Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk


0 0
Mojo Enterprises
  <<First Page  |  <Previous Next>  |  Last Page>>  

R Anstett
R Anstett

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.

Replies

Maddie Hayes
Maddie Hayes
Well-Connected

Feb-17-2006 01:45

"Are you really trying to say that the detectives at Mojo should not be allowed to hunt becasue we are too good?"

Is this how you view yourselves? Do you think you are too good because you have thought of a way to further the name of Mojo by inviting and resigning members of many agencies that you created in the other cities just to gain their skills and contacts for the hunts?

Somehow I think not. Cheating comes to my mind, not strategy.
Mojo enterprises? Shouldn't you have an Inc after that? Because it sounds more like a corporation than just an agency. We strive for our favors and cases and if we don't get them we hold, win or lose hunts. Its all part of the game right? But it seems Mojo takes the easy approach and just brings in what it needs at that moment to further ONE name right?

I'm sorry I am bringing this up but this is recent news to me. I had no idea that is what you were doing. I was under the false impression that there were many different agencies and they were all independently doing well on their own. If I am wrong in any of this please explain it to me.

Maddie Hayes
Maddie Hayes
Well-Connected

Feb-17-2006 01:46

Moonlighting is only that - a single agency with a great group of individuals. We stay in one agency and don't swap out. And look how far we have gone in the scoring! I say we definitely keep the high score tables. I like to see how well we are doing in relation to others. We might have just recently started but we will get up there in the high ranks soon. I am very proud of our agency and the work they've accomplished.

I wholly agree with Lady Emerald Devon. You do seem borg like and I or my agents will not be assimilated. *small chuckle* sorry I had to put that in there. I do love to roleplay too. That is why I have my own ezboard. But we have our own fun in our private message boards and we don't need others to come and see what we are up to or how we keep our agency fresh and fun.

And we don't need alliances either. I think we are all doing fine just the way we are. If that is how mojo plays well- thats how you like to win your hunts I guess. We will stick with our own strategy and may very well become Number 1 at the high score tables; some year. I'll have to check with the fortune teller on that one.

And I am not attacking you or any mojos exactly. Just stating my opinion that what your company is doing - just doesn't seem right or very competitive.

Madame TBird
Madame TBird
Well-Connected

Feb-17-2006 03:51

Hmmm.... the brother thing reminds me of an agent from about a year ago. Remember all the freaky posts "his brother" did. Then there was the engagement announcement that was recanted because that agent's "sister" posted it. Irregardless, I think no more than 4 accounts per IP address would be fair. With exception if there is freak or pervert in Sleuthville. Then, they should be banned period.

Arthur Granville Smith
Arthur Granville Smith
Well-Connected

Feb-17-2006 04:10

I would have thought that the recent change to the game that prevents detectives joining a new agency being able to take any favours they hold with them would have addressed the main issue here - at least in my opinion. I can't see how any of the issues surrounding detective rotation can ever be considered as "cheating", but, in my opinion, the idea that you could just import a detective with the next favour required is not in the spirit of the game. The same goes for multi-city hunts where an alliance of agencies ensures no cases are wasted on travelling. Travelling and managing cases is meant to be part of the gameplan, surely?

But as for moving agents with required contacts and skills around and using up all available cases is concerned, I see this as just good resources management.

I'm undecided on the question of alliances. Since hunts are meant to be competitive, the one danger I foresee is that an alliance could grow so big that it dominates the game and wins most or all of the hunts, thus removing the competitive element for themselves as well as everyone else. If that happened, what would be the point of playing?

I think that this discussion may have highlighted what, in my opinion, is the major weakness of this game - once you have got all the skills you want, there is little incentive to play as an individual detective. The only thing left is to do hunts, and if your agency is unable to compete with the larger ones for whatever reason, that can also become both frustrating and boring. I think the idea of individual rather than agency treasure hunts has been raised before. Whatever it was, giving other opportunities for "meaningful" play would at least give people a choice of whether they wanted to be competitive or not, and at least give them a goal to aim for in place of acquiring skills.

Or is this the subject for another thread????

Lady Emerald Devon
Lady Emerald Devon
Nomad

Feb-17-2006 05:31

"It is not cheating to bring in a detective into the agency use up their cases chasing a favor and then kick them out. Ben has flatly declared it is not cheating in previous posts. "

I have never said or implied that Mojos is cheating. I have been nothing but supportive of Mojo's - I still am, except that I felt that recent changes may affect the community spirit of the game. Which some others also think.

Agencies are supposed to have a maximum of 12 players. Bringing in new players and playing their cases then kicking them out is unfair and it is unethical. I am not saying you are cheating, nor that you have done wrong. However, I do think that you need to understand where people are coming from when they state it's unfair.
And as Arabella points out- “The fact that during a multi city hunt, as the smaller agencies must balance and juggle their cases because of traveling expenses, Mojo can simply add in the members from the agency that is currently located in the new city thus not having to spend cases traveling. 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”

Once again, not cheating. However, this is NOT ethical or in the spirit of the game.
Now, I admit, I have done this myself and awhile (before all this) ago put a stop to it because it was unethical and unfair.


