kyres1 deputy loremaster application

[kyres1]

 Ckey/BYOND Username : kyres1

Position Being Applied For :  Deputy loremaster

Have you read the Lore Team Rules and Regulations wiki page? : Yes.

Past Experiences/Knowledge : About four-five years(if you count mid-2017 under cake and now, probably up to six) on the lore team, with two(?) resignations over those five years. About a year and a half of experience as deputy LM. Multiple years as synthdev and synth deputy. I don't know how long I've been a spriter, or spriting for the server for that matter.

Examples of Past Work : The SLF Incursion Arc, the original Purpose arcs, most synthetic wiki writing, the background summary for lore, lots of wiki work including the main page and some guides. The second Elyra rework (the one before this last one), and almost total supervision (I think) of the King of the World arc and its sub-arcs. Probably more I'm forgetting.

 

A brief note (such as a roadmap with additional descriptions) identifying the course and creative direction that you'd hopefully like to pursue : With NBT finally here, I would mostly like to delve into the lore we've been aching to see for what feels like eons now. I would like to take the ship on a spin through existing lore and try my best to encourage our best development on what we'll end up seeing next.

 

Criticism of the current state of lore : Zero ability for moderation or motivation on direction or overall planning. Besides twice-thrice daily pings about what the loremaster is doing, the team has very little sway on part of not really chipping in on the active state of lore unless directly ordered otherwise. That said, the team is fantastic at accomplishing these tasks when they're laid out before them, but there is no real way to handle every writer's needs or obligations properly when you're just one person (hence, the addition of a deputy loremaster to assist.)

 

What do you believe you can bring to the team as Deputy Loremaster : Experience, moderation and hopefully, putting some of our less active teams into gear with motivation.

Additional Comments : The decision to make this application is one that I've received plenty of mean words over. I do not care about these words anymore and honestly want to see this server prosper more than anything. Hopefully being here for years and all the work I've put in is enough to prove this, at least.

Also, my previous resignation was made due to life circumstances piling up against me. I am not intending to go into detail about these circumstances, but I am certain it won't happen again.

[Marlon P.]

I think we used to butt heads, but we've also worked together well. You brought the TCFL, which was an idea in my head and in newspapers, to life with your coding and spriting. From what i remember you work in incredible bursts of speed and energy. I also think i remember seeing you communicate well with the team and synthetics.

I only see your activity on discord when we both happen to be online at the same time and i havent seen anything bad. You seem pretty chill.

On an administrative side I want to ask what you mean when you say moderation. Are you wanting to give loredevs explicit tasks and deadlines? 

I know i and others were critical of the method used for tau ceti parties, which to my understanding was to drop a message for any loredev to write input and then post the results - which had people questioning the odd assembly of parties.

How would you address a situation like this and in general?

Also what are your thoughts on the risk of feature creep in lore? And how do we address it?

Edited January 28, 2022 by Marlon P.

[kyres1]

1 minute ago, Marlon P. said:

Are you wanting to give loredevs explicit tasks and deadlines? 

This is what we've been doing for a while now, and it's been meeting plentiful success I believe. What I mean to do is probably increase the amount of tasks that exist. Though, more deadlines usually results in more stress, and less actual work done in my experience.

6 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

moderation

The big scary topic here is moderation. Everyone tells me that supervisors are just hated by nature - they're the one who makes decisions, after all. But someone has to do it. Fortunately, I was never in the position to make decisions in this sense myself - it was always delegated to Mofo, who would handle the administrative side of things whilst I focused on the nitty gritty of lore. This is what I intend to pursue, in a sense - I will basically avoid moderating behavior wherever necessary unless it is needed from Cael, which will hopefully deflate any ideas that I'd mishandle behavior of certain team members. Failing that, I'm more than willing to pursue direct moderation anyway.

9 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

I know i and others were critical of the method used for tau ceti parties, which to my understanding was to drop a message for any loredev to write input and then post the results - which had people questioning the odd assembly of parties.

How would you address a situation like this and in general?

If I recall correctly I had nothing to do with this, because I wasn't LM at the time. On that note, I am very critical of political parties in lore, largely because there is not just little, but practically no in-game way to represent these without feeling forced or ridiculous.

