kyres1 deputy loremaster application, 1 month later edition

[kyres1]

This application aims to be far more verbal with things willingly left out of the previous. I implore the reader to read the whole post.

Some stuff copypasted from

but answers to Trio's questions will be different, duh.

 

Ckey/BYOND Username: kyres1

Position Being Applied For: Deputy loremaster

Have you read the Lore Team Rules and Regulations wiki page?: Yes, I helped write it. apparently this wasn't on my last application.

Past Experiences/Knowledge: A very long tenure as deputy loremaster, synthdev, synth deputy, and spriter. I've been staff consistently since 2017.

Examples of Past Work: Hard to estimate what would be relevant here. For the position, I would say my biggest reference would be coordinating/hosting KING OF THE WORLD start to finish, being responsible for proposing the current setting (NBT), and solidifying a lot of very important themes in our setting. I also restructured a lot of the new player experience by changing the main pages for the wiki and writing a lot of the starting guides, as well as the assets for them ground-up.

 

Trio's questions below:

1) Criticism of the current state of lore
 

Spoiler

Plenty.

We run the largest staff department that, despite being so massive, has no stationary obligations (with exception of whitelist reviews for species devs), no vetting, no prerequisites, sparse internal documentation support, terrible inter-team cooperation, a variety of redundant slots, no content or review bottleneck, and no on-server quotas/participation expectations.

To pile onto the management and organization issues above, we sit upon a still-disorganized hellish chasm of writing. It has no direction, no future plots, no narrative and no collective drive. It is also growing bigger, and more disorganized and directionless by the day.

The situation is untenable. It is getting to the point where I'm seeing swaths of returning regulars simply give up on trying to catch up with what they've missed or what's been retconned. The crown jewel of our server, our prized canonicity and interactive player-led history, has been made hostile to invested or prolonged consumption. There is just that much shit that has been added or changed with zero impact on the game.

To wrap this point up, I simply do not see counterpoints to any of this. I never even see baseless claims. I just receive the same treatment I've always received - dismissal and confusion to these very obvious, factual problems. It would make me very sad to say that these are dismissed out of self-serving intentions by those who hear it, but I don't spin falsehoods. It is what it is.

2) What do you believe you can bring to the team as Deputy Loremaster

Spoiler

The problems are highlighted above with very realized intent. I intend to solve every one of them. I intend to do so with the very same passion and drive that led me to build what I've got today.

3) A brief note (such as a roadmap with additional descriptions) identifying the course and creative direction that you'd hopefully like to pursue
 

Spoiler

I love roadmaps. Let's make one right now.

The immediate attention I owe to the team as of applying is managerial. So, a creative direction, as of the beginning of my tenure, is ultimately irrelevant until I fix issues endemic to the team itself. A simplistic roadmap will go like this, and optimally see fruition within months. Not years - months. Two, maybe.

A. Starting off, slot values. What slots are necessary? What lore takes absolute precedent over others in terms of attention? This is pretty obvious at first, but a more elaborate look is necessary.

B. After that, dice extraneous slots. Deputy slots for certain teams, such as Diona and Vaurca, could be closed. This doesn't mean to boot the people who have them - instead, do not re-hire new ones. An exception for this could be made to accept the re-application of existing deputies, if they so choose to step down, therefore making sure they aren't hogging a slot of power simply to keep extra hands.

Now that volume-of-ideas can be expected to stabilize moving forward, we can reduce the static of everyday chatter. Conversations, over a long period of time, will begin to become more personally impactful and shorter between the devs - a stark contrast to an otherwise loud lore chat.

C. Establish vetting. Moving forward, vetting for new applicants is a necessity. This is a position of authority which is ultimately volunteer-based and holds extensive sway in the community in any role. To not have it vetted in some fashion is lacking immense foresight, and my own inaction in the past is partly to blame for this.

D. Establish obligations. Between heaps upon heaps upon mountains of content additions, it's obvious the team is and always has been capable of contributing time to the server. We are long overdue to ensure that these contributions are actually contributory. Failing to meet these should bring advisory, insight and definitely support for those who can't keep up.

E. Establish a git review system. This has been discussed, at length, with heads for time immemorial - first @Skull132, afterwards @Arrow768. The optimal outcome is exactly as git works - a contained, small amount of people have final "merge" privileges, and every relevant staff member otherwise can approve. Therefore, in this case, 3 people (so one team can't push everything they want) are required to "approve" a content addition or change - whereas only one of two people - the loremasters - can actually give the final, conclusive approval. Since the team in this scenario is aimed to decline in size, these numbers can obviously change.

F. Decide what direction we take the logistics of our wiki to. As of now, we sit on an aging, poorly-integrated site through Mediawiki. More modern, accessible and integrated alternatives, such as Github Wikis exist elsewhere. If I'm being honest, migrating our entire wiki to one of these things is an inevitability, but in terms of "my roadmap," this is something that logically I might be the only person equipped with the time to do, whether loremaster or not. So it has to go here for priorities sake.