I guess the only way to stop this, is too prevent a newcomer into an agency joining in a hunt that has already started.

I also know Mojos have, do and will always work hard and no one is denying this. Full credit to your 100 (+) trophies. And I think they are a great agency and the have really fantastic members.

I guess the only way to stop this, is too prevent a newcomer into an agency joining in a hunt that has already started.



Lady Emerald Devon
Lady Emerald Devon
Nomad

Feb-17-2006 05:32

Another point that has been made is that the community is small ... there are not actually that many players. The point that Arabesque made “why would anyone want to join our little agency when they can get in with the Awesome Power of the Mojo Syndicate?” and “and attract quality people, we'll have to either be assimilated by Mojo or make/join some other alliance--which is not what I signed up for” is a good one.

Personally, I don’t give a damn about the hunts. Except for maybe two trophies, we worked damn hard to win hunts and still won hunts against Mojos. When we didn’t it came down to bad luck or people not having enough time to play.

Why I brought this up, is because personally, I love the community in Sleuth. I have played games before online, where the community was great and friendly. Then, alliances were bought in. Now, it may be fine.. but I think the above points are why people are upset. It’s not against Mojos but a change that may negatively impact on the community. Points of which I have stated- including exclusion/division ect. Which has already happened as I pointed out.

In respect to a post mentioned, Mojos “are quite noble ie fostering co-operation and teaching newbies the game. I think they should be applauded for that aspect”
And Ran is a great person to ask for advice as is many players in this game.

I agree. However, my point, as already posted, was that this happens already as a community and most active agencies do all this already. I don’t see why an “enterprise” is needed.


Maddie Hayes
Maddie Hayes
Well-Connected

Feb-17-2006 09:17

"But as for moving agents with required contacts and skills around and using up all available cases is concerned, I see this as just good resources management."

And I agree with this statement if its talking about a single agency. But if I understand correctly, Mojo is a company with an abundance of extra resources (cases, skills, contacts) at their disposal.

"It is not cheating to bring in a detective into the agency use up their cases chasing a favor and then kick them out. Ben has flatly declared it is not cheating in previous posts."

But I thought that an agency could only have up to 12 agents. But Mojo has 6? agencies under them. So bringing them in and then firing them when not needed means you have more than just 12. So how is this fair? Could you please redirect me to the posts where Ben has mentioned its not. Because I want to know what is said on this matter.

And if Mojo isn't the only one doing this then who else is? So already there are other alliances out there?

And I am not saying anything bad about Mojo or its people. You were here first and set the precedent, I'm just trying to get clarification on this matter.

Orbitrux
Orbitrux
Well-Connected

Feb-17-2006 09:59

I just started a new job where part of my duties is to analyze our corporate culture. And, in fact, group norms and corporate culture have been academic interests of mine for quite some time. I'm not going to posture on whether this alliance thing is good or bad, but I think that this thread, among others, is demonstrative of Sleuth culture.

In my time here I 've noticed that new ideas tend to get shot down in public before they get flushed out. Maybe the alliance thing will be bad for the game and the community, but I notice that the group norm here is to come out swinging (sometimes making it personal) before the change has time to take effect, or before the full facts of a situation are known. There seems to be a restrictive culture here with great resistance to change.

Which is not wholly uncomprehensible, given how much time and love people put into and get from this game. And--don't get me wrong here--people certainly have the right to express their opinions. From an observational standpoint, I think it's interesting that sometimes practices, ideas, and sometimes people are completely pidgeon-holed before they can get off the ground. Just a thought.

Jojo
Jojo
Old Shoe

Feb-17-2006 10:33

"I notice that the group norm here is to come out swinging (sometimes making it personal) before the change has time to take effect, or before the full facts of a situation are known. There seems to be a restrictive culture here with great resistance to change"

Amen.

Jojo
Jojo
Old Shoe

Feb-17-2006 10:46

As for whomever said we should make our name Mojo Inc. andthose who said we are/should be a company...

"Company" was defined as "A group of persons" at dictionary.com So, I guess we're all companies.

And in real life, companies come up with new technology to help their business do better than the others. Isn't this just a new technology?


And before you all run out here saying we are horrible, and we want to ruin the Sleuth community and hunts and are only out to think about ourselves, THINK.

First, I DEFINATELY don't fit that discription. I've been here nearly 2 years and I'm proud to say I've done all in my power to better Sleuth and make it the best game out on the net. Anyone who says that we are going to ruin the game, think. Don't you think we've considered that? Do you think I'm just suddenly going to stop caring about Sleuth? Just think before you pull the trigger.

Secondly, has anyone heard history repeats itself? Well it sure does! Password sharing was, believe it or not, a taboo as much as this was. Some of the people who are here condemning this today condemned password sharing, yet they know have come to love it and see it as a blessing.

Before I begin to really rant, let's consider one last thing. People keeping saying we are "unethical", "unmoral", and a cornacopia of other things. Maybe before condemning us for some UNWRITTEN (and sometimes unexistent) law you have come up with, you should consider and enforce those that are carved in stone: such as the two detectives per person per agency rule.



  <<First Page  |  <Previous Next>  |  Last Page>>  

[ You must login to reply ]