The Wiki - A Valid In Game and In Character Source?

[Gloria]

What is it with people in OW? The treaty is ON THE WIKI. Read it.

The problem was that the treaty was made on the wiki but not played IN GAME. 
The game should be played in the game, not in the stupid wiki. 
The player of Galiard Scarlett seemed to be playing a whole different game than the rest of Ohnar West, with a forum and a constitution and a treaty that were all published on the wiki but not talked about in the game where it is supposed to be played.

And yes, that pisses me off.  I play Battlemaster.  I do not play Wikimaster.

[De-Legro]

It was played in game, if was talked about several times, it was posted in OW several times, it was posted in Arcaea several times. It is on the wiki as a reference so people don't have to ask for it to be REPOSTED for the 11th time.

Further to that the wiki IS a IC and IG resource. You have been playing the game for long enough that it should have become apparent by now, even if you have missed the several announcements to that effect. Everything Galiard did was talked about IG to some degree, then posted to the wiki for easy access. That way when you wanted to view it and someone wasn't online that had it to post, you still had a place to go and find it.

[Bedwyr]

The problem was that the treaty was made on the wiki but not played IN GAME. 
The game should be played in the game, not in the stupid wiki. 
The player of Galiard Scarlett seemed to be playing a whole different game than the rest of Ohnar West, with a forum and a constitution and a treaty that were all published on the wiki but not talked about in the game where it is supposed to be played.

And yes, that pisses me off.  I play Battlemaster.  I do not play Wikimaster.

Go to your Information page.  Check the Diplomatic Treaties link.  Go to the Ohnarian/Arcaean Compact.  Read the treaty.  Compare to the wiki.  They're exactly the same.  Beyond that, Ohnar West received the region of Arempos.  In other words, the negotiations were done in-game.  The treaty was discussed and signed in-game, using the official treaty system.  Effects of the treaty have been felt in-game.  In other words, it has been played as well as any treaty in the game, and better than most.  I added the treaty to the wiki for record-keeping purposes.

The treaty was signed on February 13th.  It was done after considerable discussion and negotiation between Jenred and Galiard, and I know for a fact that Galiard talked about it with various people in Ohnar West.  Just like I know that certain people in Ohnar West can't distinguish between a message group described as a "forum" and this game forum.  It is also standard practice to put most details about a realm and how it is run on the wiki.  It is not only standard practice, but the game flat out tells you that the proper place for detailed information about your realm is on the wiki.  If a Ruler attempts to post a Ruler Bulletin that is too long, then they receive this message "(And remember, the proper place for realm histories or lengthy background and roleplaying descriptions is the community site)" with "the community site" being a link to, you guessed it, the Battlemaster Wiki.

Check Sirion's wiki page.  There is a link to a Constitution.  Check Carelia's wiki page.  Laws and prisoner agreements.  Check any other realm page, and I'd lay fifty-fifty odds that they will have laws, a constitution, customs, treaties, or some other information that is important to know on it.  The message system of Battlemaster is explicitly designed to make linking to the wiki simple because the game is intended to be played with the wiki as an accompaniment.

[Gloria]

Maybe it was played well in Arcaea.  In Ohnar West it was not properly done.

[ó Broin]

The problem was that the treaty was made on the wiki but not played IN GAME. 
The game should be played in the game, not in the stupid wiki. 
The player of Galiard Scarlett seemed to be playing a whole different game than the rest of Ohnar West, with a forum and a constitution and a treaty that were all published on the wiki but not talked about in the game where it is supposed to be played.

And yes, that pisses me off.  I play Battlemaster.  I do not play Wikimaster.

Maybe it was played well in Arcaea.  In Ohnar West it was not properly done.