G. Construct tangible event guidelines and helpers for ingame contribution and loredev power in-round. While giving loredevs any sort of role ingame has always been a touchy topic, everyone can still agree that they at least need to know what they can and can not accomplish. Which is to say, a lot more than you might think. I can say with confidence (and a bit of pride) that, besides Alberyk, nobody in this community knows how to help with this better than me.

H. Begin checking and scrutinizing activity. Loredevs who go years without playing singular rounds are no longer developing for the server, and thus have no reason to hold their position.

I. Conclude decisively what we're doing with news articles. Their disorganization, length, detachment and irrelevance has been a problem for as long as I have been on the server; addressing how we convey lore external to the ship in a better way is an absolute necessity.

J. Address internal documentation in a centralized format. Google has a lot of organizational tools besides docs that could help loredevs keep track of staff-exclusive information in a way that isn't overwhelming. Given Github Wiki is considered, this alongside forums is also a sensible way to keep track of documentation outside of third-party stuff like Google's tools.

K. Last but not least, continuing to refine the player experience all the while.

That above is a non-exhaustive list of just a few of the things that would be considered on a roadmap for me. These points would be addressed one way or another, seeing as they touch on yet again critical problems.

4) Your thoughts on me as a loremaster, and how best you think you can assist me

Spoiler

My thoughts on you are that you're brand new to the slot. I am confident nothing will change from our current situation unless either you gain experience for the contrary, or have someone at your side who has the experience in the first place. Neither will happen without myself or very few other people applying to help.

Now, we have already disagreed some times as to the proper way of things. These were highlighted when you posted your critique on my application. To say the least I still disagree substantially with the quotes you have from that thread. I never really got an answer in the final week from you, either, wrapping up that interaction.

Still, I don't find this to be an obstacle. Every loremaster before you has had plenty of disagreements with my way of thinking; even @Caelphon ultimately went on to have ideas that betrayed my ideal to the core. This is like political ideology lore, or for example giving Biesel a military proper. But that much was, and still is beneath me - I'm here to help in this position, and I'm here more importantly to give to the community. So, in a less elaborate way of putting all that, you could say I don't really care who you are, as much as I care about contributing to the server, and if you'll allow me.

 

Notes below :

Comments on the "New Blood" argument :

Spoiler

I'm beginning to see the idea of "new blood = better" passed along a lot. It's getting funny the type of people I'm hearing say it as an excuse to turn others down. This is a harmful mindset. It's the easiest, lowest punch that ultimately means nothing. To explain why, consider first why we're intending to give management positions - namely, ones with complete advisory and control over the creative direction of the server, to "new blood?" Assuming this can be answered, which I'm confident it can't be, this is missing... a lot.

"New blood brings new ideas." What new ideas? Has anybody demonstrated something markedly new for the direction of the server? It's kind of hard for someone inexperienced to tell the difference. Why expect that of them? Moreover, are these new ideas supposed to be better? If so, why? What about the stuff we're neglecting?

"New blood brings new talent." we unarguably have plenty of writing. Does anybody new demonstrate a will to do anything but write? I don't see many other talents being paraded around as a loredev's drive.

We're at a stage where we've disassembled and detached ourselves from the most basic obligations of being volunteers to contribute to a community at this point. I do not see how adding more people who do not recognize that will solve those issues - only how they will make it worse.

With all that said I find it to be a hilariously self-serving statement to say any one community member's value is lessened by their age in the community. If you can give me good reasoning as to why not, feel free.

Additional words :

Spoiler

Whether I get this position or not will ultimately not change my contribution in the community, so the issues I brought here will be addressed by me no matter the position I'm in. Right now I'm trying to tackle only a few. The position would let me attack these problems from far more angles than those that already exist.

The most important takeaway of this application to any reader is that all of these issues are apparent to any writer who has been present for a prolonged duration of time, or is not actively exacerbating the problems. If it's not known to you, it's as good as never having been written - that's wisdom imparted from absolutely ancient names at this point.

 

[La Villa Strangiato]

Obviously, I'm in competition for the same position; it's a given that any critique I provide can be taken with a grain of salt, particularly when it's negative. With that out of the way...

I think Kyres is a skilled coder, a talented spriter, and has a plethora of ideas that he was able to effectively implement to widespread approval and praise, as evidenced by King of the World. He's had a long tenure on the lore team, and he continues to have a productive stay on the development team. With that in mind, one of the reasons I can't support this app is because, as I just mentioned, Kyres has had a long tenure on the lore team.

You argue that one requires experience to be a properly good contributor to the server. Of course, adding good code, sprites, writing, etc. requires some previous developed skill, but I think you miss the point. When some tout an interest in new blood and new talent, this is because we are a collaborative roleplaying experience. The idea is that anyone can contribute to the code, the lore, artwork, sprites, and so forth. Previous developers have been in support of "new blood" because that has always been the point of an independently-run game server with its own plot, because you can tap the playerbase for ideas. Why should this team be a club comprised of only "experienced" people? From an outsider's perspective, a lot of the current staff team in general tends to rotate in and out of various positions. Why should only a certain subsect of people be permitted to create for this server?