However. If I were forced into this particular situation hypothetically speaking, I would likely fill the gaps myself or figure out which species devs didn't pick up the slack. They would be tasked with filling in whatever they were expected to fill in to begin with.

14 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

Also what are your thoughts on the risk of feature creep in lore? And how do we address it?

It depends where the features go. Will we see, interact with, and enjoy the features added? Then keep adding them. This is a roleplaying environment where everything from the addition of pencils to the explosion of Xanu Prime can affect the way players play the game - every single major and minor addition counts.  At the same time, lore is the rules. If you break lore, you are more than likely getting punished. We are enforcing this more and more every day by adding new restrictions on the way players can express their creativity using this lore. So, to say we don't enforce it is silly.

This leads me to believe that we should control what we focus on, and have a definitive direction in how we structure our lore moving forward.

A good example of how to proceed is this :

You are going in one direction (by merit of the NBT ship only going one place at a time.)

Thus, you build in that direction, instead of building every which way. You can endlessly worldbuild every facet of lore, but you will never obtain the same level of quality (and especially quantity) you can from hyperfocusing on what the next step is. This is, fundamentally, the only way to proceed. For so long we've sat in Tau Ceti, fleshing out a stationary area with no actual change in the substance. Now, we plot to move from this, and figuring out exactly where is one of my biggest desires.

To figure out where, you need to figure out what interests your team. You gauge interest, you weigh downsides, and bam, you're now in orbit of Burszia for example doing something the whole team is working towards. The current state of lore has the opposite of this occurring ; everyone is focused on their own sandboxes, rather than a singular sandcastle to build on.

[Marlon P.]

Hmmmmm i like these answers!

+1

[niennab]

The work of a Lore Deputy Master requires a strong ability to moderate and manage the team. From what I saw of you while I was the Synthetic Maintainer, I'm not confident that you are ready for those responsibilities again.

While you were the previous Lore Deputy Master, you failed to moderate a toxic person on the team. Moreover, criticisms levied against you prompt an explosive response where you believe that you are being attacked. You are a great writer and a creative person but the Lore Deputy Master is a management role that requires both a moderator and a team player. -1

[kyres1]

4 minutes ago, niennab said:

you failed to moderate a toxic person on the team.

If you intend to pursue this argument, please provide more details on how I messed up.

6 minutes ago, niennab said:

Moreover, criticisms levied against you prompt an explosive response where you believe that you are being attacked.

This is referring to my previous application as synthetic developer a few months ago. And, for the record, I do hold to the things I said, largely in part because I do believe I was being attacked. To use the mildest possible example I can, imagine if I told you that you crashed and burned during your tenure as synthetic developer. You proceeded to say the things I did were half-baked, without clarifying what these things were. After I defended myself, you promptly said I was misconstruing your words. This doesn't ring to me as criticisms.

Further, I am not entirely sure how my response could be defined as "explosive." Most of the criticisms in this thread went without a reply from me.

https://forums.aurorastation.org/topic/16020-kyres1-synthdev-app-2/

 

[niennab]

10 minutes ago, kyres1 said:

If you intend to pursue this argument, please provide more details on how I messed up.

This person went above and beyond acceptable behavior that went largely unpunished and for far too long. You either had the habit of never weighing in on these matters in the appropriate channels or, another point of frustration, you would weigh in on conversations being had between two maintainers while failing to read on what was being discussed. Which meant that conversations had to back track or come to an abrupt stop in order to educate someone who should have read up on the conversation themselves.

-

Even in your example you acknowledge that your answers were half-baked and without clarification. Or are these two separate topics? I would not care if someone said I crashed and burned.

I didn't want to get into your history of using slurs in the community however that, along with your response to my questions in your deputy thread is what I was addressing. If you need more examples, if someone asks you not to use a slur, you should not explode and claim that you are being attacked.

It can be blatantly read in your application that I levied criticisms against you, using exact examples (how you handled barring stationbounds to IPCs), to which you either refused to answer or pretended the conversation was regarding something else. You had an opportunity to discuss what concerns I saw but instead you took to taking offense. As such, I saw everything I needed to see in order to make a judgment then.