This is one of the most absurd things I've ever heard. I play in Ohnar West, and while I understand you characters taking this stance, I'm rather surprised to find it is the players view also. The constitution was voted on by the realm. It was too large to be in a single message, so a link to the IG reference area, the wiki was provided. The Forum was part of the constitution, its simply an in game message group, one of the four that each realm is allowed. Any noble of the realm can join it. The treaty was discussed within that message group, as stipulated by the constitution, which was passed by referendum. I understand that your character refuses to join the forum as a protest against it and the other reforms, but to claim the treaty wasn't handled correctly IG simply because for what ever reason you choose not to avail yourself of the source of information is beyond ridiculous. You can't have it both ways, you can't protest against the current democratically ratified system, and expect to have access to everything discussed under that system.

Galiard is now gone, he has paused all of his characters as I believe he found BM eating into time he would rather spend on something else. No doubt once a new PM is elected we can go through all the fun of changing our systems again. Perhaps this time you might agree with what the majority of those that voted also thought, so we don't have to go through the nonsense of these half truths.

[Indirik]

The problem was that the treaty was made on the wiki but not played IN GAME. 

That is not true. The treaty was passed in-game, and posted on the wiki for reference. This is a perfectly acceptable use of the wiki.

The player of Galiard Scarlett seemed to be playing a whole different game than the rest of Ohnar West, with a forum and a constitution and a treaty that were all published on the wiki but not talked about in the game where it is supposed to be played.

For clarification, the "forum" was an in-game message group named the Forum, not a separate out-of-game discussion forum. It was a message group where anyone could join to discuss realm matters, just by asking the ruler.

And, as I said above, this was all discussed in-game. Just because you don't remember the discussion or weren't paying attention to it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

And yes, that pisses me off.  I play Battlemaster.  I do not play Wikimaster.

So you expect him to just retype the whole thing from memory every time you ask for it? If he copies and pastes it into a text file to save it on his computer, is that unacceptable because then he's playing NotepadMaster?

The wiki is a perfectly acceptable IC resource, especially in the way Galiard's player used it. The document was posted both IG and on the wiki, and links were given to the wiki page several times. Discussion was held extensively in the realm about it, with many quite "spirited" discussions. I'm sorry you object to using the wiki as a reference for the posting of documents so they can be referenced after the 30-day expiration of IG messages. But seeing as how most people, including yourself, can't be bothered to actually personally save copies of these things, the wiki is the place for these things to be posted for future reference. It is publicly available for everyone to use. In fact, it should be used more often.

[Gloria]

That is not true. The treaty was passed in-game, and posted on the wiki for reference. This is a perfectly acceptable use of the wiki.

For clarification, the "forum" was an in-game message group named the Forum, not a separate out-of-game discussion forum. It was a message group where anyone could join to discuss realm matters, just by asking the ruler.

The ruler being Galiard Scarlet, and never including me in that message group.  Not even when Duke Iceberg told him to. 

And, as I said above, this was all discussed in-game. Just because you don't remember the discussion or weren't paying attention to it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So you expect him to just retype the whole thing from memory every time you ask for it? If he copies and pastes it into a text file to save it on his computer, is that unacceptable because then he's playing NotepadMaster?

The wiki is a perfectly acceptable IC resource, especially in the way Galiard's player used it. The document was posted both IG and on the wiki, and links were given to the wiki page several times. Discussion was held extensively in the realm about it, with many quite "spirited" discussions. I'm sorry you object to using the wiki as a reference for the posting of documents so they can be referenced after the 30-day expiration of IG messages. But seeing as how most people, including yourself, can't be bothered to actually personally save copies of these things, the wiki is the place for these things to be posted for future reference. It is publicly available for everyone to use. In fact, it should be used more often.

I am not against the use of the Wiki.   But I do see a problem in relying so heavily on it that it replaces in game experience.  Editing a page in the Wiki and adding to the discussion page are very different experiences from having a character propose and discuss a document.  And I'm not into publishing things on the Wiki that have little to do with what goes on in game. 

[Gloria]

The constitution was voted on by the realm.

A poorly drafted document with lots of sections "to be filled in later" was voted. 

