Veilan's LA Q&A

[Faeryl]

If you were given the authority to change any one thing in ALFA, what would it be?

If you found it necessary to mediate a dispute between two other Admin, would you be able to side with one over the other for the betterment of ALFA, even if you didn't fully agree with either party?

The letter of the law or the spirit of the law?

[Veilan]

Hey Faeryl, and thanks for the questions.

If you were given the authority to change any one thing in ALFA, what would it be?

You know, it is rather mean to tempt an LA candidate with actual authority .

But, can I dream? Bring back Wynna, bartleby, Gelcur, Chamu, Gregg, Donrath, pitlatch, HEEGZ, spiderjones, Lemernis, gozo, esio, Elorn, ...kmj as LA... and the list goes on .

If I can't dream, and were granted auhority above and beyond what an LA's role is, I would likely institute some deadline, maybe 4 weeks, by which Admin need to reach conclusions on given issues. This is of course a rather unrealistic thing to actually try for, but I would simply be curious whether it would start a transformation for increased efficiency in our decision-making processes.

If you found it necessary to mediate a dispute between two other Admin, would you be able to side with one over the other for the betterment of ALFA, even if you didn't fully agree with either party?

Heh, a rather interesting question. Firstly, I think every ALFAn knows by know that I am not afraid to stand up for what I believe in, so I would be able to. But, this question has many angles, and I do not see LA as the "leader", but rather as the "greaser" where the machine gets stuck. I would put the betterment of ALFA above my personal opinion if there was a clear conflict - but of course, what is better for ALFA usually is a matter of opinion, no? We have many different viewpoints and criteria by which to define "better". Should we drop perma-death to attract more players, thus making ALFA more lively and thus better? Or would we be making ALFA worse in that we may gain players at the cost of our vision and soul? Both are valid viewpoints, and I would allow my opinion to influence my decision.

But in any case, I would be very reluctant to simply "side" with any one Admin against another. Usually, the charter gives us a clear idea which Admin are responsible for an issue, and with the current team I see little risk of unsolvable disagreements. Mediation is better than siding, and if that fails I would much prefer to try other options first: Put it to a whole Admin vote, poll the playerbase, query the HDMs, make use of the cross-domain-procedure, all with a deadline of say, 30 days tops. If after that we still have an unsolvable dispute, I would "side" with the Admin that is for maintaining perma-death, stand by it, and let the electorate decide next time LA comes up.

The letter of the law or the spirit of the law?

The spirit, clearly.

(Just think that the letter may have been written in english by some weird non-native-speaker! )

I fully support the banning of Khondar & Hazelthorne if that's what this question asks?

In any case, I am lawful aligned and prefer the rule of law to the rule of personae, but rules need to be made for people, not lawyers.

Thanks again for the challenging questions!

Cheers,

[Castano]

Do you believe we have too many servers? My position on this is long standing - more content makes more people log in and play. You can run the numbers pre and post MS going live if you want. Will you actively campaign to remove existing alfa live servers? Will you campaign to pull approvals from the existing beta servers?

[Veilan]

Do you believe we have too many servers?

No.

I do believe that we have a low concentration, and that it should be considered in future decisions. But looking at servers is only one side of the equation. The far better remedy is getting more players, thus increasing the concentration.

My position on this is long standing - more content makes more people log in and play. You can run the numbers pre and post MS going live if you want.

I do not contest the numbers, and I am personally glad we have the Moonshaes - I think you recall how much I enjoyed your ALFA 1 iteration of them, and I have recently begun to explore them in NWN 2. I am rather convinced they are an attractive part of our project.

Will you actively campaign to remove existing alfa live servers? Will you campaign to pull approvals from the existing beta servers?[

Heh, more of a DMA question, isn't it?

But, I do not want to remove any existing ALFA servers. Doing such I would simply consider stupid, as it pisses of players, talented builders and DMs and robs us of our own achievements as a community.