[kyres1]

2 minutes ago, niennab said:

This person went above and beyond acceptable behavior that went largely unpunished and for far too long. You either had the habit of never weighing in on these matters in the appropriate channels

1. You were not privy to the immediate details of the situation. This did not change through the duration of handling it.

2. Weighing in when you want me to weigh in/where you want me to weigh in =! weighing in in the appropriate channels.

Should I have kept you updated on how I was handling the situation? In my opinion, no, I do not think I should keep any one developer besides a superior in constant touch about how I plan to punish another developer of equal rank to the subject developer. Basically, think of it like this ; it's favoritism. I do not play favorites here, nor do I intend to. However, picking one person and in any capacity keeping them privy to details of another person's ongoing punishment, is by definition picking a favorite.

Should I have told you I was handling it? Yes. And, to my memory, I did. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge you received everything you needed to know from my perspective ; you knew we were investigating it, and you knew that something was going to happen. That said, I am not entirely sure what else you wanted, or continue to want from this.

10 minutes ago, niennab said:

Even in your example you acknowledge that your answers were half-baked and without clarification. Or are these two separate topics?

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Could you reword this?

23 minutes ago, niennab said:

I didn't want to get into your history of using slurs in the community however that, along with your response to my questions in your deputy thread is what I was addressing. If you need more examples, if someone asks you not to use a slur, you should not explode and claim that you are being attacked.

I'm going to sound like a broken record here, but please substantiate what you are saying. You are functionally calling me someone who should be permanently banned, and providing no evidence to this.

25 minutes ago, niennab said:

to which you either refused to answer or pretended the conversation was regarding something else.

For reference, you're at this point saying I'm :

Pretending to take offense to things you say

Lying, outright

Using slurs

Now, forgive me if I find all this a little outrageous to hold against me. There is no evidence of any of these things. To be clear, though, yes - I do find most of these accusations insulting.

[niennab]

Do not misconstrue what I have to say. Nowhere in response does it state that I expected to be let in on the private conversation. However, the issue stands that you failed to moderate a toxic person and had them present on the team long after what would be appropriate. Moreover allowing this person to stir conflict in the staff channels while you were online through inaction and without intervention was failing to address the issue.

On 28/01/2022 at 11:53, kyres1 said:

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Could you reword this?

Your hypothetical doesn't work and changes the 'reversed roles' scenario you're presenting from sentence 1 to sentence 2.

I didn't want to air your dirty laundry because the use of the word is either old, nichely understood as a slur, or seldom used on your part, but if you're looking for logs, then here. Note the 28 results. Although, before you misconstrue this point as well, this is an issue regarding your inability to take criticism, not the use of the slur. This is due to the conversation that transpired in June 2021* when I talked to you about it.

Spoiler

 

On 28/01/2022 at 11:53, kyres1 said:

For reference, you're at this point saying I'm :

Pretending to take offense to things you say

Lying, outright

Using slurs

Now, forgive me if I find all this a little outrageous to hold against me. There is no evidence of any of these things. To be clear, though, yes - I do find most of these accusations insulting.

In the end, I think all of the issues I have with your ability to moderate can be demonstrated in this portion here. You are falsely deciding what you consider to be the bulk of the conversation, or what you deem to be my perspective on the matter. If anything, I think this should be what is highlighted in why you aren't yet ready for this position. This is precisely what I saw during your previous tenure as lore deputy master and I am seeing it again here.

I think with time, you could take on this position, but not yet.

Take of it what you will, but I won't be responding further. My points can be viewed in this and the above posts.

Edited January 29, 2022 by niennab
formatting

[Alberyk]

I support this application. You have a lot of experience and helped us do a lot of wonderful stuff.

[Lmwevil]

19 hours ago, niennab said:

Do not misconstrue what I have to say. Nowhere in response does it state that I expected to be let in on the private conversation. However, the issue stands that you failed to moderate a toxic person and had them present on the team long after what would be appropriate. Moreover allowing this person to stir conflict in the staff channels while you were online through inaction and without intervention was failing to address the issue.

Your hypothetical doesn't work and changes the 'reversed roles' scenario you're presenting from sentence 1 to sentence 2.