The Forum was part of the constitution, its simply an in game message group, one of the four that each realm is allowed. Any noble of the realm can join it.

False.  Only those Sir Galiard included in the message group were in it.

The treaty was discussed within that message group, as stipulated by the constitution, which was passed by referendum.

See my point?

I understand that your character refuses to join the forum as a protest against it and the other reforms, but to claim the treaty wasn't handled correctly IG simply because for what ever reason you choose not to avail yourself of the source of information is beyond ridiculous. You can't have it both ways, you can't protest against the current democratically ratified system, and expect to have access to everything discussed under that system.

My character never refused to join the forum.  Sir Galiard refused to include her. 

[Indirik]

A poorly drafted document with lots of sections "to be filled in later" was voted. 

Which my character objected to quite strenuously. She spoke out against it, and voted against it. Sadly, it passed anyway. But by a close margin.

False.  Only those Sir Galiard included in the message group were in it.

See my point?

My character never refused to join the forum.  Sir Galiard refused to include her.

That's a valid IC gripe. Not a reason to launch this OOC attack against the treaty, the wiki, and the player.

[Gloria]

Yes, I remember your character objecting to it.  Thanks.

And yes, I'm ranting about the way the treaty and the wiki were done.  And there's nothing wrong with IC gripes.  Please don't take it as an OOC attack.  As a player, am not very comfortable with how things were done, so I am speaking against it.  And I only mentioned it because it seems someone assumed I am an idiot for asking about the treaty.

[De-Legro]

You really don't get the wiki do you? There was no need for general players to edit the wiki treaty page, or add to the discussion page, in fact such things just make it harder. The wiki page was a reference. Discussion should of and as I understand DID occur within the normal realm channels. Being excluded from a message group is a valid in game power play, so you would have to ask what your character did that lead to the ruler deciding he would like to exclude them. There is no requirement in this game for anything to be discussed realm wide, rulers are free to choose how they will be advised. In general it looks like OW decided to use a message group, that claimed to provide entry for all, pretty standard in a lot of realms. Other realms don't even bother with that illusion of inclusion, the ruler just picks a few advisors and the rest of the realm either deals with it or organised to remove the ruler.

There are plenty of IG thing to complain about with how OW was run recently. But I don't really see anything OOC or anything for a player rather then a character to be annoyed about.

[Gloria]

You really don't get the wiki do you?

Is that question addressed to me? I have been playing the game and using its wiki for half a decade already. 

You're just not getting the point.

[De-Legro]

Is that question addressed to me? I have been playing the game and using its wiki for half a decade already. 

You're just not getting the point.

Oh my, a full half decade. And here I was thinking you DIDN'T want to play "wikimaster". It is quite obvious you don't get the point. You keep trying to imply that the treaty and the constitution were on the wiki for a reason other then being a convinent place to store it were all can access it at any time. This

I am not against the use of the Wiki.   But I do see a problem in relying so heavily on it that it replaces in game experience.  Editing a page in the Wiki and adding to the discussion page are very different experiences from having a character propose and discuss a document.  And I'm not into publishing things on the Wiki that have little to do with what goes on in game. 

has all been entirely in your head, which has been stated by several other members of the realm. They were discussed in realm, and I'm sure would have been updated by Galiard or someone at regular intervals to reflect the discussion. So you are upset you didn't get to participate in those discussions. Boo hoo. All because OW calls itself a republic does not mean there is any game mechanic or OOC requirement for everyone to be consulted. Sounds like you and Galiard had a good little feud going on involving some push and shove. Congratulations that is part of what politics in BM is all about.

Summary, you keep claiming he used the wiki wrong. Several disagree with both that statement and have given multiple examples of realms using the wiki in the same way. You complain in a OOC post about peace on the island, and then try and imply all your complaints are IC. Your very first complaint was the treaty was played on the Wiki and not in game. That has been disputed by several people that were involved in discussion of the treaty in both realms. You can keep trying to rephrase things, or imply what you want. But in this case, you were simply WRONG. Your character might not have been aware of the discussions, fine. But don't come here whining and trying to imply that people are circumventing IG interaction just because your character was excluded.