But when I contemplate this question in relation to your answers, I come to the other reason I can't support this app; you are incredibly arrogant, and consistently frustrating to communicate with. Your points in this app are clearly and thoroughly laid out, but in a chat you argue in circular, long-winded manners where it can be difficult to determine your point, and when someone expresses they don't understand your point, you get obviously annoyed and talk down to people. I've been on the receiving end of this behaviour; I recall when I misinterpreted/forgot what a question on the lore applications was supposed to mean and assumed it was a yes or no question. Instead of quickly cluing me in what I was supposed to write in the field, you publicly pinged me to cryptically ask me if I was supposed to be ironic, and proceeded to not succinctly explain what could easily be worded as "you have to justify your application". It was a bizarre, awkward, and even a little embarrassing! I felt like I was being condescended the entire time.

And it's not that someone shouldn't be confident in their abilities, but why do you think you know the best lore teams to reduce deputies on? It's obvious to anyone that Diona lore is incredibly stagnant, but Vaurca lore has always had a fairly active playerbase and not to mention it's more intimately tied to Biesel, the Hegemony, and the Federation. Why knock down their slots?

And some of your plans for progression aren't irrelevant; I, for one, would love a wiki that doesn't run on just basic HTML styling. But in some of these I think you forget that discussing "obligations" is more suited to a proper game development studio, and less so an SS13 server where people are volunteers, doing stuff with their time that's fun. Do we need to kick people in the ass to make them do things to make it fun for people? Absolutely. But implementing actual, measured quotas is definitely something I don't want to place on the shoulders of the team.

Overall, I'd like to see some of the plans you have for structure and direction implemented, but I don't think you should do it as deputy loremaster.

[GeneralCamo]

33 minutes ago, La Villa Strangiato said:

But in some of these I think you forget that discussing "obligations" is more suited to a proper game development studio, and less so an SS13 server where people are volunteers, doing stuff with their time that's fun.

In my time of open source development, I have seen positives happen when obligations are set forth. It keeps developers on their toes, and ensures a high bar of quality. Ideally the obligations are light, but there needs to be some bar of quality control to ensure consistent contributions.

 

 

I agree with your directional nature, but my concern here Kyres is that, as LVS has said, you are a veteran. You had the chance to do this long ago. You had the chance to bring this up in a public matter outside of the application process. While I respect you immensely for admitting your mistakes, I can't let go of those ideas in my head.

Edited September 3, 2023 by GeneralCamo

[kyres1]

4 hours ago, La Villa Strangiato said:

You argue that one requires experience to be a properly good contributor to the server. Of course, adding good code, sprites, writing, etc. requires some previous developed skill, but I think you miss the point. When some tout an interest in new blood and new talent, this is because we are a collaborative roleplaying experience. The idea is that anyone can contribute to the code, the lore, artwork, sprites, and so forth. Previous developers have been in support of "new blood" because that has always been the point of an independently-run game server with its own plot, because you can tap the playerbase for ideas. Why should this team be a club comprised of only "experienced" people? From an outsider's perspective, a lot of the current staff team in general tends to rotate in and out of various positions. Why should only a certain subsect of people be permitted to create for this server?

You're overlooking some key words here. I'm criticizing the implication of new blood leading our team. This is a head staff position. This is a small subset of positions which, by their very definition, call for people with experience. You're literally dodging every possible method of just telling me why it's a good idea in the first place, only to claim I'm trying to gatekeep one of the most important roles our staff team has in the first place. Of course I want experienced people in the position. I gave reasons as to why. Why do you want new people in it? Are you going to give me a reason?

4 hours ago, La Villa Strangiato said:

But when I contemplate this question in relation to your answers, I come to the other reason I can't support this app; you are incredibly arrogant, and consistently frustrating to communicate with.

Thanks. This is a great thing to hear from... another applicant, of all people. I'm not sure why this is even allowed, but I had to put up with scrutiny from other applicants with the person who got the position, so I'm guessing this is something to look forward to now. I guess this is another one of those blatant in-your-face remarks that I'm supposed to brush over and disregard? How about you be a little less passive aggressive in general? Is that too forward?

The rest of @La Villa Strangiato's reply here is accusatory. So, for sake of total clarity, like I've had to do a number of times before, let me actually tell the reader - and the reviewer of this application - what occurred to paint such a conceited image of me in this reply.

Spoiler

So. That's the entire exchange, through and through. I was candid with you and pinged you in public. Why? Well, you... posted it publicly? Do you not want... public feedback? Why do I need to DM you the most basic request explaining your intentions?

You've been in this community long enough and claim to be invested enough in its lore to know that discourse into additions is not only frequent, but almost certainly boils down to the most basic question. "Why is it needed?" "What does it provide?" It doesn't matter if it's code, sprites, writing, events, whole ass arcs, anything we can measure as contribution ultimately has a reason behind it. So, when you are confronted on the application format to include a reason, what possibly makes you think you aren't at least going to get scrutiny by just refusing to answer? What the hell am I doing justifying all the stuff I'm adding if you don't have to?