I didn't want to air your dirty laundry because the use of the word is either old, nichely understood as a slur, or seldom used on your part, but if you're looking for logs, then here. Note the 28 results. Although, before you misconstrue this point as well, this is an issue regarding your inability to take criticism, not the use of the slur. This is due to the conversation that transpired in June 2020 when I talked to you about it.

  Hide contents

 

In the end, I think all of the issues I have with your ability to moderate can be demonstrated in this portion here. You are falsely deciding what you consider to be the bulk of the conversation, or what you deem to be my perspective on the matter. If anything, I think this should be what is highlighted in why you aren't yet ready for this position. This is precisely what I saw during your previous tenure as lore deputy master and I am seeing it again here.

I think with time, you could take on this position, but not yet.

Take of it what you will, but I won't be responding further. My points can be viewed in this and the above posts.

Slurs in early 2020, when it is the start of 2022. I do feel like there should be some sort of limit as to when you can drag shit up on people. Like sure you may have points about it being during tenure of position but giving people the chance to change is why we have appeals and stuff right? People can change? 

[Kintsugi]

On 28/01/2022 at 07:36, niennab said:

-snip-

I'm going to interject to say that presenting screenshots of Kyres saying "nibba" two years ago is hardly a fair thing to use as evidence of "slur usage". I think there are legitimate concerns and criticisms you may have of Kyres as a deputy loremaster, but that is just reaching - it's simply unfair and I don't think it can be considered a legitimate knock against Kyres as a candidate. In most contexts I would consider dredging up logs from years ago solely because of their potential to be damaging to be acting in bad faith - not saying that this is the case here, but I am saying that I don't think the practice is a good one.

[Marlon P.]

51 minutes ago, DanseMacabre said:

I'm going to interject to say that presenting screenshots of Kyres saying "nibba" two years ago is hardly a fair thing to use as evidence of "slur usage". I think there are legitimate concerns and criticisms you may have of Kyres as a deputy loremaster, but that is just reaching - it's simply unfair and I don't think it can be considered a legitimate knock against Kyres as a candidate. In most contexts I would consider dredging up logs from years ago solely because of their potential to be damaging to be acting in bad faith - not saying that this is the case here, but I am saying that I don't think the practice is a good one.

I agree. We shouldn't use old behavior as a permanent mark.

The problem would be if this behavior continued. Which i dont think ive seen. Kyres looks, from what i see, pretty chill.

[Triogenix]

A few questions.

What are your thoughts on the current major retcon system?

What are your thoughts on the current foundational lore? I mean foundational in the sense of like, how the extranet works, generalized bluespace travel/things, citizenship, ETC.

With the setting moving away from Biesel, do you see it changing from the rather basic corporate controlled melting pot it is currently, or should it remain the same?

What are your thoughts on Isolationist factions? How would you like to show these factions through the ship?

[niennab]

5 hours ago, DanseMacabre said:

I'm going to interject to say that presenting screenshots of Kyres saying "nibba" two years ago is hardly a fair thing to use as evidence of "slur usage". I think there are legitimate concerns and criticisms you may have of Kyres as a deputy loremaster, but that is just reaching - it's simply unfair and I don't think it can be considered a legitimate knock against Kyres as a candidate. In most contexts I would consider dredging up logs from years ago solely because of their potential to be damaging to be acting in bad faith - not saying that this is the case here, but I am saying that I don't think the practice is a good one.

On 28/01/2022 at 13:36, niennab said:

this is an issue regarding your inability to take criticism, not the use of the slur.

 

Edited January 29, 2022 by niennab

[kyres1]

1 hour ago, Triogenix said:

A few questions.

What are your thoughts on the current major retcon system?

What are your thoughts on the current foundational lore? I mean foundational in the sense of like, how the extranet works, generalized bluespace travel/things, citizenship, ETC.

With the setting moving away from Biesel, do you see it changing from the rather basic corporate controlled melting pot it is currently, or should it remain the same?

What are your thoughts on Isolationist factions? How would you like to show these factions through the ship?