I fully admit though that I am thinking about our concentration. My own idea to help concentration would not be pulling servers or anything crazy like that, though, but far simpler: Simply ease travel. Make all of ALFA feel more like "one" server, so that when you log in to see 1 - 1 - 1 players, you can actually manage to meet up anyway. I am not calling for a revision of the 24h rule as immersion is also a valid thing, but simply a TSM - TMI portal, so that all our servers are connected to all others. That already would be, in my opinion, a huge boon to our concentration.

I do not want to get rid of the land we have. I consider every ALFA server an asset and very great for PR, retention, and our attractiveness. Not to mention a place my character can go explore . But I do not want people to feel and be isolated from one another, but instead see they can reasonably explore those servers together.

I hope that gave you an idea of where I stand, Cast.

Cheers,

[Thangorn]

I'm terrible with this politics stuff. Could you explain what qualifies you more for this job than the other two candidates?

[dirsa]

1. how much wood could a woodchuck chuck is a woodchuck could chuck wood?

2. what lead admin really does?

3. why do you want to do that, and how can we help you?


4. is stug IV really the best answer for poland's annexation? how about tiger tanks instead?

[Veilan]

I'm terrible with this politics stuff. Could you explain what qualifies you more for this job than the other two candidates?

I have the greatest respect for the other two candidate's decision to stand up, but I believe I am simply the more experienced and capable candidate. I have started my political life in this community clashing with Sareena over making standards accessible to everyone, and I have been around through the quake and every other drama we have. My focus has always been this project, and my roots have always been here. I thus have an intimate knowledge and understanding of how things work and would need little to no time finding my bearings.

I have the management skills to get the job done, capable staffers to back me up, and a proper motivation - that I think I can get the job done, not that I do not want someone else to do it. I have a systematic and serious approach to the issue, and while that may not make my nomination as fun, I think I would run an efficient and smooth Administration.

I acknowledge that I may have touched elbows especially with Standards - which's job is unpopular but necessary, and as a staff position, also something to make the DMA get to be the more lenient guy - , but I believe even among my non-supporters few would claim that I am opportunistic or unprincipled. I took no shortcuts for my own gain or populism, and I believe I get at least respect even from those who dislike me.

I have established working relationships with all branches of the community, and I put professionalism first. I respect the Admin domains and consider the LA to be a figurehead and enabler rather than der Führer, greaser rather than leader.

I would bring good knowledge and experience with the main tasks I lined out in my platform - I have been working on and documenting for ALFA here to arguably have the best insight of any present ALFAn, and I am actually studying PR & Communications, so that I may know a bit about how we can get a PR concept, a PR campaign, a media plan or what have you on the way.

I am not the sexy candidate, but I believe I am the best one - else I obviously would have stepped down or not nominated .

I am also not a fan of David Hasslehoff. What more could you want?

[Adanu]

What would you say to those who think you are entirely too strict and cannot see the trees for the forest when it comes to any rule changing? I myself understand that consistancy is good in some cases, but lets face it: NwN2 is *not* the PnP game and trying to pretend it is, is foolhardy.

Sometimes change is a good thing... and I have reservations if you would accept that.

[Veilan]

1. how much wood could a woodchuck chuck is a woodchuck could chuck wood?

That's easy. It's the amount of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked divided by the amount of boards the mongols hoard if the mongol hordes got bored.

2. what lead admin really does?

PR, running elections on time, and prodding if the other Admin don't get along.

3. why do you want to do that, and how can we help you?

The first part is a really good question. I want to do so because I think I can make a positive dent, strengthen our profile, and help develop our project with some actual structure - such as professional documentation. I think I could help increase efficiency in our decision making in cooperation with the other Admin.

