Freevale is under new management!


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 190 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Ummm... ok. This was so unbelievably absurd that I believed it was clearly a joke. Apparently not.

I need to go send some e-mails and explain that I was wrong. Blunt Logic really did just break every agreement it ever made with its allies. So much for the supposed sanctity of Freevale's credibility in negotiations.

Goblin Squad Member

I will not get into this spat in detail, because I don't know all of them, I only speak in defense of these few points.....

1. Aragon was not a part of this decision. Yes, we want to coordinate certain efforts between our two settlements. That includes non aggression, trade, joint offensive operations, and Aragon would have always come to the defense of Freevale.

As the only two Chaotic based settlements that were willing to talk to each other, we saw other types of coordination possible. Shared training was primarily the objective.

Would an eventual alliance or possible Chaotic Nation come out of this? Yes, probably so.

Did Ravenlute or any of his group show up often enough in Mumble to have any of these discussions.... No, I never saw him there. Once I spoke with KC, and anyone else other than BL's people were absent as well.

2. To put a question to your answer, "Does PFO need more players like Andius?"

If you view Andius in the way that I do, yes PFO and certainly Freevale does. Andius at least understands the nature of MMOs and understands the value of planning and putting in place various structures, including COOPERATION.

3. This all goes back to my old argument, everything in game will always end up in the control of one person who will ultimately make the decision. Every company, settlement and even nation will have that one "holder of the key" and he or she will have the power to switch it off, since they were the one who turned it on.

I'm not saying that Dictatorship is the way to go. But democracy is certainly not, even when a majority would normally rule, a leader needs to step in and say "This is how it is going to be". If he / she holds the keys, they have the final say.

Just for the purpose of clarification, Aragon has several key holders. That is how we have dispersed power, to avoid the tyranny of one. Every company, chartered or sponsored, has its own leadership and its own key holder. The settlement of Aragon will have one key holder (The Goodfellow). Every company has autonomy to do as they please. There are only three rules / laws that we collectively ask: Defend the settlement of Aragon; Support Positive Game Play; and Adhere as best as you can to the River Freedoms.

4. I wish Freevale success in its future. I hope that Ravenlute and the others that are displeased with this shift can see the perceived necessity of it and try to work things out. Try to remember that settlements are not designed to be self sufficient and broader cooperation is required. That is not a loss of freedom, that is surviving within what the game mechanics thrust upon you.

Good luck all!

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
Did Ravenlute or any of his group show up often enough in Mumble to have any of these discussions.... No, I never saw him there. Once I spoke with KC, and anyone else other than BL's people were absent as well.

Hmmmm. It begins to look like a plan. After all, it was Gpunk who asked that, as 'spokesperson' for Freevale's council, he be the one to handle all communications with other groups and bring all matters back for discussion and decisions. You didn't see others participating because Gpunk (and other Blunt Logic members) specifically asked others not to... so that we could speak with one voice.

Bluddwolf wrote:
If you view Andius in the way that I do, yes PFO and certainly Freevale does. Andius at least understands the nature of MMOs and understands the value of planning and putting in place various structures, including COOPERATION.

I agree. Cooperation is very important. This isn't it.

Goblin Squad Member

Blunt Logic has broken no agreements with it's allies. Freevale will continue to uphold her obligations to The NC and to it's settlers.

Of course the barbarians are angry, I would be to. Surprised though? Not really. Ravenlute jumped the shark when he began locking threads he didn't like the direction of because they are 'his'. That told me all I needed to in regards to handling my own assets, like my account.

Given the way our internal politics have gone over the last 2 months, something needed to change. The governing structure was not working and the vitriol was stopping new settlers from participating in our community. Not acceptable.

Ravenlute and CBDunkerson have both been asked, on multiple occasions, to participate in The NC forums. Ravenlute refused and CBDunkerson just doesn't participate. Not even in Freevale's council. At the end of the day, that is what I was working with. An obstructionist and a non participant. It isn't feasible to work with that and it does not warrant the headache. This is a game.

My moderator rights and access on Freevale's guild launch site has been restricted. If Freevale settlers need to reach me, try our mumble or a PM here. Freevale's new site will be available for consumption soon.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The thread has moved past this topic a bit, but Shadowclan has a lot of experience with trial by combat for leadership. What we eventually ended up with is a system where we'd have monthly clomps to see who would be the warboss that month, and the warboss would have control over all day to day activities, but could not set lasting policy which was in the hands of the nobs. So you basically ended up with the classic tribal situation where the chief changes frequently and the chief can do whatever he wants... except when the tribal elders forbid it.

