, and we'll be able to roll along in a few short months. But if not, we'll simply have to bear with it.

[Kaden]

Like I said before, we're prioritizing getting all the original features (ie. Roster and Training) up and running before moving on to make a final decision about Turnover.

I completely understand how frustrating it is to be stone-walled like this, but you guys are really being told all there is to tell.

Its blatantly obvious -- I hope -- to everyone that this has had a negative impact on activity all around. For all intents and purposes, continue as though Turnover will not be happening.

[Tamsin]

I'm pretty sure that if Staff knew whether or not they were going to do the Turnover, they'd let us know. The fact that they haven't signifies that they're still considering not doing it. Saying you don't want a "definite yes or no", then saying that you want an announcement to clarify the situation is essentially contradictory. At least two Staff members have made the situation perfectly clear.

Yes, this current state is pretty crappy. Hopefully the decision will be expedient, all of the coding will be finished quickly, and we'll be able to roll along in a few short months. But if not, we'll simply have to bear with it.

It`s not contradictory at all. An announcement to clarify the situation means to explain how are things standing now, NOT make a decision as to how are things going to go in the future.

For all intents and purposes, continue as though Turnover will not be happening.

That was the kind of message the members should receive. If you made it into an announcement, I think it would help enormously.

[Jonathan Meer]

It`s not contradictory at all. An announcement to clarify the situation means to explain how are things standing now, NOT make a decision as to how are things going to go in the future.

But this has already been said multiple times. So we have a few choices.

1) You are illiterate, and can not understand when Raditzu, Burter, or others have clarified the position already.

2) You want more than just a clarification.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and went with number two.

That was the kind of message the members should receive. If you made it into an announcement, I think it would help enormously.

This, again, has been said multiple times, ever since the Turnover was actually announced, if I remember correctly.

[Jack]

I don't remember an announcement about it. By announcement I'm sure he means Announcement: blah blah blah that would be stickied everywhere.