I wanted to take a moment to reread this from top to bottom in order to gauge just where exactly this conversation went off the rails. Here’s the full audit.
I. It began when @Cheeseus (either playfully or otherwise) called me out:
My claim that a DKP system solved the issue of players arbitrarily deciding who gets what…was in fact, a contradiction to my own rule that the officers would intervene if a bid was about to go wrong. In this first bit, I’m an alleged hypocrite, smiley faces aside.
II. There are a series of posts back and forth between @Dalans and @Cheeseus regarding exact amounts of DKP at the end of the day, none of which is relevant to the claim in I. above. The banter does give them both an excuse to start hating each other more, though. Flared tempers follow, as do insults. It’s appropriate from neither of them, but it continues.
III. @Cheeseus becomes pedantic about the use of the word “currency”. Uncalled for shot back at @Dalans, but the fact remains that DKP isn’t, nor is ever, currency. That players get caught up in the naming conventions, ie: spend, save, hoard, etc. is a sad state of affairs that I have little control over. All I could do as GL was continue to beat the dead horse. DKP is not currency, and thinking of it as such skews your perspective of what you feel you are entitled to. A better analogy of DKP is round robin with numbers. In continuing to think about DKP as currency impacts further decisions…read on.
IV. It’s at this point @Cheeseus ultimately delivers what’s really on his mind: It is unfair to make a claim that DKP isn’t corruptible when compared to Loot Council, if the DKP rules aren’t clearly defined and to the letter. In short, @Cheeseus is very much offended the proposition that DKP is a better/superior system to loot council…when officers could wield their power at the 11th hour and step in to decide “what is right and wrong” – which (again, in @Cheeseus’s eyes) is no different than a loot council.
Now that the actual claim is made, a real analysis and debate of the two systems could take place…
…unfortunately, @Cheeseus instead takes the opportunity to insult @Dalans’ car, which does nothing but fuel the fire.
V. @Dalans points out a number of examples to further the argument that DKP is not a currency, which are reasonable. He then uses these examples to make another claim: people that consider DKP a currency very often have only but themselves as a consideration. This went against DoD’s ideals, which was always a team endeavor.
He also voices an opinion that Loot Council commonly fail because people suck. There isn’t any hard data, but many of us have seen it. Nevertheless, it is opinion (and one I share).
@Dalans also claims that we very specifically clarified in our rules that officers could/would intervene if necessary. He finished the rebuttal with the claim that “giving a player an item on their way out the door is a stupid idea.” – The intent of this is to point out how it made no sense that the task of earning tools to become better carpenters would have absolutely no effect on a carpenter leaving the construction site. @Cheeseus misinterprets this as a personal insult, thinking he himself to be called “fucking stupid”, while failing to pay attention to a perfectly logical claim, and the fires are fueled further.
By this point, the tally reads as follows:
-
@Cheeseus: Claim - DKP is just as easily corruptible as Loot Council: Proof: DoD officers could intervene at any time.
-
@Dalans: Claim - DKP is not a currency. It is a measurement of a person’s effort to ensure they earn loot at appropriate intervals, which in turn, contributes to the greater good (the strength of the raid). Proof: The various ways in which it is not transferable, is worthless outside of the game, etc.
Ok, two entirely valid claims, albeit completely different. Now, let’s see who handles what.
VI. @Cheeseus asks for clarification on what rule I’ve written down that says explicitly that DoD can/will intervene if a bid/loot is going to go awry. The writing does not exist, as it was unwritten and carried with us from Vanilla/TBC. I’ll own that. He again reiterates a lack of transparency around the DKP loot system, and has a perfectly valid point.
He also insults @Dalans’ ability to deal with people, which has no bearing on the discussion, and is another ad hominem attack (look at the poster). He also counterclaims that not allowing a player to spend their currency is “equally retarded” – but this is still from the point of view of considering DKP is currency, which it is not (see above). He claims it was unfair for me to ask him not to bid on the way out, and again, is completely within is right to believe that.
