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 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 :)

Feb-16-2006 15:50

Okay, I've been silent because I've been so frustrated I can't see straight. However, I have a few things I'd like to say that I haven't seen here, and maybe even a suggestion that will bring about a solution.

For those who don't know, I was a Mojo member until recently. Mojo has my heart. It always will. Before there are any misunderstandings, I did not leave Mojo because of their strategy choices. Personally, I don't have an issue with the Enterprises, other than I'm lazy and don't want to work that hard. :)

Mojo has followed the rules, and even adjusted to new ones as they are set forth. With no complaint about the rules themselves, just the spitefulness that accompained them in a few places. As far as I know the stick to the 2 agent per person rule in an agency at anyone time, which, by the way, is more than I can say for some other well known agencies. The 48 hour rule is automatic just like the favor changes, so someone tell me if I'm missing a KNOWN, SPELLED OUT rule that they have broken.

I see neither side here really validating the other. I don't see words being put into people's mouth. I see misunderstandings not being straightened out because people aren't listening, they simply want to get their way. You can't always change someone's mind. Sometimes, you can only accept that you will have a difference of opinion.

I understand the concern for the community, the fear of Mega Corps. People claim they don't like the idea of alliances, but, really, agency ARE alliances. I know recruiting sucks. There is nothing I hate more than recruiting. Having to recruit for 4 agencies...no thanks.

I understand that Mojo feels attacked. They are being attacked. But instead of just defending their actions, they really should address the feelings of the community. That, or sit quietly.

Feb-16-2006 15:54

I don’t have anything to gain from this. Yes, I have an agency, but it’s just full of old case files, Coats of the Gentle Warrior and Art Deco Clogs. So I’m willing to offer this as an impartial comment, hopefully taken in good faith.

1. Mojo is right. They are quite within their rights to do what they are doing. There is no written rule to say that multiple agencies can’t form a conglomeration and work together. And some of the rationale and ethos behind the conglomerate are quite noble ie fostering co-operation and teaching newbies the game. I think they should be applauded for that aspect.

2. There are other peoples whose opinions don’t gel with Mojo’s. Those opinions are valid. And, in the most part, for the good of this community. (As are Mojo’s I re-iterate.)

2. However, lots of people are talking about ‘rights’ and ‘rules’. When perhaps it might be better [as Jstkdn is trying to do] to talk about ‘responsibilities’. What are our responsibilities to each other? Not only as a cyber community but as people in general? Because we are ‘real’ people, not just words on a screen.

If I impinge on someone else’s enjoyment of something, whilst trying to satisfy my own needs, or the needs of my friends, or through some self-perceived altruistic need, is this really a good thing?

As ‘good’ as it intended is it still ‘good’?

I don’t think Mojo should shot down in flames for trying to do a *positive* (sorry I’d like to bold that) thing for their members and newbies, but by the same token perhaps they need to see the bigger picture, step back, and look at what they can do for ‘everyone’.

Likewise others need to see Mojo in a postive light, not say OK they are the Borg [though I like the analogy] and they’re trying to assimilate us all, or drive us out of the competition, but instead say, OK what’s ‘good’ about this, how can the community [if possible] get together to make something worthwhile out of it.

more sorry

Feb-16-2006 15:54

I think what we have here is a fear of too much power in one place. This is a concern that has been from the beginning, which is why Ben gave the original rule , and only rule as far as I can tell, of only 2 detectives per agency.

I would like to suggest we go back to this control, rather than constantly adding new rules when we don't like the way someone is working.

Why not expand it to 2 detectives per person, period. Whether this is pass sharing or personal detectives. I don't know how difficult it would be to monitor this when needed. The orginal idea was that no one person could control an entire agency. With pass sharing, it is very, very easy for one person to control an entire agency. Anyone who knows me knows I have no issue with pass sharing, but I do think that if we limit access to detectives, which was the original idea behind controls here in Sleuth, we can solve all of these arguments we've been having lately.

Access to 2 detectives per IP address.

Just a thought.

*walks steadily back to her office and works her cases*

Feb-16-2006 15:55

Lastly (sorry this is a drag) when in doubt put yourself in the other person’s shoes and ask yourself would I be happy with what I was saying or doing, being said or done to me?

Thanks for listening.

Feb-16-2006 15:56

lol sorry cfm i didn't mean to split your comment

Feb-16-2006 16:07

*smiles softly at Secret Squirrel* Not a problem. I don't mind being interrupted by rational thoughts. :)

Feb-16-2006 16:26

The advantage that can be gained by running 4 agencies, one in each city, has not been seen, but the potential is still there. By having a headquarters in each city, the main agency does not have to spend cases in traveling when doing a multi city hunt. They can instead rotate members that are currently in the city needed into the agency and do the cases and favors. It is a huge advantage for an agency to have 10-12 members in the home city, who can each work 100-120 cases instead of having to budget and save cases for travel or wait until server reset, just simply rotate members in who still have 10 cases and are already located in the new city.

There has never been a problem before of having many people become friends across agency lines. The problem only occurs when one agency is trying to hold more agents than they original were intended to hold. Moving inactive agents to a second agency just to pull them back into the first agency when more cases are needed or favors are needed in different cities can be seen as an unfair advantage. It could be concluded that, that way of game play is not what was intended. There have been many agencies who have risen to the very top and many more that although have not be #1 they have been very successful using only hard work and staying within the original guidelines set forth of having a maximum of 12 agents.

Feb-16-2006 18:42

I'm not sure I really understand what's going on here. Let me try figuering this out...

Mojo starts a hunt in New York. The next favor they need is in Delhi. One of their agents in their Delhi office hold the favor they need. So they kick out one of their New York (Mojo) agents (reassign that agent to another agency), send a message to the agent in Delhi, that agent resigns from that agency, accepts the invite from "the home office" (Mojo) does the favor, then resigns from Mojo and goes back to where they started from?

No travel involved? No wasting cases by traveling? You just message the person who has the favor you need, in the city you need, invite them, they join, do the favor, advance Mojo in the hunt and then leave, freeing up space for the next person that has a favor you need?

I must not have understood very well before, but if that's what's going on that's cheating, plain and simple.

There's an easy way to put a stop to that. Require that the person joining actually travel to the agency city, using up 2 cases and cash and losing any favors they're holding. It would make it pointless to have agents waiting in the wings, holding onto Delhi favors if they actually have to go to New York or London to join the agency.