Works very well. You have a relatively-static council of policy leaders making sure that the clan stays basically on course, but change up your tactical leadership frequently so that nobody burns out and you constantly have fresh energy and new ideas in that position.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lion Council support Freevale in their needs and popular emotions in every way as we can, and I´m sure Aragon and entire UNC think the same way. But, is really that bad having a central administration (leader, council, or else) than have to discuss even small matters with all before a decision?

Administration wide, a greek democracy is not ideal and even it's a harmfull way to manage an endeavor. A central leadership, accordant with the general idea of the group's objectives, could lead to a better development in long term.

While the pressure of third part will be hard (specially by those who want to take some advantages from it by recruiting leavers, per exemple), I guess the better thing to do is assembly to discuss the matter. Otherwise, those harmfull malicious third part influence could make it worse than it is.

Lion Council are with you guys. Hoping for the best!

Goblin Squad Member

EoX did not pressure anyone to change politics. If the EoX has consistent problems with maintaining diplomatic relations our primary response is to end those ties.

This change in structure is not orchestrated or even invented by us.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gpunk wrote:

Blunt Logic has broken no agreements with it's allies. Freevale will continue to uphold her obligations to The NC and to it's settlers.

Of course the barbarians are angry, I would be to. Surprised though? Not really. Ravenlute jumped the shark when he began locking threads he didn't like the direction of because they are 'his'. That told me all I needed to in regards to handling my own assets, like my account.

Given the way our internal politics have gone over the last 2 months, something needed to change. The governing structure was not working and the vitriol was stopping new settlers from participating in our community. Not acceptable.

Ravenlute and CBDunkerson have both been asked, on multiple occasions, to participate in The NC forums. Ravenlute refused and CBDunkerson just doesn't participate. Not even in Freevale's council. At the end of the day, that is what I was working with. An obstructionist and a non participant. It isn't feasible to work with that and it does not warrant the headache. This is a game.

My moderator rights and access on Freevale's guild launch site has been restricted. If Freevale settlers need to reach me, try our mumble or a PM here. Freevale's new site will be available for consumption soon.

I am very sympathetic of not feeling like non-participants shouldn't have an equal say when you're the one doing all the work.

However if you agreed to a democracy, earned your settlement while selling it based on those premises, and the democracy is unwilling to hand over power to you... wouldn't it be more appropriate to claim a new settlement when the time comes then to force an oligarchy on those promised democracy if you feel the democracy isn't working?

The timing of this announcement does suggest you intended to trick many Freevale members who would have withdrawn their votes if you made the announcement before the end of the land rush.

This is a very different situation from TEO where I earned them their settlement while the system of government stated votes where earned after you had proven your loyalty through dedicated service, and then they decided to make it so that people who had never lifted a finger to help the group got to vote on where to put it after I had already put in all that work.

Perhaps I am not being privileged to the full story but this has had a serious negative effect on my personal opinion of Blunt Logic. I would invite you to fill me in on the parts I'm missing if I indeed am missing part of the story.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Gpunk wrote:
Blunt Logic has broken no agreements with it's allies.

No? So each company still has a say in all decisions and can appoint their own representatives to do so? Or there was no such agreement? Or the other companies that formed Freevale aren't your allies?

Or your statement above is untrue?

People obviously have different spins on things. You say I'm a non-participant. I remember it as you yelling at me to shut up and me trying to avoid further damage to the cohesiveness of the group by taking a step back.

Obviously some issues which needed to be worked out have come up. This wasn't the way to do it. Kobold, seems like you've been generally supportive of Gpunk... but do you concur that no agreements have been broken here? Anyone else? 'cuz I don't see how anyone can seriously make that claim... and once we acknowledge that reality how do we proceed when all we've got is, 'Ok this is the new agreement that I may decide to unilaterally change at any time in the future'?

Goblin Squad Member

Andius the Afflicted wrote:

However if you agreed to a democracy, earned your settlement while selling it based on those premises, and the democracy is unwilling to hand over power to you... wouldn't it be more appropriate to claim a new settlement when the time comes then to force an oligarchy on those promised democracy if you feel the democracy isn't working?

The timing of this announcement does suggest you intended to trick many Freevale members who would have withdrawn their votes if you made the announcement before the end of the land rush.

Perhaps I am not being privileged to the full story but this has had a serious negative effect on my personal opinion of Blunt Logic. I would invite you to fill me in on the parts I'm missing if I indeed am missing part of the story.

I support the above mentioned.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
Hmmmm. It begins to look like a plan. After all, it was Gpunk who asked that, as 'spokesperson' for Freevale's council, he be the one to handle all communications with other groups and bring all matters back for discussion and decisions. You didn't see others participating because Gpunk (and other Blunt Logic members) specifically asked others not to... so that we could speak with one voice.