[Gloria]

Oh my, a full half decade. And here I was thinking you DIDN'T want to play "wikimaster". It is quite obvious you don't get the point.

Playing wikimaster is different from using the wiki.  Properly.  The game is the game and the wiki is the wiki.  I do not post in the wiki in character, but as a player and as a wiki editor.  The participation in both is different.  That's clear, isn't it?

You keep trying to imply that the treaty and the constitution were on the wiki for a reason other then being a convinent place to store it were all can access it at any time.

No.  I am not trying to imply that.  I am questioning the assumption that everyone in OW should know about the damn treaty.  I asked a simple question: "Did the treaty between Jenred and Galiard say anything as to what would happen if Arcaea failed to take over Enlod as planned?"  Your answer implied that something was wrong with me because I did not know what the treaty was and I had not read it on the wiki. 

This has all been entirely in your head, which has been stated by several other members of the realm. They were discussed in realm, and I'm sure would have been updated by Galiard or someone at regular intervals to reflect the discussion.


So you are upset you didn't get to participate in those discussions.

No.  I'm upset because, apparently, you believe I'm supposed to know.  Then you say I was not supposed to know.  Which one is it? 

Boo hoo.

I am sorry that you need to cry.  Maybe if the game is not fun to you you could stop playing and do something else?  Also, why do  you need to bully other players?

All because OW calls itself a republic does not mean there is any game mechanic or OOC requirement for everyone to be consulted. Sounds like you and Galiard had a good little feud going on involving some push and shove. Congratulations that is part of what politics in BM is all about.

Never has this meaning of "Republic" been assumed or implied.  My character and Galiard had a good little feud that, I hope, was an enjoyable roleplaying experience for both of us.  This had nothing to do with the Forum or the Wiki or the Constitution... but with a totally legitimate IC reason and family history.  Many and many a year ago, when Sasrhas seceeded from Lasanar, Sir Galiard Scarlet was the general.  Baroness Adelina Driscol of Attlel secceeded Attlel from Lasanar to join Ohnar West.  Of course Galiard Scarlet hates the Driscols and any younger Driscol would be weary of Galiard Scarlett.  That's normal.

Summary, you keep claiming he used the wiki wrong. Several disagree with both that statement and have given multiple examples of realms using the wiki in the same way.

You seem to misunderstand my argument completely. 

You complain in a OOC post about peace on the island, and then try and imply all your complaints are IC. Your very first complaint was the treaty was played on the Wiki and not in game. That has been disputed by several people that were involved in discussion of the treaty in both realms. You can keep trying to rephrase things, or imply what you want. But in this case, you were simply WRONG. Your character might not have been aware of the discussions, fine. But don't come here whining and trying to imply that people are circumventing IG interaction just because your character was excluded.

I never complained about peace on the island.  Lefanis started this thread, not me.  Read it again.  My first contribution to it was just the question about the treaty.  You claimed I should know about it because it was in the wiki.  But I haven't got the answer to my question. 

Did the treaty between Jenred and Galiard say anything as to what would happen if Arcaea failed to take over Enlod as planned? 

I thought the answer to this question would help the discussion about peace/war on the FEI.  I still don't know the answer to this. 

BTW, you're a moderator.  You're supposed to be helping discussions, not fueling flame wars.

[Bedwyr]

Gloria,

The treaty is in the diplomatic treaties, in game, that is visible to your character.  As I told you in my first response.  Or you can look on the wiki to check it.  You're an experienced player, look up the treaty and see what it says.

The fact that you derailed the thread with OOC attacks on people "forcing" you to play "wikimaster" is what made people annoyed with you.

Read the treaty, find your answer, and stop complaining about stuff being put on the wiki when the game tells you to put it there.