1. it functions. It serves its intended purpose well. There's plenty of time to give feedback on major retcons internally, which is the biggest gripe when it comes to new developers swooping in to apply retroactive continuity on everything they can touch.

2. Most of this used to be a pointless effort to pursue. However, in recent times, we've banked heavily on specifics.  Some of these have grown more important over time ; for example, with the addition of a proper starmap with measurements and distance, we required proper interstellar speeds to be defined. Being nebulous, especially in the NBT, will not do us good in some cases. In others, it is best to leave things up in the air. The specifics of this aren't really fun to go into detail about, especially moderating it, but the core of what I mean is this :

Culture and how things work as it pertains to wherever we are visiting, is important. It is quite important to understand, for example, how Orepit's law enforcement responds to certain crimes, if at all should we visit it. Simultaneously, without intent to visit it, Qerrbalak may never prove useful in the same regard.

3. I do not intend to change from a corporate setting under any circumstances. It is the primary drive and most freeform portion of our lore, and in my opinion, altering this would suit the demands of very few people. As for a "melting pot," this is an extension of freedom we are granted already by nature of being in Tau Ceti. You can basically see whatever lore players feel like playing at the time, for any reason, and it'd be in character.

4. Coming from a person who personally implemented multiple isolationist factions? I don't feel strongly about them. They are not particularly harmful by sheer volume (yet) but do serve to portray lore that is otherwise hard to portray elsewhere. It's hard to portray Gadpathur's vehement hatred of Sol with the way the rest of the Coalition can tend to act, that being a melting pot just like TC. It would be difficult to justify otherwise, and this is where isolationism plays its good part in a narrative.

 

To respond to Nienna's post, I will echo this in that regard.

On 28/01/2022 at 06:36, niennab said:

Take of it what you will, but I won't be responding further. My points can be viewed in this and the above posts.

 

[Lucaken]

I don't really know about your past, but I do think dredging up 2018-era discord screenshots to supposedly prove your reaction to criticism is disgustingly petty, and not at all something that shows whether or not you are a good candidate. At the same time, I have had Deputy Loremasters lash out at me and would really like it if that didn't happen again. So, I do think Niennab is at least right in saying that a person in this position has to mantain a cool head - I get that's very ironic coming from me, but it's still a fair point. Another valid criticsm is regarding your resignations. I've been lead to understand that at least one of them were caused by personal life issues (perfectly understandable and reletable), but I don't think this is a bulletproof reason. I've seen staff take fairly long hiatuses openly and not lose their positions, assumedly because the rest of the team understands and tolerates it for a bit. Resigning twice and then coming back each time is a tad more dramatic, and Lord knows the last thing the team needs is drama.

That said, you have a very impressive list of contributions, to the point that me (relatively new generation of aurora player) still hear a lot of positive things about what you made/led, and continue to like the events and additions you are responsible for. You have even helped me out personally a couple of times, which I'm still grateful for. The only thing that stops me from giving my support is your plans - namely, the fact that they still seem a little vague. It makes it harder to compare you to other candidates who've already provided a lot of answers, so, here are some questions.

What are your thoughts/plans on the Canonization Application process, and the general idea of player-written lore?

In some of your answers and original post you talk about managing the team so that they are working towards one project, and not on their own sandboxes. What would you do if a team or a writer didn't want to participate, or just generally disagreed with this style of development?

Related to this, how would you split up the time teams have between their own projects, and so-called 'lore team' projects?

Should a writer experience severe burn-out from your management style or otherwise, what would be your next steps?

Thanks, and good luck!

[kyres1]

1 hour ago, Lucaken said:

Resigning twice and then coming back each time is a tad more dramatic, and Lord knows the last thing the team needs is drama.

I don't see how this is particularly dramatic. This is nearly five years of time we're talking about here.

1 hour ago, Lucaken said:

The only thing that stops me from giving my support is your plans - namely, the fact that they still seem a little vague. It makes it harder to compare you to other candidates who've already provided a lot of answers, so, here are some questions.

This is something that gets me scratching my head, personally. As in, I agree - most of the things I proposed here are pretty vague, admittedly. I'm happy you came along to ask for specifics.

1 hour ago, Lucaken said:

What are your thoughts/plans on the Canonization Application process, and the general idea of player-written lore?