That's very interesting. It was in a voip conversation with yourself and KC where we decided to use the EoX forums to house the NC forum. I personally invited you three times to come there and make an account to get involved and I know I also invited KC at least once. In fact I encouraged all leaders of companies within the NC to do the same in that same conversation. The fact that no one besides Gpunk did is very sad and unfortunate.

All I know is the offer was personally extended by myself to you and Kobold over voip multiple times in the same conversation, while Gpunk was present and after he left. Why you guys never showed up, I have no idea and will not speculate but the offer still stands for ANY leader within ANY settlement that is part of the NC to take part in the discussions we have in the NC forum.

Hell, Aragon has every single company leader signed up and actively taking part. Just sayin.

Goblin Squad Member

You're in a difficult position, and everything said in this forum by outsiders needs to be taken with a grain of it's-in-other-groups-best-interest-if-another-group-fails.

One of the first rules of remote communication is not to assume malice where carelessness is as good an answer.

Try to set the irritation aside and talk to each other in private. And remember that the other guy might not be wrong.

Goblin Squad Member

CBDunkerson wrote:

People obviously have different spins on things. You say I'm a non-participant. I remember it as you yelling at me to shut up and me trying to avoid further damage to the cohesiveness of the group by taking a step back.

What was the last vote you participated in on the council? When did you sign up on The NC forums, as requested, and get involved? You were never yelled at, you would have to get on voice comm for that to happen. More people than myself asked you to stop muddying public threads.

Andius, if you want to be filled in, hop on our mumble or I can come to the appropriate TS. Talk to your settlement reps. A democracy was never promised. We had a ruling council - an oligarchy. We participated in democratic like actions, via nominating representatives and casting votes. What was promised was that everyone would have a voice. They still do.

The timing of the announcement could indicate all sorts of things. It might even indicate that I wasn't willing to yet walk away from weeks worth of hard work to satisfy obstructionists and non participants. The settlement game will require satisfying hundreds of players. As it stood, Freevale's governing structure was not poised to do that.

Goblin Squad Member

Gpunk wrote:
It might even indicate that I wasn't willing to yet walk away from weeks worth of hard work to satisfy obstructionists and non participants.

Would people removing their votes jeopardize that hard work?

Goblin Squad Member

Gpunk wrote:
A democracy was never promised. We had a ruling council - an oligarchy.

Ah. This may change everything. I'll hop on TS in a few hours if you're still there but until then another question:

Was the decision to change the government's structure approved by the needed majority within the old system of government?

Goblin Squad Member

Andius the Afflicted wrote:
Gpunk wrote:
A democracy was never promised. We had a ruling council - an oligarchy.

Ah. This may change everything. I'll hop on TS in a few hours if you're still there but until then another question:

Was the decision to change the government's structure approved by the needed majority within the old system of government?

It was not. The old system of government was not functioning in large part due to lack of communication, lack of compromise, and lack of participation. The vitriol existing behind the scenes was actively keeping newcomers from participating. None of it healthy and none of it fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
Kobold, seems like you've been generally supportive of Gpunk... but do you concur that no agreements have been broken here? Anyone else? 'cuz I don't see how anyone can seriously make that claim... and once we acknowledge that reality how do we proceed when all we've got is, 'Ok this is the new agreement that I may decide to unilaterally change at any time in the future'?

I'm in the awkward position of agreeing with Andius here. I believe a dictatorship might be the way to go, but I have trouble seeing why Gpunk chose this exact method of instating it, and I worry about our groups like the Librarians of Doom who signed on for something they no longer get.

The old Council wasn't fast or effective, but we did pass votes eventually. The obvious thing to do would have been to wait for them to pass a vote on the matter. Gpunk chose not to do that because he feared they would vote no.

The other obvious thing to do would have been to make the change before the end of the Landrush to give people a chance to send their votes elsewhere if need be. Gpunk chose not to do that, either.


Gpunk wrote:
A democracy was never promised. We had a ruling council - an oligarchy.

I seem to recall us frequently using "get a seat on the Council and crowdforge your settlement!" as a selling point. Several companies came in doubtless with that expectation.

Goblin Squad Member

I am not a fan of this kind of drama, and I apologize for expressing myself in a negative way in my earlier post. Andius, sorry about that jab haha. All I meant is that I wasn't going to swear revenge on those that have wronged me.

I am going to objectively list facts and let others form their own opinions.

At the start of the Land Rush, the companies Outsiders, Blunt Logic, and Stone Bear Clan decided to join up their votes so they could get a settlement. Blunt Logic had managed to submit their Settlement to the Land Rush a little earlier than Outsiders and SBC so it was decided to use their Submission in case of a tie. No one company was supposed to be in charge. All companies were equal.

A form of government was decided on that everyone agreed to. Gpunk was voted as the Ambassador of Freevale, but the general consensus from members of Freevale was not to make any binding agreements with other groups until at least a settlement spot was secured.