You, and everyone, can in fact help, as I plan for a three-pronged approach to PR: The NWN 2 community, the non-NWN DnD hopefuls, and our community itself and thus word of mouth. Telling your friends about ALFA, being active in the community and helping maintain a positive spirit and outlook would already be a good part to broaden our appeal; a can-do spirit would help us attract more talent and players and continue on the increasing numbers we are seeing. I believe we have too long slacked on an actual professional project development in ALFA 2, and that we have great potential to make the future even more bustling and lively than the present.

4. is stug IV really the best answer for poland's annexation? how about tiger tanks instead?

I fully admit that I have a weak spot for the majesty and sheer overengineered awe of the Tiger, but it simply is not an efficient vehicle. StuGs, however, are simple, efficient, effective and elegant, and were the most bang for your buck / Reichsmark.

What would you say to those who think you are entirely too strict and cannot see the trees for the forest when it comes to any rule changing?

Opinions are opinions, and each one is entitled theirs. I appreciate consistency and firmly believe that this project has some core values, but I have myself fought for much of the change that we are now accustomed to - you get to see and know all the rules, you get to vote for your Admins, moderation is no longer anonymous, just to name a few. I think my record speaks stronger than my quote kmj, insistence to give the appearance of a bureaucrat .

I myself understand that consistancy is good in some cases, but lets face it: NwN2 is *not* the PnP game and trying to pretend it is, is foolhardy.

I fully agree, and in fact I am often times attacked for the fact that I do not view PnP rules as the end-all (just check Mirabai's signature ). The nature of our community is far removed from a 4 player, 1 DM setup - we have multiple DMs, servers and a plethora of player characters. You will find many standards discussions plastered with statements from me stressing that very fact. PnP provides us a great inspiration, but simply trying to copy PnP 1:1 does not work for our format. And let's face it, often times people come here who have never played pen & paper DnD - they should not be disadvantaged. ALFA is its very own beast, with its own challenges and opportunities.

Sometimes change is a good thing... and I have reservations if you would accept that.

I understand where the perception comes from, and I am certainly not a revolutionary who campaigns for change for change's sake. Please do consider, though, that as Standards Head I had to do a staff position - and erring on the side of skepticism was expected of me. Let me stress it with a light-hearted quote from chat:

<Kill|zzzZ> CURMUDGEON OMG
<Curmudgeon> What?
<Kill|zzzZ> I have been offended by Veilan
<Kill|zzzZ> He does not cater to my every whim.
<Curmudgeon> That's his job
<Kill|zzzZ> lol
<Curmudgeon> To offend

Now, I cannot claim to not have felt some small amount of glee cultivating my "evil" standards persona (hence why some claim I am not only lawful, but in fact lawful evil aligned), but as Lead Admin, I am fully aware that my role would be a different one, and I would be beholden to the electorate, charter and my own conscience. I am a curious guy and like to explore and experiment - just as I would not demand change for change's sake, I would not try to shoot down ideas simply because they are new. Some merit can be gleaned from everything, if one keeps an open mind.

So, again...

Sometimes change is a good thing... and I have reservations if you would accept that.

I am doubtful I am capable of convincing you otherwise, but the best I could hope for is that you are willing to give it a chance, and vote me out in June if you feel I let you down.

Cheers and thanks for the questions,

[NESchampion]

I'd like to start by noting that I'm willing to stay on and help with Rule Documentation regardless of who takes the reins, at their discretion of course. That said, I have a number of questions below.

To start with preface, the role of LA according to the charter is as follows: "Lead Administrator—Oversight of Administration, Veto & Referral Authority, Election Oversight, and Public Relations. Also responsible for resolving disputes over domain classification of any particular issue."

What (if any) areas of ALFAs administration do you find most in need of oversight presently?

What (if any) areas of ALFAs administration would you seek to change?

Should the Charter be changed to allow elections for Infra Admin, Tech Admin, and DM Admin be open to all members of ALFA to vote, instead of being limited to "all seated Administrators, all HDMs, vote-eligible Administrator Staff as defined in section 3.5, and all DMs"? Why or why not? If not, what purpose do you feel the restricted voting constituency is useful in fulfilling?

