Dear Sirs and Madams,Argonath is a community, and that's because its has the players on one side and management on the other side both roles are irrelevant, if you don't have the other one, so yeah we all have the power.
I am on a quest to find what would be the rights of the public or non members in privately setup t groups which are focused on generally supporting the Argonath RPG project.
An NGO (non governmental organisation) group which focuses on supporting members of the community whilst also marketing the product of Argonath RPG to those outside of the community.
Some groups which I can name for example include - BCA / Bureau of Citizens Advice.
Generally my feels are that the public has a powerful say in such groups, but.. really... does the public even have any rights? What says they get a say? What is the power of the public views and perceptions?
Your feedback would be most appreciated.
- Eugatnom Etnom.
While I don't think a complete democracy can work in argonath, too many factors that lack. It's important that every individual does have at least an express of opinion. Actually having influence on the decisions made by developers would be desirable since a dev can't always be 100% right about everything and multiple sides form a complete picture... But for everyone's voice to be a tool of political persuasion becuse everyone's has to be respected, that would backfire immensely.
I've concluded in the past that argonath's hierarchy can be described as an oligarchy: A really small group of people having all the power and knowledge to really make a difference, but also the responsibility. And responsibility is something you'd rather leave up to the devs, not.. everyone.
Am I even answering the right question? :rolleyes:
Argonath is a community, and that's because its has the players on one side and management on the other side both roles are irrelevant, if you don't have the other one, so yeah we all have the power.
Democracy is good only on paper, its impossible for all members of this community to have same positions, just like its impossible in RL, that all citizens of one country have the same positions or jobs.
We all have the freedom of speech, that you might know best as you criticizes many groups, ideas and from what i seen when you are criticizes you burst in the flames.
@Monte
So no, groups and players unless their official, active and/or management/administration don't really have any power or say as much as we think we do.
On the other side you sir are a cyber bully, demanding a response after 50 views is just...people need time to think about what you asked them.
Sorry but could you reword that?
I feel that any and all groups that say they work for the public, or the community / in the open should be ready for public criticism or support and not just tell them to go away / they have no say in it.
Monte's just trying to create a perspective for at least himself on what the general pseudo-political flow is like.
It looks like he's trying to find loopholes so to BS groups through, but really he's just curious.
That's why it's surprising to see 50 people don't care before 1 does, when it's about fundemental rights.
Sorry but could you reword that?
I think you misunderstood my point.
I was asking say if a group were to be setup, would it be the public right or not to try suggest, help or even criticize the group? or is it wrong for the public to expect such?Everyone knows the community isn't a democracy but what is a democracy anyway but if a fancy word for an elected dictatorship. (but let's not discuss too in depth about politics)
i dont care. posted this just because you care
I was asking say for example if a group were to be setup, a group which claims to be in the public interest... would it be correct of the public to expect such liberties such as suggesting / trying to support it (the group) or to even feel as if they can criticize the group and or some of its decisions ? or is it wrong for the public to expect such?Yes, it would be correct.
Why isn't it? That's the question I would ask. Surely, through the appropriate channels that is. Anyone should have the right to suggest, help and/or criticize any group.
This isn't Communist China unfortunately, IMHO it seems some individuals are concerned with trying to run/change their group without public issues concerning them. We all know the notable "omg you dm'd us in that last roleplay, not recommended 0/8 m8" post on many family topics in the past. Of course falsified claims are not morally correct and without any evidence, it can be easy just to brush aside these claims. But when groups go to extreme lengths to protect their image from being criticized and then be made to change their vision or play style, I don't see why the public shouldn't be able to.
Isn't this a fundamental value that we take for granted in modern society?
Stop posthunting then.