Freevale's council voted, and it was decided that Freevale would join the NC's non-aggression pact. Gpunk expressed his displeasure at how long the process took, but as it was the council's first big decision, it could be expected that the process would have some wrinkles that needed ironing out. During the process, CBDunkerson did voice his concerns about making formal agreements. Blunt Logic members told him that he was making things harder with other NC members and asked him to stop.

Ravenlute was voted into a position by the council that required him to debate things with Gpunk a lot on our forums. Gpunk repeatedly expressed his displeasure with things, and Ravenlute in particular, but never attempted to get the Freevale council to vote on changing the way the government operated.

I will add a none objective part here: it seemed like the majority of Freevale was content to wait until we at least had a settlement location locked in before making any big decisions for the settlement. That is why a lot of folks kept quite on our forums, because they didn't see the point in jumping the gun.

Right after the Land Rush ended, Blunt Logic declared the current government dissolved and set themselves as being in charge of Freevale now. The other founding members, Stone Bear Clan and Outsiders have both expressed their surprise and anger about this.

Ok those were the facts, now here are my personal feels... I know it isn't cool to burden you fine folks with my opinions, but writing this out is therapeutic.

The funny thing here is that I actually agree that running a Settlement with a council of equal representatives would be really hard to do. Sometimes decisions have to be made quickly, I am familiar with the realities of how games like this work. At its inception, Freevale was meant to be able to grow organically to change as needed to be a successful Settlement. Had the proper avenues been used, Freevale's government could have been changed while upholding it's founding principles.

After Blunt Logic's heavy handedness in declaring themselves Masters of Freevale, with complete disregard for what anyone else in Freevale wanted, I will have a hard time trusting them enough to remain in Freevale.

It is sad to see something you helped build be unfairly twisted like this, but I know that as a sandbox, PFO will be full of such things. It isn't like it was even real yet. I mean at least Freevale wasn't burned to the ground, which is something that will be possible in PFO eventually. Imagine how bad that is going to feel for folks when after months and maybe years of hard work their settlement gets razed. It is going to happen, probably to most of us. I have felt that pain in a Sandbox before and whew, I hope you all mentally prepare yourselves.

Anyway, it is what it is. I won't post about it anymore, promise.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Gpunk wrote:
A democracy was never promised. We had a ruling council - an oligarchy.
I seem to recall us frequently using "get a seat on the Council and crowdforge your settlement!" as a selling point. Several companies came in doubtless with that expectation.

We can crowdforge a settlement. Unless it means joining the NC. Or signing the RA. Or working with Aragon. Or changing alignment. Or participating in the government.

People expect representation and they will still get it. What they won't receive is the ability to halt political progress because of personal biases they hold against our neighbors.

People that expect representation without participation are going to be disappointed. A settlement cannot be run on the positions of obstructionists and non participants.

The ability to level a settlement in the months to come will require commitment, communication, and a willingness to work with others. I am glad SBC plans on operating in such a manner one day. It is a shame they don't operate that way currently.

Goblin Squad Member

I haven't read anything here or elsewhere that Blunt Logic has asked for or hopes that others leave Freevale.

Hopefully the parties concerned see this as a wake up call to address the concerns and they can work these out.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Gaskon wrote:

What happened to the group that was going to choose their leader via combat challenges?

Did they end up joining Freevale?

I loved that idea.

I can say that my PvP/PvC (Player verses Corpse) company, when it's created, will operate under such a rule. However, as it's chaotic, nobody would be under any obligation to follow the new leader, and the challenger would have to be willing to take the rep hit for attacking.

Bluddwolf wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
We wish the more democratically-focused settlements, such as our fellow Chaotics in Aragon and Tavernhold, the very best.

I can't speak for Tavernhold, but I assure you Aragon is not a Democracy.

Aragon is governed by common sense and game mechanic optimization. It is better to have a settlement that is run well, than it is to have one that gives everyone an equal voice. What needs to get done gets bogged down with what some would like to have done.

Oh, sorry. I thought Aragon had a council.

So the 2 CN settlements are basically dictatorships??

Goblin Squad Member

I remember someone saying they were attracted to the democratic system set up for freevale.

Goblin Squad Member

This is why Republics are always stronger than Democracies, beyond voting for their representatives, the general person does not have much say in the day to day operation of the government.

If I may offer a suggestion? On issues requiring a vote, why not set up a poll on your website with a 5-7 day time limit? Right now, there isn't a real need for speed. Take the time to hash these things out. If everyone in your groups know that time sensitive polls will be up on your website, it gives them an incentive to visit it more often. Then if they don't vote, after knowing this, you can point to them not participating in the process.

I wouldn't make the votes shorter than five days because people could take long weekends away from their computers or have RL issues that prevent them for voting right away or some such thing happening.