This…again…is an opinion: @Cheeseus’ opinion of right and wrong. We’ll get back to this shortly.
@Cheeseus asks for a list of players that abused loot rules that were “dealt with”. I provide list. He begins to explain them away, I delete the post – as it contains OMG SPOILERS.
V. After I make some clarifications, @Cheeseus rebuts @Dalans again clarifying his argument that both loot systems are viable, so long as expectations are made clear up front. Let’s compare with the above notes:
Claim - DKP is just as easily corruptible as Loot Council: Proof: DoD officers could intervene at any time.
Well, similar…but not quite the same. A factor is still missing: the group of players in which it works/doesn’t work for. I would argue that both systems are viable if expectations are clear up front and a particular group of people are involved (small, tight-knit group of players that know each other well for LC). Based on the new claim, both DKP and LC would work well for a small group. Now, flip it to a large group. Would DKP and LC both work for them? Highly unlikely. Quite possible, though! What proof can we offer for this claim?
…us. There was too much churn and too many complex dynamics between the Raiders and the Elite for LC to have ever been effective. Even with full transparency, it would have been very easy to make bad calls or upset players that were less-than-110% invested, thinking we were “playing favorites”. Someone on Twitter mentioned LC worked for their 40-Man raid but the kicker was that their recruitment process took FOUR MONTHS. We didn’t have that amount of time.
@Cheeseus goes on to defend this stance by saying “No where does it say that you are supposed to be interested in the raid only to help the raid progress”
That would be right here, in the Red Flags post:
http://forums.descendantsofdraenor.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12341&p=105434&hilit=red+flag#p105434
We don’t raid for gear; we raid to see progression and experience content. If your intentions are to gear out for PvP (which doesn’t happen much post 1.0), do us a favor and let someone go to a raid in your place that gives a shit about the guild and not about their own personal agenda.
Note my vitriolic circa-2008 tone in the last sentence. The guild comes first, not your perceived currency which isn’t actually a currency. That means the loot you earn is a privilege that comes with joining the progression raid.
Unfortunately, this once again falls on my shoulders, as I chose the wrong language to describe our intent (Guild Ranks and their Requirements / Rights / Responsibilities). I’ll own this as well. Regardless of my mistake in the language I used, the intent should still have been crystal clear – and to folks who were aligned with the guild, this was never even a question that came up.
@Cheeseus then tries to come up with a LC transparency example, but unfortunately, posting logs publicly after the fact is too late; LC means that you’re deciding on-the-fly who gets what. And all it takes is one bad decision for the fabric of your guild structure to unravel. If the person who was rejected cries “Ah fuck them, they only favor their friends”, what defense do you have to stand on to say otherwise? A publicly posted log of raids describing how poorly the person was a contributor, and therefore, did not deserve the loot?
That’s what DKP is. A log of everyone’s contributions.
VII. @Dalans rebuts, no name calling.
VIII. @Cheeseus returns, more calls of ‘hypocritical thinking’ and turns @Dalans’ explanation back on him, to make it sound as if they are in agreement. The claim of “needing to rely on asking people not to loot” is an attempt to punch a hole in the “Perfect DKP system”, but it is also commonly known that no system is perfect, so I’m not entirely sure why he choose to use this as grounds to stand on.
And another ad hominem attack on @Dalans and his abusive admin powers – again, uncalled for, doesn’t progress the debate at all, and it is irrelevant as to whether or not @Dalans being in charge of a Loot Council would guarantee it wouldn’t be beneficial for anyone.
IX. @Dalans misinterprets a joke made by @Cheeseus reference this week’s blog post, re: Bulwinkul calling Lexxii a cunt. He calls @Cheeseus’s experience into question by pointing out the size of the Eh Team: small, tight-knit group, which we’ve claimed already is a good choice for LC.
X. @Cheeseus doesn’t understand @Dalans’ misunderstanding of the joke re: Bulwinkul, and @Cheeseus turns it back on @Dalans, demanding to know how many guilds he has run.
