+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Government District (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-5.html)
+--- Forum: Regional Security (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-53.html)
+--- Thread: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing (/thread-6121.html)
What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Seraph - 04-20-2018
I think the dispatch is fine. Endorsements are, essentially, public information anyway and whilst this makes certain endorsement behaviors more obvious, it is not the publication of private or confidential information.
I would be happy with some sort of disclaimer at the start declaring that all nations have a right to endorse who they please and that no one is forced to endorse the CRS or the delegate, nor should anyone on the list be considered disloyal for choosing to remain there.
Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk
RE: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Lakania - 04-20-2018
(04-19-2018, 05:22 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote:(04-19-2018, 03:58 PM)Lakania Wrote: you've been here since 2014
Actually he's been here for around 10 years. Southern Bellz is one of our most historical members still around.
Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk
Even more reason to realize the importance of Endo's then.
RE: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - southern bellz - 04-20-2018
Maybe I'm the only one, but I find the publish publicly but never ask personally style of communication disrespectful. I'm glad to see at least one member of the committee admit that that style of communication isn't tactful, but disappointed in what seems to be the majority feedback that ease of communication trumps the right way to communicate.
Thank you Far for encouraging my feedback both on here and in discord. I appreciate that.
What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Kris Kringle - 04-20-2018
I don't think anyone here has denied your right to provide input. My own post suggested that this was an excellent chance to ensure that the dispatch better conveys our intended message. We're just saying that the dispatch itself is a useful and effective tool, isn't inherently offensive or disrespectful, and therefore would continue to be used.
Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk
What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Seraph - 04-20-2018
Indeed. While I'm sorry you feel you have been disrespected, no disrespect has been intended at all. The fact that this conversation has us considering wats to better ensure misunderstanding and offense are not caused is a sign that you are being listened to and considered.
Sent from my KOB-L09 using Tapatalk
RE: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Tsunamy - 04-20-2018
(04-20-2018, 07:42 AM)southern bellz Wrote: Maybe I'm the only one, but I find the publish publicly but never ask personally style of communication disrespectful. I'm glad to see at least one member of the committee admit that that style of communication isn't tactful, but disappointed in what seems to be the majority feedback that ease of communication trumps the right way to communicate.
Thank you Far for encouraging my feedback both on here and in discord. I appreciate that.
For the sake of this discussion, what exactly, are you taking issue with? Is it the fact that you weren't asked privately first? The "shaming" effect of the Dispatch? Both?
Meaning: If someone TG'd you first and then put you in a dispatch, would that been better? My instinct is to say that that would be worse but ...
In any case, let me make two points.
A) I think getting "pinged" is what makes it feel shaming. But, it's also not like everyone is getting pinged about you. There are dozens if not hundreds of nations in the region that are getting these pings. So it's like not anyone is like "Oh, look at SB that slacker ..."
B) Acknowledging this has been successful — and that you're a long time SPer who knows what's what — do you have any suggestions are how we could square this circle? Would it help if people like yourself could request to be taken off the list? Or were contacted first? Or ... both?
RE: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Roavin - 04-20-2018
SB, What if the dispatches gave general information and didn't include specific lists for each CRS member, but rather just one list of affected nations posted in a spoiler, with the noflag nation parameter, and with the smallest text size possible?
RE: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Farengeto - 04-20-2018
(04-20-2018, 04:54 PM)Roavin Wrote: SB, What if the dispatches gave general information and didn't include specific lists for each CRS member, but rather just one list of affected nations posted in a spoiler, with the noflag nation parameter, and with the smallest text size possible?The problem with that is that it removes one of the functionalities of the dispatch. The purpose of splitting it by CRS member is so the mentioned nations can figure out who they haven't endorsed. It's more easy for a user to check with this.
It's not as though we're relying on information that is secret or hard to access either, with a data dump one can easily find all of this in literally seconds. The suggestion mostly just tries to pretend we don't have what we already do, while making the dispatches both less effective and useful in the process.
As for TGs, they were investigated but simply were not practical. With API rate limits, performing this would take 4-6 hours just with current WA numbers. Meanwhile dispatches can perform this in a minute, with an arguably less intrusive notification.
While some users may have a personal grudge or such, this system is built on the more optimistic assumption that most people just haven't done the endorsement yet. Maybe they're new, maybe they forgot, maybe they don't know, or maybe they've just already gone inactive. This is supposed to be a gentle reminder to endorse the Delegate and the CRS, and it's why I've reached out on a number of occassions about trying to improve the message.
RE: What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - southern bellz - 04-20-2018
I don't believe anyone has infringed on my right to provide input, to set the record straight. And I acknowledge that I have spoken out in a harsh manner, and still my feedback has been mostly encouraged, and I appreciate that.
@Tsu. I do not like the combination that it is public, that no one has reached out to me in the process, and apparently if I choose not to comply I am going to get weekly pings reminding me. I also think what is being published is being misrepresented, unless I totally don't understand. I don't find what has been published as easily obtainable public data. If that was the case, there would be no reason to publish or communicate it.
My suggestion going forward, now that everyone who is on the list has been pinged twice, would be to switch communication to TG and change the communication to remove nations that have already been contacted. That should reduce the length it takes to run the API. Basically, now that everyone that has been contacted, the communication could focus on staying up to date.
What's the deal with publicly tracking and shaming every nation that isn't endorsing - Kris Kringle - 04-20-2018
You can always just adjust your notification settings.
Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk