Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk


0 0
Agency Subscription Limit
  <<First Page  |  <Previous Next>  |  Last Page>>  

ctown28
ctown28
Tireless Tiger

Feb-16-2008 18:02

I think its time to revisit the idea of subscription limits for onw person within an agency. It's been the rule that one individual person can only sub up to two people in an agency. After that it's considered an unfair advantage. This was the case a while ago, maybe not so much anymore. I currently have 3 subbed detectives, ctown, Brady Quinn and Bonelady. I have never hid that but also never really offered that information. I really wasn't aware of the "rule" that is really impossible to enforce. What about couples that log in from the same IP address, families, etc.

Anyhow, when this was brought to my attention, I decided to move Brady Quinn out of Dawg Pound Investigations to avoid any conflict before omeone complained. I still think this is an unfair rule. The agencies that have "control" of their detectives because they have gone inactive and the directors know the passwords actually gives a better advantage. They got that control, yet someone else has paid their money for it. IMHO, if I want to pay to sub 3 dets, thats my money paying for it. Either lift that silly rule or ban password sharing. I don't see how you can have it both ways. Now remember, this is to be an open debate, if you are looking for an argument, find a different thread, if you disagree but want to be objective, please post and lets have a respectful debate!

Replies

ctown28
ctown28
Tireless Tiger

Feb-18-2008 02:58

I actually should clarify, I contacted Admin about it and after a short debate he didn't think it would be a problem. I still moved one of them, Iwant to move him back, I already have admins approval, I want the communities.


Secret_Squirrel
Secret_Squirrel
Safety Officer

Feb-18-2008 04:41

lol. This is like one of those detective novels where you get all the missing pieces of the puzzle in the final chapter, rather than at the start where everything would have made oh so much more sense... but then like all good mysteries it wouldn't have been half as good a story.

Why didn't you just say, OK I've talked to Ben and he says that having 3 subs in my Agency is cool by him, so why don't we aren't you all doing it?

You made a lot of unnecessary 'rage against the machine' statements at the beginning, based in the surety of already having the machine on side. :s

So, probably what's more interesting to everyone now, and since you've made the statement, is:

IS this in fact a firm and fast rule change or not for the whole Sleuth Community?

Ben?

Secret_Squirrel
Secret_Squirrel
Safety Officer

Feb-18-2008 04:42

PS Sorry Ben :)

Sleuth Sindy
Sleuth Sindy
Pinball Wizard

Feb-18-2008 04:52

My feeling is that the silent majority on Sleuth could care less about this issue; there are just a few detectives out there who just HAVE to make it an issue, and of course, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. It's not majority rule, it's whoever whines the loudest.

That's just my opinion.

Sleuth Sindy
Sleuth Sindy
Pinball Wizard

Feb-18-2008 04:57

And let me just state that I only have two detectives and that's all I have time for or can afford, so I am within the "Honor Code" here and have no desire to have anymore than is allowed, so I have no personal agenda in stating my opinions here. These are just my opinions and observations.

Sleuth Sindy
Sleuth Sindy
Pinball Wizard

Feb-18-2008 05:20

ctown:

Let me ask you this: Did you pay your subscription to Sleuth or to the community at large? The only person who should be able to dictate to you what you can or cannot do with your detectives is the person you paid your subscription to.

Bonelady
Bonelady
Collector

Feb-18-2008 11:14

SS and Sindy,

fair good statements, part of the reason for this thread was/is to revisit the entire idea. Please allow me to clarify a few things. While Ben did not come and and say ok go ahead and do it, he did lean toward approval when I offered to go through the "loophole" of transferring this detective to my co-director.

In a nutshell he said he would let me figure out the best way to handle it. The system had been abused in the past, (at the very begining of Treasure Hunts) At that point I moved Brady out of the agency and into Wish as I did not want to cause any problems. I could have just kept my mouth shuty and nobody really would have been none the wiser as to the detectives I play as, but would that have been the ethical thing to do? Now what's the best way to handle it? I figured it wouldn't hurt to tap the community for opinions, if the majority has no problem, I will move Brady back to DPI, if the majority still feels that's an unfair advantage, I may not agree with them but will respect the wishes of the community.
As a community, I think we owe it to ourselves to be respectful and mindful of otheres opinions whether they are agreed with or not.

Sindy, I agree Ben should be the only one who can dictate that, however I don't think he really cares one way or another about it, the community however does or this would never have been an issue. If anything, Ben has always listened to player feedback about the any and all concerns, in fact thats how this rule came to be in the first place.

Sleuth Sindy
Sleuth Sindy
Pinball Wizard

Feb-18-2008 11:44

Bonelady:

I agree we should be community conscious and respectful of others, but I think that this also includes keeping your nose firmly where it belongs, in your own business and not that of other people.

Having said all that, I am not going to post on this thread anymore as I don't want to create a lot of hard feelings in the "community," although I still have them.

Happy Sleuthing

David Adams
David Adams
Red-Nosed

Feb-18-2008 11:56

For the record:

We at Wish are happy to have Brady for as long as he wants to stay. He needed a home, and we had the room and needed his contacts and welcomed his participation in the team. We will be sorry to lose him, if he chooses to leave.

Wish On a Star has offered its support to many people, regardless of their affiliation, alliances, or community participation, as long as they are in good standing with the principles of Sleuth. We stand behind that policy, and will continue to for the considerable future. Thank you.

Sleuth Admin
Sleuth Admin
Tale Spinner

Feb-18-2008 12:08

For the record, as much as the rule is a pain in my butt, the rule is still in affect (effect?).

No single person should control more than two detectives in an agency if that agency competes in Treasure Hunts.

Treasure Hunts are intended for agencies that really are teams of several people working together to accomplish a goal. Allowing more than two accounts per player opens up the possibility of a single person with a lot of time and money to dominate the hunts and shut out agencies who are competing in a more cooperative way.

Ctown28 must have misunderstood he offered to give one of his three accounts up to Lilangel (who only had one account in that agency), and I said that would be acceptable if she really was given primary ownership of the account.

Here are the messages I sent to him...


MESSAGE #1
---------
From: Sleuth Admin
To: ctown28
Sent: Dec 29, 2007
---------
Yeah, the official rule is that if you are active in treasure hunts, we don't want any one person controlling more than two accounts in a given agency. It's really to prevent somebody who is willing to spend a lot of money from filling up an gency on their own and dominating hunts.

You're right that it's not functionally different than password sharing, but we can't really prevent people from doing that.

Anyway, please do find a way to get one of your three accounts out of that agency, or transfer control of one to somebody else, or some such.

Thanks for checking!
---------


and then...


MESSAGE #2
---------
From: Sleuth Admin
To: ctown28
Sent: Dec 30, 2007
---------
Does lilangel not already have a second in the agency? In any event, I'll let you figure out the best way to handle it. Obviously, it's not a very extreme case, but we needed to draw the line somewhere as we did have a problem early on with a couple people who bought 10 accounts and proceeded to dominate the treasure hunts against agencies who were using the system in the way it was intended.
---------

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

[ You must login to reply ]