---

Before the next question, a bit more prefacing. Advertising ALFA is one thing entirely, but one important aspect that feels lost is player retainment. However I've not seen much information available about our player numbers and trends, information which could be highly useful in indicating any problems with retainment. Details about how many players ALFA brings in each month; how many stay for a month, three months, and six months; and how regularly players trend towards logging in would be useful information for the playerbase and Admin to decide on possible changes and problems.

While player retainment is not explicitly listed under any Admin, would you be willing to pursue gathering information about player retainment available for everyone to look at? Additionally, if player retainment is a problem (something I personally feel is but lack data to support), would you be willing to take initiative, perhaps with DMA and PA, towards finding out the causes of a low player retainment rate and possible solutions?

Thanks for your time,
NES.

[Veilan]

I'd like to start by noting that I'm willing to stay on and help with Rule Documentation regardless of who takes the reins, at their discretion of course.

Well, you would have my discretion, as I sought your willingness to stay on before announcing .

To start with preface, the role of LA according to the charter is as follows: "Lead Administrator—Oversight of Administration, Veto & Referral Authority, Election Oversight, and Public Relations. Also responsible for resolving disputes over domain classification of any particular issue."

What (if any) areas of ALFAs administration do you find most in need of oversight presently?

I believe that the current Administrators have a productive working relationship. There is no head-butting and issues are discussed in a cordial fashion, even when there are disagreements. They are grown-ups and do not need a supervisor, if a problem comes up, it will be dealt with there and then.

What (if any) areas of ALFAs administration would you seek to change?

I have no plans to introduce reforms of ALFA's administration. I would, as stated, seek to prod on quicker decision processes where necessary, but not at the cost of deliberation or by infringing upon Admin's domains.

I have half a mind to query about a revival of the CC, but I believe we have bigger problems to deal with and would try to tackle the role with just three staff heads first.

Should the Charter be changed to allow elections for Infra Admin, Tech Admin, and DM Admin be open to all members of ALFA to vote, instead of being limited to "all seated Administrators, all HDMs, vote-eligible Administrator Staff as defined in section 3.5, and all DMs"? Why or why not? If not, what purpose do you feel the restricted voting constituency is useful in fulfilling?

I personally do not believe the voting constituencies should change. Players have powerful representation not only through the PA, but also the LA already, and it is not a big hurdle to make to DMing or doing staff work around here, with 3 servers live and more in the pipes.

I also believe it makes sense that the people directly, and not indirectly, affected by an Administrator's decision should be the ones to elect them.

And let us not forget that voting may serve as an incentive to give more to the community, even if it is "only" by ad-hoc DMing once a week - which is enough to earn the right for full voting participation, yet simply offers so much more to the community as a whole. Not that playing offers little, but we all know we prefer 4 players, 1 DM to 5 players logged in, don't we?

However, if the respective Admin, with the support of their constituency, approached me with a wish to alter their electorate, I am not fundamentally opposed to considering it, though my personal preference is to keep it as is.

Before the next question, a bit more prefacing. Advertising ALFA is one thing entirely, but one important aspect that feels lost is player retainment. However I've not seen much information available about our player numbers and trends, information which could be highly useful in indicating any problems with retainment. Details about how many players ALFA brings in each month; how many stay for a month, three months, and six months; and how regularly players trend towards logging in would be useful information for the playerbase and Admin to decide on possible changes and problems.

While player retainment is not explicitly listed under any Admin, would you be willing to pursue gathering information about player retainment available for everyone to look at? Additionally, if player retainment is a problem (something I personally feel is but lack data to support), would you be willing to take initiative, perhaps with DMA and PA, towards finding out the causes of a low player retainment rate and possible solutions?

