Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk

Sep-15-2006 22:46

Thanks to Admin for posting resumes. It is a better idea than listing all detective names (for those that wanted privacy).

Bad News:
There seems to be a bug with the resumes. I know of at least 2 detectives, that show them listed in agencies they never joined.
I believe it is tied to "gift subscriptions". When a person buys someone a gift subscription, it automatically links the accounts. So, now the gifter and giftee have the same resume.

I am sure Sleuth Admin is working on correcting this, but I wanted to let everyone know, before we go around accusing people of "infiltrating our agencies" :D

Sep-17-2006 21:21

Rach, perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are saying.

You want the resume part to be able to be turned off after you have been in sleuth for 'x' amount of days if the player chooses to?

If so then how many days makes a player "safe"? or gives them the same privacy you want for your self but want to deny them because they are not old enough.

Just trying to lay out all sides of the debate here.

I think we all agree that not having disolved agencies or agencies that the detective starts makes the resume section much less useful but what we have is better then not having it at all.

Sep-17-2006 21:39

All the details are just distractions. The entire premise is flawed.

And a solution that doesn't solve a problem needs a new name.

Sep-17-2006 21:41

Rem, Ben posted 8 hours before me that he thinks this is still a useful tool for Directors and I posted that I agreed with him.

Rach is explaining her point of view and I am asking questions about it. Where have I not showed respect?

Sep-17-2006 21:48

I clearly disagree with both you and Ben that it is a useful tool. My statements made my thoughts clear.

It's the digging through trashcans that doesn't show respect.

As a member of the minority who was voted down, I propose a list on each bio of all the Agency Directories a detective has accessed. Let's all get a look at who's digging around. If I'm not applying for membership in an agency, what cause would there be for anyone but me to open up my list?

Sep-17-2006 22:08

I agree whole heartedly with remington. This serves no purpose, except to allow nosy people to probe into our pasts. I have absolutely nothing to hide, but I resent the idea that anyone who wants to can poke around in my history. It serves absolutely no purpose, and I am very disappointed in the decision to keep this change. just my two cents.

Sep-17-2006 22:19

The way the resume works right now, it is not helpful for the purpose of keeping people who choose to rob other agencies out. I have not found a way it can be used at all. It seems to only be a way to spy on others, or to check up on people.
While I do not have a big issue with showing what agencies I have been in, I do think that checking up on people, tracking them, and possibly using that information against them may become an issue.
I understand what lilrach is saying. I do not think that she or anyone should have to explain why it makes them uncomfortable.

Ran, you said: “I think that one of the driving factors to adding resumes was to be able to check on thieves. It appears that with the restrictions it will not be as useful for that purpose, primarily becuase it does not show the agencies you create. However as an additional resource to see more information about other detectives and their history in Sleuth I think it works well.”

This bothers me. Why do you, or anyone need more information about any other detective. Your own words say it is not useful when hiring agents, so what information are you deriving from this?

Sep-17-2006 22:22

Wow! I'm trying to figure out when looking at someone's resume became equivalent to digging around in trashcans. Pretty strong wording.

I personally have no problem with someone looking at my 'resume'. Big deal. They will see what agencies I've been in. Well, they'll need to look at Rhiemma's to get any variety, but even if I'd been in 30 different agencies since I started playing they certainly aren't looking at my personal life here. I may live here it sometimes seems like, but it is not my real life. Now, if we start having our PM's publicly available THEN I'll yell. And loudly. THAT is my private business. My agency history? big deal.

That being said... I do think that the resume' bit is pointless if it doesn't do what it was originally intended to do. Which is keep track of the ones who are stealing from us.

Sep-17-2006 22:29

I'm glad you acknowledge that it doesn't fulfill its goal, Della.

But not caring about privacy is hardly a reason to force it on people who do care.

Sep-17-2006 22:29

Very good question ara!

And Della, it's not really that my history is available that ticks me off, it's the fact that it's not needed for anything. It's simply extra information that anyone who has a right to know could simply ask me. Anyone else, it's none of their business. I agree with you, it is pointless, since it is ineffective at what is was designed to do.

Sep-17-2006 22:34

You know they say a camel is a horse designed by committee.