Rules Team Rulings - 22-APR-2013

@DeathinaBottle: You aren't asking about process now. You want justifications. That isn't process.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

If the process involves divining new VTES cards by reading chicken entrails whilst consulting the I-Ching... and makes VTES a good game...

I DON'T CARE

If the process involves Ozzy Osbourne levels of cocaine before making banning decisions... and makes VTES a good game...

I DON'T CARE

If the process is to get a bunch of trusted and experienced players to give commentary on what they see happening in tournaments... and makes VTES a good game...

I DON'T CARE

Why do you care what method is used if it gets the results we want Eric? Don't we all want a good strong game that is fun to play?

1. I personally view that attitude as a "Bread and Circuses" mindset that abdicates a civic duty to be informed. It was prevalent during Roman times and even in the modern era you see it in all manner of governments and regimes (i.e. both dictatorships and democracies) - as long as people are happy, they don't really care what's going on. I love VTES and it is because of that love of VTES that I feel it is important to try and be informed.

2. Suppose an unknown process leads to a good result. Understanding how the process works might lead to improvements and refinements that can allow even better results. (In this case, my goal is not to change things, but it's an example of how understanding how something works can be helpful).

3. Wanting to know how and why is a very natural thing. Just look through the history of science and you'll find plenty of individuals who, despite knowing that X causes Y, were much more interested in understanding how and why X causes Y.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

I'm doubting that the VEKN will be doing anything at all to get to the "ends". I'm very much doubting that the means used involve taking people into darkened rooms and beating them up. It's the VEKN, not an international spy agency.

You're right - the VEKN is not an international spy agency. So why does there need to be so much secrecy and lack of transparency?

I guess one issue where we disagree about is that you think that the VEKN is already very transparent whereas I do not think it is very transparent at all. Even when I was on the Inner Circle I didn't think the VEKN was very transparent and there were plenty of processes and inner workings which weren't clear at all (even to IC members)! B-)

I think that Hugh explained fairly carefully what the process is:
- If you have a beef with a card in the game, you contact Pascal.
- If you think a card needs revision, you contact Pascal.
- If you have found a problem with how a card skews the metagame, you contact Pascal.
- If you think others agree with your wish to nag Pascal, you put it on the forum and nag Pascal that way.

And in many ways, it seems that Pascal is the Chief Officer of Rules & Cards and his word is VTES law. If you don't like that system, then I suggest you pester the IC. If they think it works fine, then you'll just have to suck it up and deal with the fact that Pascal makes the decisions.

And if this *was* all of Pascal's decision, then you are right.

But if the decision was actually the Inner Circle's (and Pascal merely executed it), then all these "you contact"'s should be at the Inner Circle.

Or if the decision was actually the Chairman's (and Pascal merely executed it), then all these "you contact"'s should be at Johannes.

That is why it is important to understand the relationship between Rules Director / IC / Chairperson.

The decisions for cards and rules is not a democracy it is effectively a monarchy.

I agree it is not a democracy.

Yet many officers of the VEKN commonly portray the VEKN as a representative body. And even amongst the National Coordinators, there is disagreement about how the VEKN actually functions (which is a different topic than how it "should" function). If even the NC's don't all understand the structure of the VEKN and how it works, then I think that's a big problem.

I am an informed citizen. I read the forums, I read the cards, I look at decks winning tournaments, I run tournaments, I participate in playtesting, I enjoy speaking with a lot of people in the VEKN and playing VTES.

I don't think we need to worry about the design process of cards, if the cards being produced are good.

I don't think we need to worry about the details of Pascal's inner thoughts, if the changes he makes benefit the game. Especially since both Pascal and Hugh have said that he actively seeks expert opinions from around the world via direct conversations, emails and the forums.

Just like I don't think the minutes of every VEKN IC meeting need to be public knowledge, the details of every thought of the RTR Process don't need to be justified heavily in public. If you'd like the level of transparency you want regarding RTRs (past, present and future), then we should also make public IC-Meeting minutes back to when VEKN got hold of the game. There isn't much point in insisting on one aspect of the VEKN being highly transparent and open to extensive scrutiny without doing it to the rest. That however, is a decision for the IC, because they would then have to consider how much of the rest of their activities should be highly transparent especially considering the chance for Commercial in Confidence items to appear on agendas and in the minutes.


And this is a fairly cynical thought, even deliberately cynical, why is this important to you now when it was not important when you were on the IC as Storyline Coordinator?

Ok, i was starting to assume what eric was asking at awhile ago, but now im certain:

Pascal making the decisionsxor it rolling onto him.
Ad csrcws anyonexhas insinuated, its been all his area, hjs project, thus far.

As far as transparency, if the ic claims to have X degreexof transparency, they should have it. If they dont, then they damn well better have a good reason.
And, in my opinion, the fact is they seem to bexhinging many decisions and variables on the now very real possibility that we see print again. That entire situation being the paperwork hurricane it is, with thexpotentially volatile components of the licensing to OUR game, i think it may be a safexassumption that a large part of anything not being done in the open has everything to do with that. Id go as far as to say that after we seexprint, any member of the IC would probably talk ooenly in person or online about aspects of the process.

As far as transparency to the processes, which is what Eric really has been asking for in this threads entirety, there may not be a simple process, and this being a volunteer organization, its probably way looser than that.

While juggernaughts cocaine and entrails theories may be legit , i think theres probably just alot of pascal spending months researching things, bouncing ideas ofc of players and IC, then delivering his decision to the IC before posting it publicly.

Speculation, obviously, but it seems realistic. Even though i think there should be a large couldron, a ritual dagger, and a human sacrifice involved .............

Also, did anyone else notice Reyda and Ohlmann agreeing on things?



Someone should wrife this down. Record it for posteritys sake, so we can publish it in a book sometime...