I am glad for the question, as I can whole-heartedly say retention is not lost on me. I replied to one of Cloud's questions already that retention and the mood of the community are important goals in and of themselves, and I stated to dirsa that retention, and in-community happiness, is one of the three prongs of the PR policy I would pursue.

Now, your question touches on something I had tossed around in my mind for a bit, weighing whether it would be considered as "too bureaucratic" against the obvious benefits and uses.
Controlling is the final part of any PR action you take, and benchmarking, even if it is only internal, simply is a tool we have too long foregone. I intended to run bi-monthly polls of happiness with the project while also allowing for qualitative feedback.
Using statistical data from unique logins is something that is within our means to supplement this, and I would very much like to see, and communicate, how we are actually doing against the gloom of too low concentration and comparison against the glory days of NWN 1.

I would be very willing to try to help analyse that data, and make some recommendations to the respective Admins, but again, in the role of an enabler rather than a leader - what the "executive" Administrators do to improve the situation would be within their purview. If it does not work, I would love to be able to tell them with hard data instead of vague generalities.

Thanks for your time,
NES.

You're very welcome, thanks for your challenging questions, and your willingness to continue your work.

Cheers,

[Dorn]

Do you think we should upload a large portion (not the most terribly broken parts) of community things like Kaerdins to expand the variety available to players and add another 'reason' to choose alfa? Does the fact that the vanilla cleric is so overpowered in a low/moderate magic world mean that the arguments about some of kaedrins less balanced 'fixes' become slightly obsolete?

Do you think we should speed up time in ALFA? For example make 1 IG year equivilent to 3 months RL to introduce the capacity for ageing if people wanted to?

Given you, and every other potential admin since time began, note the need for more players and particularly more DMs because of the lack of willingness to curb new server numbers....what active steps are you going to propose to other admin to do about it? How are you going to LEAD alfa towards another of the RP servers out there which regularly has 20-30 people on each of at a time with many DMs?

Are you going to get your girlfriend to play alfa and role up a male character so sylvaine and and her char can cybor online in reverse gender roles?

Can you see a better online way tool for scheduling events like a noticeboard? It's almost impossible to find out wat may or may not be happeneing. Maybe this is a question for Hialmar.

good luck bee-arch

[Veilan]

Do you think we should upload a large portion (not the most terribly broken parts) of community things like Kaerdins to expand the variety available to players and add another 'reason' to choose alfa?

Well, in my eyes, one of the biggest mistakes we made in ALFA 1 was tying ourselves too badly to our own... well, Murky's content, thus missing out / making it hard to implement future community content. Not that ALFA had bad stuff thanks to later efforts, but we were lagging and had some difficulties that might have been avoided.
I am all for adding more content, toys and gimmicks to play around with, if they are reasonably functional and produce more utility than buggery. If other projects have good stuff that we cannot offer, that is a selling point for them, and it would be hard to suffer such from a marketing standpoint.

Of course the ultimate decision whether to add content does not fall within LA's purview. I would see it as my job to argue for it, though.

Does the fact that the vanilla cleric is so overpowered in a low/moderate magic world mean that the arguments about some of kaedrins less balanced 'fixes' become slightly obsolete?

Boosting everyone else certainly is one option for more "balance", but Lead Admin is given nothing more than an opinion on such matters. The details would be left for the executive Admins to hash out. I am, however, not principally opposed to giving boons out for more of a feeling of balance (true balance after all is unattainable, but perceptions matter, and the effort is never in vain); just see my stance on Uncanny Dodge to get an idea what I mean. We just have to stay reasonable and remember that ALFA is not PnP, but in fact a 24/7 CRPG community.

Do you think we should speed up time in ALFA? For example make 1 IG year equivilent to 3 months RL to introduce the capacity for ageing if people wanted to?

And noone would play a half-orc anymore?