Was I condescending? Well, I don't think so, but I was definitely stating the obvious, and I definitely felt taken aback by the disregard you have for the addition you sought to implement.

Was I cryptic? No. My words are pretty clear. I'm straight with the things I say for a reason.

Was I wrong for pinging you in public? Absolutely not. That sounds like a problem you should take to the administrators if you think someone has a bad attitude with you in a public channel, so much so to discomfort you enough to make a fuss about it later. On their application... for the position you're also trying to apply to. That sure is a convenient time to bring it up. You had a lot of opportunities to make this seem rude, discomforting, embarrassing, whatever else in the 2 1/2 weeks that have elapsed since. Why bring it up now, even assuming the rest of what I said is to be disregarded?

4 hours ago, La Villa Strangiato said:

And it's not that someone shouldn't be confident in their abilities, but why do you think you know the best lore teams to reduce deputies on?

I didn't say I did? You're ignoring the "such as" part. This is referencing all species slots. All are subject to closure depending on urgency and importance. Moreover, don't pretend we don't have an obvious chain of influence established by the presence, contribution, and activity of certain teams as opposed to others. It is completely disregarding the efforts of people who have committed immense amounts of time to their work to simply say that they are seen with complete ambivalence in comparison to any other team. Some people pull more weight than others. There is nothing to gain from pretending otherwise.

4 hours ago, La Villa Strangiato said:

And some of your plans for progression aren't irrelevant; I, for one, would love a wiki that doesn't run on just basic HTML styling. But in some of these I think you forget that discussing "obligations" is more suited to a proper game development studio, and less so an SS13 server where people are volunteers, doing stuff with their time that's fun. Do we need to kick people in the ass to make them do things to make it fun for people? Absolutely. But implementing actual, measured quotas is definitely something I don't want to place on the shoulders of the team.

Huh? Wait, why am I a green name then? Damn, these deadlines sure suck! I hope I don't get a deadline for the next two-hundred hour project I work on. Again.

That's sarcasm. It's sarcasm because this is the worst thing you could say. Let me explain why.

First of all, you imply there is existing obligation. As it stands, and as it has been for time immemorial, there is none to be seen here. The position is unvetted, unmonitored, largely unsupervised (even during stricter tenures), and holds total power over the direction it is entitled to. That's the funny part. There isn't a catch for being a lore developer. There never was. Every other staff team functions just fine with obligations out the ass. CCIA is sitting here crunching the most mind-numbing IRs weekly, administrators are taking hundreds of tickets a day oftentimes, moderators are doing the same with literally no fun things to make up for it, wikimaints are a thankless role, and don't even get me started with my own department in development! We're practically churning hundreds of hours-long projects as a matter of routine at this point. All the while, we're still subject to the whim, will and request of the people who - get this - don't have any of that weight.

Now, I don't blame you for not knowing that. You've never been lore. How would you possibly know? The most you'll receive is the complaining and trickle-down from a lore developer. But the fact of the matter is that nobody is holding a gun to anybody's head. Nobody is working on an expectation here that they themselves did not set. The solemn, singular exception to this was deadlines I set over the course of literal months in KOTW, and that was a single case. It was originally intended to work with the NBT - a project so singularly large that it dwarfs every other accomplishment this server has achieved once over.

This all tells me that you have a preconceived notion that :

1. The other staff teams aren't persistently, constantly, and proactively working literally overtime to do their respective parts

2. Lore, as our largest department by strides, can not shoulder the most fundamental of obligations, such as commitment to the server - content with effects, events, and other specifics noted above

3. Lore is already busting their ass with wide-sweeping coordinated projects.

None of this is true. If the second is true, then you must justify why we have them. At that point, don't ask me! Ask the person who keeps the department around. That would be, looping back again, the literal host of the server.

4 hours ago, La Villa Strangiato said:

Overall, I'd like to see some of the plans you have for structure and direction implemented, but I don't think you should do it as deputy loremaster.

I don't think you should get it either. I would hate to be denied off of precedent of Trio's misconceptions as my previous competitor - but simply being chosen won't exactly make your statements right. It also won't make you more right than the last dozen people who chose vitriol, exaggeration and victimizing to decry others. It sure happens a lot. I can only hope you wisen up to the funny game of social politics you're partaking in here.

 

4 hours ago, GeneralCamo said:

I agree with your directional nature, but my concern here Kyres is that, as LVS has said, you are a veteran. You had the chance to do this long ago. You had the chance to bring this up in a public matter outside of the application process. While I respect you immensely for admitting your mistakes, I can't let go of those ideas in my head.

Well, I know you well enough to know you don't mean malice by saying this. So I'll just skip to explaining why you're misinterpreting this, and hopefully clear it up.