And if you still are not happy, well, there are lots of folks who would welcome you into their settlements. Just make sure you are happy how those settlements are run before jumping ship.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bitter Thorn wrote:
So the 2 CN settlements are basically dictatorships??

Again, I won't speak for Freevale, but Aragon is certainly not a Dictatorship.

Aragon is run by an Oligarchy. It will have a Counsel made up of the head of each of the companies (chartered and sponsored) and the freelancers will have a seat on the council as well.

We plan on having eight companies of 50 members + 100 support / freelancers or 500 total citizens.

The settlement itself will have a Magistrate (The Goodfellow), due to game mechanics one person actually holds the key to starting and shutting down a settlement. Same will likely hold true for companies as well. I won't entertain arguments that Ryan has different plans, I'll believe it when I see it.

So the Magistrate will also have a vote, two votes if he/she is also the head of a company. His/her Magistrate vote can only be used to break a tie.

The Council of Aragon only votes on settlement business that is broad in scope (Wars, Pacts, Alliances, Foreign Agreements and Contacts).

Unless otherwise stated, all companies have autonomy for purposes of leadership and action.

All individual citizens of Aragon are expected to follow just three rules / laws:

1. Common Defense of the Settlement
2. Positive Game Play
3. Adherence to the River Freedoms, as best they can

* Alignment and Reputation Reqs. are not etched in stone, but our leaning is towards Chaotic and no lower than -2500 (unless specifically sanctioned).

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We will essentially have 2 rings to our governing structure. The inner ring will consist of the oligarchy, initially formed by and consisting of Blunt Logic members with leadership experience. How it grows from there depends on how Freevale grows.

The second ring will be the advisory council. This will consist of 2 representatives from each company and representatives from our Free Agents. 2 representatives, 1 vote. The council's role will be to provide feedback to settlement managers.

The oligarchy's decisions will not always line up with the council's vote. Nor will it always diverge. Settlers still have representation and they will still be heard.

That's the basics anyways. It will be fleshed out in the upcoming days and presented to the remaining settlers. Then it will be hashed through, adjusted as needed, and Freevale will move forward.


One of the real problems with "democracies" is simple: Ultimately, the guy in charge is the guy in charge. It's very rare to find the sort of person who can really just obey a Council without any funny business.
He may say he'll follow certain rules, but in the end, he'll do what he thinks is right—not what he's told is right. People can form agreements—"Oh, sure, I'll have the sword, but I'll stop swinging the second you think someone else should have it"—but they are not often going to keep them unless they happen to both agree that the sword has to go down.

And since I think people are sick of political comparisons, I don't have any fictional comparisons off the top of my head, and the obvious forum equivalent is just asking for trouble, I'll compare it to the feud between Michael Eisner (CEO and some other titles of the Walt Disney company) and Roy Disney/Stanley Gold. When Roy and Stan put Michael in charge, helping to depose previous CEO Ronald Miller, there was reputedly a promise Eisner made them: If they ever decided he wasn't fit to rule anymore, he would step down.

When Roy and Stan became dissatisfied with Eisner's behavior later, they demanded he do just that. Eisner refused, denying that he'd ever made such a promise. If we assume that the promise was made, then it's very obvious what lesson to take from this.

I hope that all the would-be democracies and Councils take this to heart and take steps to ensure that either a) there will never be cause for such a conflict of interests, b) the person pressing the buttons is one of those special people who will do what he's told, or b) everyone is clear about what the leader will do if he thinks those giving him orders are leading his settlement into disaster.

Regardless of what's happening here, one thing is plain to me as your FACE a bread sandwich: This is not a power grab. Gpunk firmly and honestly believes that he knows how to run the settlement better than the Council could. This has always been quite clear to those of us in Freevale.


For another comparison, I have a friend who used to manage a roleplay Minecraft server. This particular friend is a major control freak, and whenever we would argue to include something he didn't like, he would say no. Sometimes, we would have Councils, but whenever the Council ruled against him, he'd just make a "higher" Council with members more close to himself.

Finally, he admitted that he simply was not interested in running a server if the roleplay incorporated those particular elements. The roleplay is quite dead now.

I think Gpunk had better examine this question: If the rest in Blunt Logic (apparently the new Council) rule against him, deciding, for instance, to declare war on Aragon and turn the training houses into piles of lawn gnomes and beer cans, will he honor that? Or will he again do what he thinks is best?

Goblin Squad Member

<kabal> Bunibuni wrote:

This is why Republics are always stronger than Democracies, beyond voting for their representatives, the general person does not have much say in the day to day operation of the government.

