Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk

Feb-12-2006 17:59

The time is here to start invitations to Mojo Enterprises.

http://www.geocities.com/sleuth.mojo/home.html

This is a group effort by several detectives to create a fun, helpful and competitive enviroment for people to participate in.

We welcome you to look over our guidelines, our code of conduct and mission statement.

To show that we want to help everyone we are also posting for the first ime in public some (not all ;) ) of Mojo's hunting guidelines.

Feb-16-2006 06:52

Icecream.

This reply has been deleted by a Moderator

Feb-16-2006 07:18

I am making an executive decision here. It's not abnormal that after a change of topic stuff is moved to a different board. We all know what this conversation is about right now, and actually the thread title in still on track.

For continuem sake in terms of a discussion that no matter on what side of the fence someone stands is important. This needs to be dealt with, and is not going to go away.

1. Either a consensus is reached and we continue to discuss this, we make a decision we can all live with at the end of it. Which means this should go in to Sleuthtalk.

Or....

2. Mojo accepts that despite this is upsetting people, they want to do this anyway. Make a statement as such, so people can stop explaining why they do feel it is bad idea to this. So we can move on and the other people make a decision if they want to stay in sleuth or not, play treasure hunts or not. Or talk to Ben. After which I will happily remove thread.

I see a lot of people talking, I see a lot of people not willing to listen, I see a lot of people putting words in the mouth of others or making false conclusions as to what other people are trying to say. Maybe we should all take a deep breath and calmly actually read this thread.

Let me be very clear here. Depending on what rules you set for yourself, Mojo has done nothing wrong. As there is no user agreement (god knows maybe it is time for one), we all play by our own rules. You can not judge anyone by your own rules, you can however discuss why you feel certain things are not such a good idea. Mojo works VERY hard, have a good way of working together. And anything discussed here, should not and in the case of most people posting IS not, an attempt to say to Mojo they are cheating or they are lazy or don’t deserve to be number 1. And certainly not be a personal slam towards a member in Mojo itself. As for Mojo, please try to see what others are trying to explain, and don’t just dismiss it.

Feb-16-2006 07:18

And ask yourself, is having this worth it to you? Was sleuth such a horrible place to be when you only had 1 active agency? (sleeping agencies is not what we are discussing here.) Is it worth it to have others be unhappy by it? If the answer is in favor of having it, then just say so and then we all just have to learn to live with it, and see where it takes us. Then we will see in the future who is right and who is wrong.

There are no formal written rules. However the lawyer in me knows that formal written rules can be equally important in a court room as unwritten rules. It's in terms of unwritten rules where we disagree, some feel there are unwritten rules and some don't. Some feel that this is going to distroy the community, others feel it will enhance it. Discussion is good.

Mojo I’d copy and paste the header of this thread myself so you guys can have a clean recruitment thread. Please do so, should take you a few seconds.

Now that this thread is moved to sleuttalk, discussion about anything else then this issue is off topic.

Feb-16-2006 07:53

The way I see things this is the natural normal evolution of agencies.

As stated before there are at least two functions for an agency.

Hunting and community.

Having a group of agencies opening and honestly telling everyone that they are cooperating and sharing can not be a bad thing if the alternative is secretive behind the scenes scuttling in the dark.

Yes I personally see why others are upset. Change is upsetting. Being upset does not stop the change. I am being told that this is the third time this issue has come up. The community needs to ask itself why that is.

If there is a balance issue it is with hunting. Multiple agencies can not hunt for each other as was correctly pointed out. Mutiple agencies can share detectives and choose which agency to "push" just like any good agency helps to "push" an individual detective.

As to the point of rules written and unwritten.

Rotation of detectives in and out of an agency is part of the rules. It can not be "unfair" to follow the rules and do things that are allowed under them. I have suggested in other threads possible solutions to the issue of rotation. Please go there and make a comment as to how a rule could be implemented.


One last point in this post and I will let others post their opinions.

If we wanted to create uber agencies that were built to intentionaly harm other agencies the easiest way to do that is to quickly build up a large group of agencies and have multiple ones in each city. We have demonstated that is not our intention by declining applications by other agencies to join us. This is a way to build community and help strengthen ties between agencies.

I know that if Detective X comes to us and asks for help in obtaining a set of Orbs for her agency we would do that. Does it make the game easier for that other detective becasue we are willing to help them get the best price? Likely yes. Does it make for a better community? I think it does.

Feb-16-2006 08:11

Looks in her crystal ball: the community will always be split on this. There are reasons for and against, on both sides.

Feb-16-2006 08:23

I agree with you.

The only thing that makes me feel upset is that people claim that following the rules is somehow unfair.

I never expect people to automatically agree (or disagree) with me, I want a lively debate where everyone gets to make their points.

Yet that does not mean that one side has to win, both can be equally valid.

Feb-16-2006 13:32

I think the debate on this will always be going on.

Either there is a set rule for it by Ben or there will always be this argument.


I think R Anstett and I think we have the right to do this. Whether people agree with it or not, it can/is going to be done. That's not to say, "We're gonna do it so deal with it." Not at all. We simply find nothing wrong with the concept. I know for a fact agencies in the past (which I shall not name in specific) have done this type of thing and become very successful. Either no one cared then or no one knew.

Feb-16-2006 14:42

Well, I know Mojo means well when they want to create Mojo Enterprises. And it is natural for this to become a heated debate over whether this will ruin the community, or it will help it. But let me give you a brief view of what I see in this...

My agency is falling apart. I thought if I could have an alliance with the Mojo's, my agency would be restored and everything would be back to normal. After the founder left unexpectadly, I knew Mr. T's would be in ruins in a couple of weeks. Thank God Sam Average stepped forward and is continuing to support my agency.

I'm not sure whether I should be disappointed that the Enterprises has rejected my agency. Sure, I'm not getting the alliance I thought I wanted, but the points everyone has made is slowly changing my mind. Will Sleuth's community crumble if it becomes eerily like Survivor? Or will it make it more enjoyable?

I'm deciding that everyone should lay off with the alliances and stick to the game and enjoy it. My verdict is that adopting alliances for this game is going overboard. If everyone has an alliance, where would all the competition go? And it certainly won't help if another uber agency is created. That would cause too much fighting.

Then there is the unsubscribed players who have never experienced an agency. Some are probably ignoring the issue, others are probably fussing over it. Where would they stand in this? We're treating them like an audience. But then again, none of this concerns them...

Ben should make a decision. We should let him decide where his game should be going. He created it, and he's the one who shall rule it. I've said enough already. I'd better go and catch up on cases that I've missed.

Feb-16-2006 14:54

I think it should be a choice. The game can still be enjoyed and noone is forcing anyone to be in an alliance. If you don't want to be in one, great...don't. The competition is still there,no matter what.

I do see where everyone is coming from, but I don't see anything as unfair. That is MY opinion.

As you said, Ben should and is the one who makes the final decision , and whatever happens, happens. Whether we're for the change, or against, we'll have to accept it....no matter which way it turns. I will enjoy the game either way :)