First part : I approved and reviewed and partially wrote the lore team regulations created by Mofo, back when it was still called the "Lore Bible." I still have the document. I personally saw the removal of at least four inactive members, quality-controlled as much as I could, and gave the ultimatum that ended total ground-up Dominia reworks in 2019-2020, I forget when. To say I haven't tried my best to hit this issue in its formative years is misinformed at best. This is also disregarding any committed effort I had as synthetic developer to quality control its playerbase. I still, to this day, have stripped more whitelists than any singular person on the team, as far as I'm aware. If that's not trying to "fix things," what is?

Second part : You can ask basically any non-Unathi, non-Skrell and non-Vaurca developer. I am up their DMs like nobody's business. My "bringing this up" is a matter of personal investment and interest that I not only make privately available to lore developers constantly, but I also try to recover and steer topics in their favor as much I can. The most egregious examples tend to be the most verbosely opposed to every application I've put forth, often citing these disagreements as their reason for opposition. Only some of them actually listen to the input given. However, it shouldn't matter if they do or don't. It also shouldn't matter when I even brought this up, or if I ever did. The point is that these are apparent now, and people either disregard them out of blissful ignorance to the topics, or are themselves perpetuating it.

Finally : I wholeheartedly believe that whatever mistakes I've made are imperative for any next-occupant of the position to make. They will make these mistakes because there is no other way for them to learn otherwise. They will break core tenants of the server, simply because they hadn't the foresight or understanding to recognize when or why it was bad. It's not simply "their fault," but this is the biggest reason I find my experience to be valuable. This also doesn't inherently make any other applicant a bad choice, mind you. It's simply a matter of fact.

If you're interested, I can give you a non-exhaustive list of some of the essential mistakes I made that I see every loredev (and have seen every loremaster, for that matter) make, and continue to see to this day. In the interest of still keeping this reply brief enough to read, I'll let that be optional, though.

[GeneralCamo]

1 hour ago, kyres1 said:

I am up their DMs like nobody's business. [...] only make privately available to lore developers constantly [...] The most egregious examples tend to be the most verbosely opposed to every application I've put forth, often citing these disagreements as their reason for opposition. Only some of them actually listen to the input given [...] The point is that these are apparent now, and people either disregard them out of blissful ignorance to the topics, or are themselves perpetuating it.

Then why is this the first time I've ever heard of this? If the lore devs are ignoring it, as you say, why haven't you brought it out of private conversation? Why haven't you allowed others to scrutinize it? Instead of doing that, you've just waited for a chance to get into the seat and only -now- are you stating this in public. That's what I do not get.

[kyres1]

23 minutes ago, GeneralCamo said:

Then why is this the first time I've ever heard of this?

Because this is a matter that has lasted a very very long time between a very very large multitude of people.

23 minutes ago, GeneralCamo said:

If the lore devs are ignoring it, as you say, why haven't you brought it out of private conversation?

23 minutes ago, GeneralCamo said:

Instead of doing that, you've just waited for a chance to get into the seat and only -now- are you stating this in public.

I've actually brought every single issue up numerous times in staff mediums, previous applications, forum posts, etcetera. This is presuming I've sat on this like it's some sort of hidden agenda or secret timebomb to drop overtly on an unsuspecting team. It's not. I was literally facing these issues years ago, trying to fix them as I said. They persist to this day demonstrably even with multiple years of changed hands having been in control.

 

Once again, the dwelling on whether I should've said it or not is becoming the point of contention. It makes it seem like these are damning aspects that I've brought to attention like some sort of complaint. Which, is literally the opposite - I'm offering to take the position which can assume a stance to fix these issues. I'm volunteering myself to tackle the problem. These are just the problems I'm particularly angled against.

What I meant to say by saying I've privately and publicly relayed these things, is that I have complained and I retain the ability to complain. These aren't new ideas. They're nowheres near new. They've existed since my tenures began, and some time before, admittedly with less extreme consequences. This application in of itself is myself offering to remedy my own complaints, with my own work and effort, because I see - and have substantiated - that these complaints were valid and maintain their validity to this day. There's still no valid opposing argument tackling the subject matter, and likely never will be, seeing as it's been years that these have been discussed.

[Fluffy]

2 hours ago, kyres1 said:

If you're interested, I can give you a non-exhaustive list of some of the essential mistakes I made that I see every loredev (and have seen every loremaster, for that matter) make, and continue to see to this day. In the interest of still keeping this reply brief enough to read, I'll let that be optional, though.

I would be interested in this, if LVS isn't

[kyres1]

41 minutes ago, Fluffy said:

I would be interested in this, if LVS isn't

The most consistent immediate mistake that basically everyone stumbles into is VIP events. Some way or some manner of them exists in every loredev's history, even mine. (That's how I learned! Thanks, Purpose events.)

VIP events are basically "important person/people board to talk about important things." They're uninvolved, unintuitive, bore the hell out of the crew, and waste an extended vote to many. In fact, many times, these can literally just be ran on secret without announcement and work just fine. This ends up leaving people disinterested and objecting future events of the same alignment/faction/species/whatever.

