Apparent Random Selection of What is Removed from References

[Zelmana]

Recently there has been an endless campaign against references inside of the game, yet the line where this is seems so strange. It seems that almost at random, or at complete opinion of developers, certain reference items are being removed yet others remain. Even references with similar "theming" or sharing the same reference schema if you will do not follow logic.

For example, RnD Rootbeer was changed to Getmore Rootbeer. RnD Rootbeer was a reference to A&W (AnW since we can't do & in titles).
I can see why someone might see this and remove it for reference to RnD- Research and Development, a role inside of the game. However, Mr. Gibb (faux Dr. Pepper, referencing in-game meta 'gibb'), and Changling Sting (ref'ing Changling gamemode) were untouched.

Why are the choices of what we revert or change in game to "sanitize" so loosely defined? If we want a standard why is it so gray, it almost seems as if a few Devs are ruling based off of opinion of "i like this reference" or "i don't like this reference".

Who is to stop anyone from undoing the PR work of a reference change PR? At that point it is a battle of "i don't like this reference" vs. a reverting PR of "i do"

[Alberyk]

29 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

Unless there is direction from upper management the devs make these decisions based on preferences.

Every coding change is merged by the upper management in the dev team, aka the maintainers.

For references, it depends on a lot of things. But I think that replacing stuff like space cola with more friendly lore version is better.

[limette]

i dont think anyone has done a 'bringing references back' PR; the complaint here just seems to be that a single PR has not removed every reference, and thus is favoritism? i can assure you danse probably DOESNT like changeling sting or other refs, and just as well i have yet to see a PR opened nevermind merged going "i like this reference"

[Zelmana]

Yet if we look at the multiple PRs we can see that there's a lot of back and forth on whether or not things are fine. Would it be permissable to re-add references that I like back? If not, we have no standard of references being acceptable or not.

[Marlon P.]

2 hours ago, Zelmana said:

Why are the choices of what we revert or change in game to "sanitize" so loosely defined?

Unless there is direction from upper management the devs make these decisions based on preferences. There's no right or wrong to it. You also see this mindset lore-side. It's a culture war that flares up every now and then. Do you want to keep the references?

[Marlon P.]

44 minutes ago, Alberyk said:

Every coding change is merged by the upper management in the dev team, aka the maintainers.

What i mean to say is there's, to my knowledge, no wider directives for references, so maintainers and devs make their own guidances - hence the back and forth on the matter.

[Zelmana]

14 hours ago, Marlon P. said:

 Do you want to keep the references?

Yes.

[Marlon P.]

1 hour ago, Zelmana said:

Yes

Powerful.

What do you want to happent to achieve this goal? Guidelinesfrom the bosses about naming conventions for in-universe products?

Edited July 26, 2022 by Marlon P.

[Alberyk]

14 hours ago, Marlon P. said:

What i mean to say is there's, to my knowledge, no wider directives for references, so maintainers and devs make their own guidances - hence the back and forth on the matter.

Having directives specially made for references is ridiculous and would add another layer of pointless bureaucracy. Maintainers already have the basic rundown of what is good or not for the server and can decide from there.

[Marlon P.]

4 minutes ago, Alberyk said:

Having directives specially made for references is ridiculous and would add another layer of pointless bureaucracy. Maintainers already have the basic rundown of what is good or not for the server and can decide from there.

I agree.