XI. Some chatter back and forth. @Omaric steps in, as does @Klocker.
XII. @Cheeseus claims to have been part of multiple guilds with multiple loot systems. Still doesn’t progress either claim: @Cheeseus’ personal experience has no bearing on whether or not a) loot systems are all fine given the right documentation or b) DKP is/is not a currency. However, more insults from @Cheesus, “how fucking useless you are, etc.”
This is where he attempts to clarify the use of the Bulwinkul quote, then weaves me in as a defense on editing @Dalans’ post, which did to bring clarity to an argument, removing ambiguity on whether or not it was a personal insult (it wasn’t). By this point, I’ve officially lost count at the amount of personal attacks @Cheeseus has made against @Dalans.
@Cheeseus quotes himself (??) and demands an answer on fairness regarding his hypothetical loot situations.
XIII. @Jungard enters, well written clarification on the overall issues.
XIV. It’s at this point that @Dalans begins his own ad hominem attacks (which I’m sure is out of frustration). What’s the tally by this point? I honestly don’t know that I would’ve last this long. As an aside, he does offer answers to @Cheeseus’ questions.
More fighting and attacks. None called for or appropriate.
XV. @Cheeseus clarifies that he is fine with both systems but reveals that what upsets him is when players claim LC is terrible without having tried it. If this had been stated near the beginning, a lot of insults and wasted breath could’ve been saved. It’s a perfectly valid opinion to hold – I hate it when my kids say they hate Spinach when they’ve never even tried it.
…but once again, this opinion has nothing to do with a) all loot systems are fair, provided adequate documentation, or b) DKP is/is not a currency. It’s at this point that it’s clear @Cheeseus has taken personal offense to the claim that LC sucks. Perfectly fine to be upset by the claim, esp. if you’re partial to it…but it does not excuse personal attacks, nor allow you to reframe the argument.
Few more back-and-forths, not worthy of mention.
So what am I left with at the end of this? Well, here’s what we know, after stripping away all the insults, misunderstandings of bad jokes, and clarifications:
-
DKP is not a currency: @Cheeseus offered a number of ways that it can be thought of as a currency, but I repeated this mantra to the guild until the end of time: It’s not currency. Anyone who chose to continue to believe that it was as a convenience for the arguments was only fooling themselves. It may have been a currency to other guilds, but it wasn’t to us. Any further arguments based on the fact that DKP was a currency in the context of DoD are invalid. Sorry.
-
All Loot Systems are Fair, Provided Adequate Documentation and Full Transparency: Disagree. The main difference about the “intervention” is that in LC, it is the modus operandi. Every single loot is an intervention. A group of your peers are gauging whether you deserve an upgrade or not. When we intervened, it was in an emergency situation – to stave off a possible horrific bidding/looting gone awry. We very rarely (if ever!) had to intervene, but it was pertinent to have the rule in place as a safeguard to our members.
This is an entirely separate issue from me pulling someone aside and “encouraging” them not to loot. It wasn’t a definitive yes/no. It wasn’t a demand. It wasn’t an order. I would very much have liked it if people, on their way out, didn’t take upgrades from people who remained. And if you respond to this by saying “Oh, come ON Hanzo, the way in which you asked…how could I have looted without feeling like a complete dbag??” then you are correct. If you were guilty as a result of my ask, then you know exactly why I did.
It is because loot upgrades belonged to the raid, growing strong, progressing, and working together as a team. Your final two weeks in the roster was as a courtesy to me so that I could find a replacement. But by no longer being a part of the team, it simply did not make any sense other than for personal gain to loot on your way out. You may spin this however you wish (and again, I’d like to point out that I’ll own the fact that I did not write this down – this was my fault and nobody else’s) but at the end of the day, if you feel so strongly about that this treatment of you was unfair, then I apologize for the ask…
…and it was my mistake for putting trust in your ability to align yourself with the best interests of the guild.