Another big one is floundering your first event, or events, and going, "This is too damn hard, I give up!" Everyone does it. Like, everyone. There are cases where some simply do not run events after running one, for years-long tenures. The fear is reasonable. Events are a spotlight role- they put the host, the director, volunteers and the lore in the spotlight. Fuck up, and it's stressful to deal with the consequences.

What I've always done to reassure people in the end with these is reminding them that, really, if things go so horribly terribly wrong, it's them - and the rest of staff - who have the "retcon" button. While I obviously hate retcons and everything they stand for, I will always stand by the fact that loredevs should never stress with events because of them. Things never go too bad. But, it's a possibility, and in that fringe case where nobody wins and everything's unfun, you should not have to take the fall - nobody should. Stressing over events is unfounded because of it.

You can learn a lot from KOTW's event week. In this time, everything was pseudo-canon, or "optionally canon." It was a week of unpredictable randomized events which permeated the Aurora, and anybody who was onboard was trapped until the week elapsed. Any death in the week could be retconned without fuss. And death was plentiful! People were ecstatic of the ability to optionally canonize this series of absolutely wild events, because the stressful aspect was temporarily lifted. This is something lore developers should take control of from the start - their interpretation of the canon which reflects on characters is as malleable as anyone else's. Yet, few do. Many believe the simplest mistakes and tiniest missteps are cause for alarm and they get so stressed they just avoid it altogether. Why stress? You're here to enjoy it like everyone else. As long as you're not ruining fun on purpose, what is there to worry for?

A third, more gloomy mistake is losing direction immediately upon getting the role. I've personally had problems settling into roles when I first start them plenty of times. Others end up in the same rut, but they walk themselves in circles - never truly gripping a passion, never truly bursting out to enjoy their role to the fullest. When people enjoy their role as a writer, developer, administrator, CCIA, whatever - they'll naturally try to make things fun for everyone else. The name of the game is fun, and amidst the stress and lonesomeness one might face as a full writer, it's very easy to lose sight of that.

Boring as it might sound, the fix is to literally just keep pursuing your interest. You cling to what makes you enjoy the role. If it doesn't harm, if it's not self-serving, and if it's contributing to the server, these meet the criteria for something you can do indefinitely. For this, I eventually found spriting to be my niche in off-time. We're never too full on sprites and whatnot, so, duh. Before spriting was my big go-to, I found most of my passion to be rooted in playing dungeon master - giving compelling stories, connected narratives, and attaching players to some grander scheme that they would uncover as they go along. With our lore as a springboard, it made for some of the most memorable and exciting stories I have literally ever had the pleasure of seeing. The gratification of being the storyteller just absolutely enthralled me. In a sense, I'm still hooked to that feeling, and yes, if I were just offered it for free, I would absolutely take an event host role.

For anyone who finds themselves lost (usually first entering the team), these sorts of retellings of time on the team will seem sparse and minimal. You're not incentivized to find your niche because, well, nobody's going to make you interested for you. That's your issue. To many, they never find their passion, though it might just take a little push to really unlock it. Cheerleaders are few and far between. Don't give up, find your fun, and own it. That's the solution to the third mistake.

 

Edit : I added the green text.

Edited September 4, 2023 by kyres1
added the green text

[canon35]

1. Do you feel that in some cases, lore for a species needs to be curtailed or altered to better be consistent with a vision for aurora lore as a whole? If so, what's some lore from a species you feel needs to be changed?

2. Do you think you're able to stand your ground in the event that a lore writer takes massive issue against your rulings as lore master deputy, such as blocking a project they've been working on from being canonized?

3. Times change and so does lore, many species over the years have experienced retcons and rewrites. Some for the better, some for arguably the worse. While I do doubt that any large scale retcons or rewrites will happen again, how would you handle a species maintainer wanting to make major retcons for their species?

4. There's a sense that one day lore might be "done". No more planets to add, no more cities worth writing out, etc. Do you think we're anywhere near that for any species or factions? What's your feelings on the idea that more species may have to focus harder on event arcs or article arcs to really add anything?

5. How will you try to make lore more accessible for new players?

6. Are there any practices or ideas currently existing in lore or being done by the lorestaff you feel has to stop?

7. What are your thoughts on the idea of "antag lore", like the retconned Dominian vampire House Haradis or the Secret of Ouerea easter egg?

8. Just for fun, faction or culture has your favorite "feel" or aesthetic to it?

[kyres1]

17 minutes ago, canon35 said:

1. Do you feel that in some cases, lore for a species needs to be curtailed or altered to better be consistent with a vision for aurora lore as a whole? If so, what's some lore from a species you feel needs to be changed?

I sparsely see xeno devs obstruct anything. I actually honestly can't really pin a time where a species' lore has grappled the server in a negative way for any prolonged period. I think that a lot of this can be owed to most species just not having enough time for their faults to settle before getting ground-up reworks or retcons; the only two exceptions being synthetic and Tajaran lore. The rest have dramatically changed so much in just the last couple years alone that pinpointing flaws is difficult when everything is malleable.

