"Join User Groups"

[Lord Drake]

I still stand on my belief - as Davy said - some glitches are harmful (the ones that crash other's computer, ko afk players, etc.), and some are not harmful (lava glitch to level up grenades, ice glitch on CD, end of the world sailing, etc.) even though some of those glitches might lower the performance of the game. Certain glitches - we really cannot put any measurement that is clear enough to proof how bad they could affect game performance. And some other glitches happen to players accidentally without being desired by the players, such as players got stuck out 'floating' outside the ship, or spawning in some odd places.

In other words, as I stated on another thread (https://piratesforums.co/threads/at-the-edge-of-my-wits.6555/#post-110294), I'm not standing on the 'pro' or 'contra' side of the glitches. It all depends on what kind of glitches those are. As for endorsing or supporting glitchers, I would have to say no. That's because the ones who claim to be glitchers, don't want to be limited on what kind of glitches they are so-called allowed or not allowed to do or discuss in this Forums. For that purpose, I do not think that a separate group discussion for glitchers is necessary to have in here.

Now we are back to the execution reality of having interest group's own forum. Having interest group own forums would defeat the purpose of our "forum". We already have separate topic forums, and each of those basically discusses anything that has something to do with the related topic, with the public as the audience/participants. If a group would like to be exclusive and in its own little world/clique discusses the same topic or other so-called 'secrets', then where would the "forum" application be in that case? This makes a big difference since a user group would have its own moderators, and public cannot see the discussions unless they join the user group. The essence of a forum would be gone if discussion moved to separate user groups.

fo·rum/ˈfôrəm/


Noun:

1. A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.
2. An Internet message board.

clique/klēk/


Noun:
A small group of people with shared interests, who spend time together and exclude others.


User groups based off of "guilds" are different in nature though. First of all, guilds are community group that are legit on the Potco game. Secondly, different guilds are comparable to different "families". We all could have the same interests on SvS, PvP, glitching, ranking, looting, and so on (game-related) - or in real life: same interests on sports, music, art, technology, and so on - but we are still parts of different families. My family has different value, rules, life styles, philosophy, than your family. So it is understandable that this Forums could accommodate those families/guilds in different groups to discuss "family/guild affairs", that no one outside the families should get involved. I think that's one analogy we could understand this entire situation. So I would have to say "no" to having user groups based on interests.

Totally called it. xD

 

[Will Nightwolf]

i had in mind there could be different types of groups like Pvp, Svs, Glitchers, etc... its just an idea i had

A user group for just people who pvp and svs won't really work out if you think about it.

1-User groups have appointed moderators who approve entrance. So either

• We'd have mods who let everyone in which would be pointless because a thread already allows everyone in.
• We'd have a bouncer like person who only accepted hardcore pvper's which will cause drama.

2-What's the purpose of having a closed off area for people to talk about pvp or svs?

• Wouldn't you want events to be announced publicly to get more members to sign up
• If you want to talk in private you can just start a conversation and invite as many people as needed

The only reason I can think of at the moment for a user group is for guilds to use their subforum as their own mini site for personal guild information.
User groups aren't made for just random groups some of the reasons it's made is for privacy, easy communication through this site, etc..

 

[Davy Darkrage]

Well, I could see the merit of establishing a particular group of PvP (etc) people, and groups don't have to be invite-only or have group mod approval.. they could be public. It could help with communication or something.

I'm not convinced yet but maybe some sort of forumless group functionality could be included or something.

 

[Punkin Pie]

Well, I could see the merit of establishing a particular group of PvP (etc) people, and groups don't have to be invite-only or have group mod approval.. they could be public. It could help with communication or something.

I'm not convinced yet but maybe some sort of forumless group functionality could be included or something.

I like the group idea for Guilds where the members would have to be approved and not public, or else it would defeat the purpose of having the group. A PVP group I could understand being public though. Thanks Davy for thinking of these things. I hope to have an idea soon also.

 

[Davy Darkrage]

You'd have the option of moderated or public when creating the group if we went this route. Moderated groups would also be able to invite members.

 

[JadeOHayes]

Well, I could see the merit of establishing a particular group of PvP (etc) people, and groups don't have to be invite-only or have group mod approval.. they could be public. It could help with communication or something.

I'm not convinced yet but maybe some sort of forumless group functionality could be included or something.