If I may offer a suggestion? On issues requiring a vote, why not set up a poll on your website with a 5-7 day time limit? Right now, there isn't a real need for speed. Take the time to hash these things out. If everyone in your groups know that time sensitive polls will be up on your website, it gives them an incentive to visit it more often. Then if they don't vote, after knowing this, you can point to them not participating in the process.

I wouldn't make the votes shorter than five days because people could take long weekends away from their computers or have RL issues that prevent them for voting right away or some such thing happening.

And if you still are not happy, well, there are lots of folks who would welcome you into their settlements. Just make sure you are happy how those settlements are run before jumping ship.

Our voting period tended to be 3 days, with results declared sooner if all votes were made before that. Apparently that wasn't fast enough for Blunt Logic.

The Settlement was designed to cater to Chaotic folks of both hardcore and casual. In fact CBDunkerson's Outsiders are a group of folks who are solo players but were looking to get the benefits of a settlement, which we were able to offer until now.

This is how our Council was set up, direct from our site:

-------------------

The Council is the decision making body within Freevale. It consists of 2 Representatives from each Company as well as 2 chosen by and from the Citizens that don't belong to a Company.

This Council will be guided by the Voice, a member of the Council voted to lead the Council meetings and bring topics up for vote to the Citizens and the Council. Once Freevale is established as a Settlement in-game, a new Voice will be appointed every three months, of which the current one cannot be selected.

Hand of the Council is a position agreed upon by the Council to act as an Ambassador of Freevale to everyone outside of the Settlement. They may be called in to Council meetings to give their view on a subject or testimony but they are not part of the Council and do not vote as a Rep. Any Citizen of Freevale may apply to be a Hand and more than one Hand may be in service at a time.

The primary duty of the Council of Freevale is to vote on what direction the Settlement goes in, what develops and in what order. They will also be responsible for vetting new Companies and Citizens.

-------------------

The Council of Freevale currently has two functions;

*Review information acquired by the Hands and other sources and make sure it is complete and ready to be presented to our Citizens for discussion. This action will typically be reserved for things we may need to vote on later. This is the time to bring up any ideas, positions or qualms about a proposal so that we can get any new info on it we may need. After it's been approved, the Voice will post it in an appropriate forum for the Citizens to read up on and hash out their own opinions. If need be we can bring it back in for another Review afterward and create an updated proposal.

*Vote on a proposal that has been discussed with our Citizens. Each rep will be voting for their Company so they should probably talk about this within their Company, not just the Freevale forum, and get a good idea on their position. Companies are not always going to agree, and that's the point. It's what makes voting on these proposals important. The length of a voting period will vary depending on the proposal. After the votes are tallied the decision will be announced to the public and and Council threads will be locked and moved to the Council Vault where they can be reviewed by any Council member at any time.

It is in the best interest of every Company to have at least one Council representative but it is not mandatory. Neither is it required that a Council rep speak on a review or vote. A Council rep may remove themselves from the position at any time or their Company leader can replace them with someone else with simple notice.

-------------------

This setup allowed all members of the settlement to discuss changes before they were set in stone while not demanding that every single member cast a vote. All Council reps, the Voice and Hands were able to leave and join as they needed. It gave equal representation to the Free Citizens as it did a Company and because the number of Reps were not decided on by size of a Company, an overwhelming force would not be able to just vote everything their way. It would require discussion to bring other groups to your side of an issue.

There was a lot of flexibility for growth and adjustment in this system.

Goblin Squad Member

Gpunk wrote:

We will essentially have 2 rings to our governing structure. The inner ring will consist of the oligarchy, initially formed by and consisting of Blunt Logic members with leadership experience. ...

The oligarchy's decisions will not always line up with the council's vote. Nor will it always diverge. Settlers still have representation and they will still be heard.

So a Military Junta for all practical purposes with BL members having total control and all others having the right to what? The fact you say that decisions will not align with the council's vote means that the council's vote is meaningless for all practical purposes.

What you are describing is not at all what was described as the approach to be taken by Freevale. It is most definitely not why I committed my vote to the settlement, nor why I asked others to commit their votes.

I can appreciate KC's comment that GPunk thinks he knows best but that is irrelevant. The settlement was "sold" as an attempt at a democratic settlement. The timing of this change is highly suspect and I'm rather disappointed.

edit: Cleaver is spelled with a C

Perhaps BL will decide to allow the initial goal of the settlement to play out. That is what would be fair to all the other companies and players that supported Freevale.


KK?!

This reminds me of that time I bought that "Triple K" cereal by mistake... :I

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

KK?!

This reminds me of that time I bought that "Triple K" cereal by mistake... :I

My apologies .. KC it is.

Goblin Squad Member

I am curious as to why no one was sent to replace Gpunk when he resigned and as to why no one from the companies that comprise Freevale has ever taken part in discussions with the Northern Coalition.