For now? Less immediate focus. These are really secondary to NBT development and getting the NBT rolled out good and proper is, to no surprise, my number one priority no matter the scenario.

After it's "settled" I'll focus on putting canonization apps in a certain time of the year or months that are convenient to developers. That way, they are only accepted/reviewed during these times, so things either A. don't pile up or B. don't overwhelm devs 24/7.

1 hour ago, Lucaken said:

In some of your answers and original post you talk about managing the team so that they are working towards one project, and not on their own sandboxes. What would you do if a team or a writer didn't want to participate, or just generally disagreed with this style of development?

If a lore writer does not wish to participate in the direction we are moving in with lore, then they more than likely would not apply to begin with. If, by some tiny chance they applied just to change everything, they would not fly long, particularly because we are moving in a direction that does not cherish constant retcons.

If a lore writer disagrees, that is their decision to make. Participation and disagreement are very different, actually. I have participated and assisted with many projects I did not agree with, both as synthetic developer and LM. In a sense, everything is torn to shreds in editorial. Someone will find things to disagree about with virtually anything you say, and this is healthy for the writing environment we have. I do not intend to punish people for disagreements like this. On the other hand, refusing to participate in basic team functions is something I've never seen a developer actually do, even the angriest ones who have disagreed the most.

2 hours ago, Lucaken said:

Related to this, how would you split up the time teams have between their own projects, and so-called 'lore team' projects?

I would let the developers decide their own time. In my experience, constant deadlines for anything but the most important stuff is downright agonizing. Most things truly aren't important enough to split time on, and the things that are have a majority agreement from the team to pursue.

2 hours ago, Lucaken said:

Should a writer experience severe burn-out from your management style or otherwise, what would be your next steps?

I learned the remedy to burnout about two years ago : just take a break. If you care enough, you'll come back, and most people do. If one remains inactive for more than a few months, I tend to inquire as to why before anything. Punishment for inactivity is rare and I don't foresee this changing, however, I do yearn for set activity deadlines where people must do something, anything, for their tenure. The specifics of this I would say are up to six months of inactivity resulting in action. Even three or four months of inactive development is very harmful to a species' playerbase.

 

 

[The7thLain]

Kyres has to me, shown himself to be capable of the task of being a deputy loremaster in the past, during a time when his boss, the loremaster, was often unavailable. At this time, many of the responsibilities of not just the deputy loremaster, but the senior loremaster fell onto him often, yet he conducted himself well and kept cohesion and direction in the teams despite the turbulence of the day and small crises which seemed to crop up every other week. I will not say that he was perfect then or is now, he frustrated me at times with his decisions, but everyone has flaws and things they need to work on, some of which have been pointed out in this thread already. Even with these though, I believe in his character and proven ability to effectively moderate and coordinate the team as he did during the King of the World arc, the largest and most involved arc in the history of our server. Furthermore, I think that he will better perform in the position than his last tenure, as he will have more support from the lore team and the loremaster proper, since everyone across all teams generally has a stronger involvement and presence than they did when Kyres last resigned the position.

I can in good faith say that Kyres is my preferred choice for the position of Deputy Lore Master.

+1 haha nice guy

[Lucaken]

I'm satisfied with most of your answers, and after a couple of more days thinking about it, I'm happy to give my +1. I think you'd do a good job considering your experience and general drive to make things better.

That said, I am not very happy about your ideas for canonization applications. While giving more breathing space to developers is good, forcing applications to be reviewed only in specific times a year would be alienating to a lot of players who contribute lore - largely because you might have to wait even more than 3+ months, while the developers do whatever they want/are required to do. It discourages players and might make the writers view submissions like chores, which is the opposite way we should be going. I heavily disagree with this policy and hope it's either tweaked or just straight chucked out for something a bit more encouraging to both sides (as their current state is not great, either).

[Mofo1995]

I'm a big fan of Kyres. They're a good friend, and a talented writer. They were unbelievably helpful as my deputy, and I think they would be a good fit for Cael and that they would be able to gel well together. 10/10 Mofo seal of approval +1

[Caelphon]

This application is accepted! Congrats on your promotion.