20 minutes ago, canon35 said:

2. Do you think you're able to stand your ground in the event that a lore writer takes massive issue against your rulings as lore master deputy, such as blocking a project they've been working on from being canonized?

Yes. I think I have a history of being more stubborn than lenient, to a fault.

21 minutes ago, canon35 said:

3. Times change and so does lore, many species over the years have experienced retcons and rewrites. Some for the better, some for arguably the worse. While I do doubt that any large scale retcons or rewrites will happen again, how would you handle a species maintainer wanting to make major retcons for their species?

I do not often receive good reasons for retcons. I still... don't. I really never will. Quality control and "modernizing" are excuses I get, but never elaboration as to what makes a page more or less qualified, or modern for that matter. Usually, additive retcons (see: entire faction rework/content buffs) actually unmistakably never adjust the technical quality of anything, arguably simply worsening aspects with more thorough, specific writing.

So, without a good reason, and with legitimate intent to deconstruct or remove what's already there... why would I approve it? Contrarily, if it has a good reason, who ever opposes it? The missing link here tends to be a good reason, and almost 100% of our retcons - especially factional and additive rewrites, have boiled down to ultimately writer preference.

27 minutes ago, canon35 said:

4. There's a sense that one day lore might be "done". No more planets to add, no more cities worth writing out, etc. Do you think we're anywhere near that for any species or factions? What's your feelings on the idea that more species may have to focus harder on event arcs or article arcs to really add anything?

Well, depending on who you ask, some might say "no, we can make this infinitely."

I might get shit for it but, just like retcons, I never get a good reason for just piling on content. It's another thing that is just contradictory to development; you're actively making things harder to consume, harder to remember, harder to digest and even harder to avoid breaking the rules of. It plays into an idea that a writer is writing whatever they want with disregard to the player. Therefore, raw content sucks.

However, not all content is just reasonless and raw fluff. You can very easily differentiate the two. Ask yourself; does it affect the game and/or how people roleplay? If yes, you're already a step ahead of most of it. Let's just hope it's a positive impact - though, most writers are quickly able to tell what they see as positive or negative perceptions of their lore. Hint : the playerbase and community's perception of lore is the correct one, not any single writer's. It's up to the writer to align with that.

As for events, yes. I can't even begin to fathom the amount of time wasted curbing the idea that lore writers can't just run their own events. They can. Join a round. Ahelp. Tell them to spawn something. You're done, get playing. There's obviously nuance to this, but the simple ability to contribute for a writer is as easy and fun as playing the game. Why people continue to express such stress and opposition towards these ideas eludes me, but my previous post replying to Fluffyghost covers this mistake and how I feel it should be fixed.

34 minutes ago, canon35 said:

5. How will you try to make lore more accessible for new players?

The biggest project currently being undergone on my front for new players is either the away site mapping guide (which is basically done), or the discord alteration proposal (which isn't public, but you're aware of it, I think). These were both things I intended to tackle for new contributors and new players to enrich the experience immediately, but I've gone and done both of those before having applied.

That leaves only stuff I had as stretch goals remaining. Earlier in the thread I proposed an alternative wiki system; using in-game integration, having Github wikis accessible ingame is far more functional, easier to update, easier to keep track of, and more. Working on the technical aspect of the team's organization is necessitated for any of that to work, so before I can get ambitious like that, I need to mend what we've got first.

38 minutes ago, canon35 said:

6. Are there any practices or ideas currently existing in lore or being done by the lorestaff you feel has to stop?

Not much that wasn't highlighted extensively in the OP.

39 minutes ago, canon35 said:

7. What are your thoughts on the idea of "antag lore", like the retconned Dominian vampire House Haradis or the Secret of Ouerea easter egg?

It's cursed, no pun intended. I never saw anybody do anything with these and feel they might be a doomed concept as a result. I wager an idea like antag lore could work, but definitely not in the way we used to perceive it. Secret lore, on the other hand, should not exist within the team - the only barrier of knowledge of any lore should be between staff, and players in my opinion.

40 minutes ago, canon35 said:

8. Just for fun, faction or culture has your favorite "feel" or aesthetic to it?

Faction? The Republic. It's the most honest image of what our lore stands for, for the most part. Call me boring, but it's our setting's heart for a reason, and virtually every positive memory about this server still lingers with me in this faction.

Corp? Hephaestus. I like robots. I like monolithic machines. It goes hand in hand.

Planet/culture? Konyang. Konyang is the perfect planet. I can gush about it for hours.

[DeadLantern]

I support Kyres. The two other applicants, while well-meaning and both great writers, are for the status quo. They generally see the current state of lore and its predicted direction as a good one--they mainly seek to expand, not to fix or change (which is fine). I, however, do see fundamental problems with lore and its relation to the game, and I mostly agree with Kyres as to what those problems are, but I am mainly supporting Kyres as they are endeavoring to enter this slot with a clear vision on how to change the game. Ideally, if Kyres were selected, big changes would happen immediately.

I do have a few questions regariding Trio's and Kyres' discussion on Kyres' last application. Looking at Kyres' previous application, you can see their discussion on the phoron scarcity and if that event was managed properly. Trio focuses in on the fact that the question "what happens if phoron becomes scarce" was never (and still is) not defined. I, as a pretty up-to-date reader, have no idea how phoron being scarce would affect space travel or the diplomacy between states. I have not seen any evidence of states acting differently due to the phoron crisis other than Elyra shutting down phoron. I think this is a valid point to bring up. Kyres rebuked this statement by saying KOTW did have a large ripple on lore and was very good and very cool (which I agree with)--however, I think Kyres here is conflating KOTW and the Phoron scarcity. The events of KOTW were caused by the phoron scarcity, but they are not the same thing. KOTW was Sol blowing up mars and killing itself--which was very good and very cool and what I believe Kyres was referring to. But as to what the phoron scarcity does outside of Sol blowing up Mars I have simply no clue. I would like to hear Kyres' thoughts on my summarizing of Trio's and Kyres' debate on the previous application. Is this accurate? Do you have a response as to the lack of consequences for the phoron scarcity?

I am also bringing this up to illustrate that this argument seems to stem from a miscommunication/misunderstanding. I don't think having Trio and Kyres on the same ticket would be like oil and water. There can be some excellent changes to lore and the server from this pairing, I believe. Kyres has radical ideas; Trio can be discerning on which ones have the most merit, the most priority, etc. I have my own opinion on which problems are the most pressing but I am not applying for this position, so that seems rather superfluous; I will just say that I think having Kyres on as the DLM will be a net positive for the server. It has been three years since KOTW, I think we need a new shakeup involving our lovely Horizon.

Also, not to question Cael, but I find it odd that Cael appointed Trio as the DLM, and resigned not a month later, thus putting Trio in charge. I am not denigrating this passage of power; Trio would still be head Loremaster because Cael would be picking a DLM or a LM no matter what. But, it is strange that that Trio's app was to be the DLM--he applied as such and I (and I assume everyone else) read it and appraised it as such. Would it be different if Trio was applying for LM? I don't know. I am earnestly not trying to engage in bad-faith argumentation. I genuinely think it is strange and I do not know where else to voice this. Did you expect to be LM so quickly (or at all), Trio?

[GeneralCamo]

LVS and Kyres are my narrowed picks honestly. I do see some long-term issues popping up, and I went over them in Kyres's last app. Both have shown that they have seen this and beyond, and have addressed them directly.

My major concern is with new players. Aurora is a soap box, and is having trouble getting new players to integrate into the community. People are overwhelmed at the sheer content, which wouldn't necessarily be a problem I feel if it is properly organized. But there's no easy primer; the lore is all over the place, and it's difficult to look for stuff. This extends beyond lore honestly, but adding more lore is not helping this situation.

I agree with a general content freeze as proposed by Kyres, at least until *existing* content is organized and primed easier. Everyday I see new players struggle to integrate into the server, and several presumably fail as I see them disappear. This is not sustainable, and something drastic may be what we need. 

[Fluffy]

I am sure we can, and will, have our wealth of disagreements on different points.

But, you seem deeply interested in the server success, and to arrive to sound conclusions. You seem to me to care, at least in principle, about following a sound method to reach a conclusion, and don't shy away from having it scrutinized, falling for cop-outs or fallacies comparatively uncommonly.

This, in my view, makes you the best candidate for this position, among the current applicants.

[La Villa Strangiato]

Hi there, I'm sorry for the wait in a response. I decided to wait a day before responding so that I could ensure I didn't heighten emotions any further than they've been heightened.

I'm sorry for my choice of words in my original post. I should know better than anyone that there's really no way to call someone arrogant without pissing them off (rightfully so), and that was a bad way to talk to you. I really do mean every compliment I extended towards you in my original post. In my mind, I did not want to beat around the bush by claiming that your creative ability was anything less than up to snuff. You are genuinely talented and passionate. You are an organiser, you have experience, and you have ambition, which is a quality I admire far more than simple skill.

This is not a lie or an attempt at social engineering. I was a little hurt you interpreted my post as such, until I realised it's pretty hard to interpret that any other way. I still stand by that the interaction I pointed out, and which you posted, was frustrating and confusing. I did not bring it up to demean you or defame you, and I didn't report it to a moderator because it's not a post that was a rulebreak. You didn't harass me or set out with deliberate malicious intent. It was simply an interaction that frustrated me, and I used it as an example of what can make you hard to communicate with. I should have used less emotional language in describing what happened, because whether or not I intended it, it makes it seem much more accusatory than it should be.

I continue to believe that you have served your time on the team and I would prefer to see a person who can communicate more gently in a management position (clearly in this case it is not me). Nevertheless, I made your application thread shitty, I made you upset, and I should've been smarter about how I communicated my points to you. Thus, I apologise. If you'd like to talk to me further about this or anything else, please feel free to message me on Discord.