Speaking as someone who has conversed with the Northern Coalition several times, my guess is that it's because Gpunk is supposed to be the ambassador. Members from other companies don't get directly involed in negotiating because they aren't supposed to.

I believe CBD also chatted with the NC chaps once or twice.

EDIT: Also, Gpunk resigned?

Goblin Squad Member

Outsiders should have considered their responsibility to participate in the governing of Freevale. How they expect anyone to honor their position when they refuse to participate is beyond me.

I stepped away from dealing with simple matters of state. I only resumed once Freevale committed to not preying on their neighbors. If Freevale would not have made that commitment, I would not have continued on as Ambassador.

Ravenlute was explicitly asked to get involved in recent NC business. He refused.

Goblin Squad Member

3 days is kinda funny... I remember things taking a week at times.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since none of you, us, or them are in game and Freevale is just a project that will not see the light of day for at least 6 months, no one has lost anything... so why don;t you all just recognize that obviously something was broken and work on tweaking it so that it works better.

I know that Pax and TEO/TSV have frequent meet and greets, to give an opportunity for many different people / interests to come together. The UNC membership, the more Paizo forum active ones, are in several Voip channels every day. I personally visit Pax, Blunt Logic, UNC and PFO Fan almost every day (although it has been a while for PFOfan).

There should be a Freevale only get together, followed by an open to public meeting afterwards.

Goblin Squad Member

5 people marked this as a favorite.

In short: "Good news, citizen--you now have the right to obey!"

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Members from other companies don't get directly involed in negotiating because they aren't supposed to.

Why are they not supposed to?

It confuses me when people are getting upset because Gpunk took away their voice, but you've got other members of the NC repeatedly asking them to get involved and literally no one does.

The NC isn't an "Ambassador" thing. Its a representative thing. Augir is the only MA rep in the NC... But he has the authority to act unilaterally. The MA merger into the Empire went exceedingly fast. Less than 12 hours from initial proposal to finalization.

We aren't asking for that. We are asking for "if company x has an issue with 1, the company x leader explains that to the NC".

Don't have a council discussion about it, then wait for a vote, then tell Gpunk and ensure he explains it correctly, then have him present that to us, then we digest it and counter, then Gpunk goes back to the council and presents it, then another discussion, then another vote, then Gpunk bringing it back to us.

If Kolbold Cleaver of the Cannibal Kobolds has an issue with something the NC is discussing it, he brings that up with the NC and it gets addressed.

So, again, why aren't company leaders of Freevale supposed to be involved in something other NC company leaders are?

Goblin Squad Member

-Aet- Areks wrote:
I am curious as to why no one was sent to replace Gpunk when he resigned...

This is the first time I've heard about that. When did it happen?

Bluddwolf wrote:

There should be a Freevale only get together, followed by an open to public meeting afterwards.

I'm sure there will be once Blunt Logic has finished pasting together a new Freevale website because they lack complete control in our current one.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like to think the GW Devs are somewhere wringing their hands gleefully and saying, "ah! Look at what's happened here and they aren't even in-game yet!"

Goblin Squad Member

Ravenlute wrote:
I like to think the GW Devs are somewhere wringing their hands gleefully and saying, "ah! Look at what's happened here and they aren't even in-game yet!"

Do me a favor and make an account at Xeilias so we can talk.

Goblin Squad Member

Ravenlute wrote:
I like to think the GW Devs are somewhere wringing their hands gleefully and saying, "ah! Look at what's happened here and they aren't even in-game yet!"

That is generally the response of the EVE devs, they see this sort of conflict in EVE as "player generated content".

My impression is Goblinworks have a different attitude.

Hopefully you guys get it sorted soon, as the end result will not just be Freevale losing votes, people may leave the game.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Look, I founded Outsiders to help players avoid this kind of drama and let them play the game the way they each wanted. I joined Freevale because Blunt Logic espoused the same principles. Obviously things have changed, but I don't intend to get pulled in to endless bickering over this.

Gpunk wants to cast me as 'non-participating'? I'm not worried. I know plenty of people remember (or can read on this site) the work I did to help found this alliance in the first place. Even some of the people accepting the change know that I was involved in recruiting and/or keeping them in the group. My discussions on our land rush choices, how we should make plans for 'War of the Towers', alpha, resources for trading, and various other issues are still there to see on the Freevale forums.

As are the posts where Gpunk 'asked' me (and everyone else, but also me specifically) to stay out of the NC discussion threads... which he now faults me for not participating in. I'm not the only person who read these things. I have nothing to prove.

How many posts were there about how things couldn't move forward because I hadn't responded? How I was slowing things down? Zero? So, I'm 'non participating' because I didn't take part in the NC discussions Gpunk strongly requested I stay out of... and Ravenlute is an 'obstructionist' because Gpunk didn't like his participation.