You mean like Facebook's groups? As long as it's not "closed" for public ... because that is the whole point of it why I'm against it. Being "exclusive" (in quotation marks) but not closed to public, I have no problem with. If they are open for public viewings and participations, like you said, they do not need to have a moderator approval to join (having a moderator to approve is the one that causes it to be exclusive - putting authorization on certain hands). Groups would still need to be moderated, just as forums, because whenever there is communication (discussion, throwing words back and forth), there is a possibility of getting out of control, and that's what needs to be avoided.

 

[LEO]

I thought about and now I'm gonna share something.

This whole group idea going beyond just guilds seems like something that could change the forum so here are my thoughts on it.

I will start by saying that without a doubt, this is the most active forum right now and most likely has been the most active and fastest growing since it was started. It's come a long way and it definitely can keep going a lot more. There are so many features and so easy to use. There isn't much new stuff missing here really. I've said this before and I will repeat it again, This forum has progressed a lot faster than the game it represents(that's if anything in POTCO is progress). Keep it that way.

To get to the main point that has to do with creating groups(that are non-guild) in my opinion could hurt the forum in the long run. Guild groups are good because they give the guild something to do and bring them closer. Other groups however such as svs, pvp, glitch... to name a few, as already mentioned by Jade and Davy hurt the purpose of the forum. To connect this to the paragraph above, the reason the forum has been constantly successful is due to the freedom, the many features it offers yet simple to use, and the environment which is for the most part positive(though sometimes things can get out of control but no one/thing is perfect) therefore when making changes that could effect how we post, how users interact with one another, it should be taken seriously as I am sure the leaders of this forum will do because so far it has been good. This is a Forum so it should stay that way. No need to complicate things.

In my opinion making groups that correspond with part of the game would just break the purpose of the forum. If things are great as they are now, let them be great. We tend to believe that change is good but that's not always the case. I like SvS... I still play the game because of it(and friends) but I have posted what I wanted to post already. The SvS events I held were okay on the event sub-forum. I have posted almost 1,000 messages so far which is something I never imagined when signing up originally. When Adhy invited me to join the forum, It took me a while to decide then just said why not. That "why not" proved to be better than other POTCO sites. And I am a member on other sites and try to stay active but a lot of them have flaws that can be fixed but somehow like in POTCO, get ignored so I am not trying to be bias or be mean towards other sites.

Guild Groups which could later lead to little sub-forums is great in my opinion because it helps the guild leaders and members manage the guild within the forum without distractions, etc. Other than that, I think the all the specific sub forums starting from "New Members" to this "Site Feedback" do the job of sharing, helping or just spending some free time just fine for me.

 

[James Birkshaw]

Well, I could see the merit of establishing a particular group of PvP (etc) people, and groups don't have to be invite-only or have group mod approval.. they could be public. It could help with communication or something.

I'm not convinced yet but maybe some sort of forumless group functionality could be included or something.

Hey Davy, I was just wondering what distinctions would exist between some so-called "forumless group" and a subforum "section" (Like "The Shipyard" or anything else we have currently on the actual forum). How exactly would a group operate compared to the operation within the organization already implemented here?

 

[Davy Darkrage]

Hey Davy, I was just wondering what distinctions would exist between some so-called "forumless group" and a subforum "section" (Like "The Shipyard" or anything else we have currently on the actual forum). How exactly would a group operate compared to the operation within the organization already implemented here?

That's what I'm trying to work out, there's a lot of different directions to run with this.
To clarify, by 'forumless' I mean groups that are not given their own forum section. They'd still exist within the boundary of "Pirates Forums" and the community here.

We could allow for "clans" which would basically be 'guild' type groups that don't exist as guilds in the game, that would get their own subforum.. or even branch that out to a pages feature like on FB. No matter what, not everyone will be able to create a group.

How this ends up is really more up to you guys, I want this to work in the favor of the community.

So far the plan is to allow guild representatives who want their own guild group to come to us, and we'll give them access to create it. They'll be able to give their group a name, description, and photo, and decide whether or not to make it open or closed. Closed groups could also send out invites to members, but I want to implement that in a way that doesn't quickly become annoying. Members of the group would have access to view and post in their own subforums, which are created by the group admin. The group admin can also appoint group moderators to approve members and moderate the group subforums.

If anyone has any ideas to improve the concept, I'd like to hear them.
Thanks to everyone who's given input so far.

 

[Punkin Pie]

The system will be designed specifically for guilds, but I'm open to ideas. What do you have in mind?

Stand your ground Davy lol. Your original idea for guilds-only is best. That's what the Forums is, all the info that PVPers and SVSers and anyone else needs. I don't "think" they would need a specific "user group". If that were to happen, I may want a user group for "Italians" or a "Baking Group" lol. Pull ease. (Chaos)