I believe our current system works fairly well - 1:1 offline time progression, in-game online time progression, and comic book timing for everything else. It sure is not perfect, but it gives people the option to come to sensible understandings. It neatly bridges the gap between frequent and irregular players and leaves it open to people to age faster or slower within some boundaries (the immersion of their fellows).

But, if as you said "people wanted to", I would have no problem with it.

Given you, and every other potential admin since time began, note the need for more players and particularly more DMs because of the lack of willingness to curb new server numbers....what active steps are you going to propose to other admin to do about it? How are you going to LEAD alfa towards another of the RP servers out there which regularly has 20-30 people on each of at a time with many DMs?

Well, Lead Admin does not have the actual power to lead, unless he acts like a really aggravating strongman. Lead Admin mostly has the power and responsibility to guide. Funnily enough, (An)Führer means both of these things in german - the guide, or the leader.

In any case, I would work the three areas of PR identified. I would try to nudge Admins / HDMs to ease travel restrictions and increase inter-server connectivity - one draw of those other projects is that when you log into their only server, you immediately get to interact with everyone else in that community. They do not have our awesome landmass however, and I believe we need to try for a "ALFA is one server with a lot of playgrounds!" feeling. Letting people hook up is a great thing.

Promoting more DMing is a challenging task. Hopefully attracting talented builders and getting others interested in our project both from outside NWN, the broader NWN community, as well as internal willingness to step up / bring one's friends in would help. I also believe that server-connectivity would also help encourage more people to DM, as you then could more easily sidestep "your" server if your character travels.

Additionally, I would energetically prod DMA to consider some measures to facilitate DMing for those intimidated by the wand. For instance, appointing a Staff Head of Training again, to really cultivate the benefits the re-introduction of PADMship brought. I would even be willing to ponder what could be gained from some obscure and arcane ideas, within reasonable limits (such as NickD's idea to award DMs something, even if it is a token amount). If people really log in and shuffle their feet to gain rp xp as some fear, then we could let them DM in that same time without feeling they "miss out" - of course, it is a tricky issue, as I do not want to "bribe" people for something that should be done out of conviction and their own fun, and we are not sure whether that would actually produce good DMs. But if people feel their job DMing is unappreciated and no fun, then they will not do it, and we must look at how we can make DMing fulfilling and fun for them.

Of course, most of your question touches on things where LA can do little but prod, plead or shout, and nudge. But you know I have no reservations about doing so.

Are you going to get your girlfriend to play alfa

I'm working hard to get her to play! She's scared of the english more than the perma-death, but I'm making some headway, as she has accepted to play in an english NWN 1 campaign with me and agreed to buy NWN 2. Well, agreed to let me buy it for her...

and role up a male character so sylvaine and and her char can cybor online in reverse gender roles?

Nah, we could do that in Goldshire just fine .

Can you see a better online way tool for scheduling events like a noticeboard? It's almost impossible to find out wat may or may not be happeneing. Maybe this is a question for Hialmar.

I had suggested that each server gets a way of actual in game announcements - for instance, that when you log in, you get a brief message saying. "It is late summer. The weather is fair. There is an unusual amount of travel on the Lion's Way." If we could get this going, then I do not see why it should not also announce public sessions - maybe not the secret meeting of the Cyricists . It would, of course, be dependant on HDM support and ease of implementation.

Apart from that, I think the current server boards do a good job of scheduling, as DMs and players announce their availability there. If you tell me a way how to facilitate it, I will look into it - and I think Hialmar was planning to work on an event calender for ALFA, he would have my full support and help for it.

good luck bee-arch

Arch-b*tch?

[Hialmar]

Short answer to Dorn (sorry to hijack the thread):

Can you see a better online way tool for scheduling events like a noticeboard? It's almost impossible to find out wat may or may not be happeneing. Maybe this is a question for Hialmar.

In the previous website I spent countless hours to code a scheduling module that never really got used. Sorry but this won't happen again...

[jmecha]

What will you do if the other two people running for this position publicly announce their withdrawal before you can?