Ironically, while Areks is urging, 'hey everyone should come talk to us on the NC forums'... my access to do so has just been removed. :]

That said, I was following the conversation there (yes, I did create an account after all) before the access got yanked and saw that Gpunk was already writing off SBC, Outsiders, and 'possibly Kobold Cleaver' before a single objection had been raised (and while I still thought the whole thing was just an odd joke). As such, claims here of still wanting to work with us ring somewhat hollow. Likewise, I want to assure the members of Aragon/UnC that my supposed 'bias' against them is pure fiction. First I've heard of it.

Finally, I'm going to make the same point that caused Gpunk to blow up and ask me to stay out of NC discussions in the first place... are you sure you aren't counting unhatched chickens? See, at one point some of the NC members were trying to work out the details of how a non-aggression pact would work with what the in-game mechanics were going to be... and then 'War of the Towers' came along and changed almost everything we thought we knew about those mechanics. Plans change. Things get implemented differently than you expect. The in-game settlement of Freevale doesn't even exist yet, but you're completely certain you know how Goblinworks is going to handle its introduction?

Sure, it seems likely the person who posted the winning 'guild' entry will have sole control of each settlement at first... but that's still a ways off. Groups can change leaders (ask Andius). People can drift off to other interests and become unreachable. Goblinworks may need to have some procedure for handing over control to people other than 'guild entry posters' because they may not all be around or the right person any more. Heck, they have talked about how the long term goal is for all founding members of a settlement to be able to establish the government together. Maybe the anomaly of one person being able to over-ride all others that you are counting on for the land rush settlements won't be as set in stone as you are thinking. All the different companies which became Freevale posted their own guild entries at one point and those records could still be around. In any case, the leaders of these groups aren't exactly an unknown on these forums. The weekly land rush update posts kept track of which groups had merged together. You may (in private forums) be saying that Outsiders has been booted, but I'm not accepting the certainty of your ability to DO that. The 'ground' for Freevale hasn't even been broken yet and you're so certain you can dictate the "new management"? Maybe it'll turn out that way, but the future is not yet written.

I'm still going to consider myself a future member of Freevale despite claims I have been booted... because that may not be how it plays out. If it does, I'll have contingency plans in place (many many many private messages flying on this already), but don't think you can just declare yourself emperor and that makes it so. You posted a guild description... and then tossed it out the window the day the land rush closed. Maybe that's not quite as kosher as you seem to think.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

BTW, while I was 'not participating' two days ago I posted the land rush writeup for Freevale to the alpha recruitment forum at the request of some of the members.

Whenever this settles out and we know how Freevale is going to be run I'll go ahead and update that to whatever is appropriate / requested. Doesn't look like there is currently any way to delete it in favor of a new one, but I can edit it and will be happy to do so however things turn out.

Goblin Squad Member

A new government ? UHH... maybe I missed something here, you started out with one person who had all authority and could do whatever they want and nobody can stop them, that is what you still have!

Unlike a traditional mmo guild there needs to be a way to remove the leader of a settlement or it will just be their toy to play with as they want , not a good idea for PFO. I understand the MVP wont have government types but due to the limited number of settlements (guilds) a way to vote out the leader is needed , I think. Settlements need stability to be fun, not a new government because one person 'feels' like it.

Goblin Squad Member

Notmyrealname wrote:


Unlike a traditional mmo guild there needs to be a way to remove the leader of a settlement or it will just be their toy to play with as they want , not a good idea for PFO.

In a lot of MMOs the guild leader is autobooted if he does not login regularly, generally in favor of the person online the most.

This can have the hilarious consequence of the new leader being the newbie who is grinding his new character 24/7 to make it playable.

Goblin Squad Member

KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:
Notmyrealname wrote:


Unlike a traditional mmo guild there needs to be a way to remove the leader of a settlement or it will just be their toy to play with as they want , not a good idea for PFO.

In a lot of MMOs the guild leader is autobooted if he does not login regularly, generally in favor of the person online the most.

This can have the hilarious consequence of the new leader being the newbie who is grinding his new character 24/7 to make it playable.

Which ones are those?

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:
Notmyrealname wrote:


Unlike a traditional mmo guild there needs to be a way to remove the leader of a settlement or it will just be their toy to play with as they want , not a good idea for PFO.

In a lot of MMOs the guild leader is autobooted if he does not login regularly, generally in favor of the person online the most.

This can have the hilarious consequence of the new leader being the newbie who is grinding his new character 24/7 to make it playable.

Which ones are those?

Final Fantasy is one example.

Scarab Sages

WoW and Neverwinter postively have this mechanism. Both for higher officer active...

51 to 100 of 190 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Freevale is under new management! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.