Can we bring back the old playerbase count?

[Flip]

Those of you thinking one or two people can run IFM on their own clearly have no insight into how much has to be done, if they made that change you'd be crying about requests taking too long to be completed within a week. Maybe think about things for longer than a minute before putting forwards a stupid suggestion like that.

 

Also the idea of "just fucking listen to official faction leaders" makes no sense, they don't all agree, they're not some hivemind. For example, the recent ROE change had half of the server saying we need to relax the rules on hits and up the limit from 1 M4 and 4 men per hit. At the same time there were people wanting to go in the opposite direction who's main issue was cutting down on unrealistic attacks and block wipes. These opinions were coming from different official factions, which ones do we listen to? Just the people we like? No, we need people with experience around factions to talk it out, discuss ideas and come to a decision on what's best for the server.

[Ragontor]

26 minutes ago, Flip said:

Those of you thinking one or two people can run IFM on their own clearly have no insight into how much has to be done, if they made that change you'd be crying about requests taking too long to be completed within a week. Maybe think about things for longer than a minute before putting forwards a stupid suggestion like that.

 

Also the idea of "just fucking listen to official faction leaders" makes no sense, they don't all agree, they're not some hivemind. For example, the recent ROE change had half of the server saying we need to relax the rules on hits and up the limit from 1 M4 and 4 men per hit. At the same time there were people wanting to go in the opposite direction who's main issue was cutting down on unrealistic attacks and block wipes. These opinions were coming from different official factions, which ones do we listen to? Just the people we like? No, we need people with experience around factions to talk it out, discuss ideas and come to a decision on what's best for the server.

 

Anyone saying that IFM should only be one or two people are stupid, absolutely. I would say the consensus from this thread so far is not at all that. Its more so removing IFM and combining it into other divisions to have a wider net, and/or removing inactive staff who occupy those positions currently and expanding the division in that regard.

 

Staff should never take what faction leaders say as the gospel, but should always strive to have an open discussion (very much like this thread) and work together to find a solution that benefits the community. Whether what they want is exactly what is beneficial to the community is another thing, but at least having that discussion counts. 

Just limiting this to whomever is in a position of power within the administrative team is idiotic. Changing something and then getting annoyed because the community is upset both ways is what happens when you do this. Initial Proposal > Feedback > Finding Compromises > Reproposing > Feedback > Final Proposal > Vote/Feedback > Implementation. Not every decision needs to be this of course, as that just jams everything up but if its controversial or a big change, then it should follow a process.

[Flip]

1 hour ago, Ragontor said:

 

Anyone saying that IFM should only be one or two people are stupid, absolutely. I would say the consensus from this thread so far is not at all that. Its more so removing IFM and combining it into other divisions to have a wider net, and/or removing inactive staff who occupy those positions currently and expanding the division in that regard.

Removing inactive staff is absolutely something that's been needed for a while, and this is something I had argued about in staff chat a while back. Combining IFM into one team that handles legal and illegal factions isn't the best move though. The reason things have been separated into different divisions (I can speak from experience with IFC) is because when certain requests aren't a specific person's or group's responsibility they often get ignored. If we had a small team that handled everything, you'd get people only focusing on the thing they care about still anyway and parts of the server would go ignored as there's noone appointed to focus on it. This is already an issue when it comes to the dev and mapping teams. IFM have given plenty of ideas to devs for illegal factions, these were to be taken up be Kendrick Underwood, when he left there was no dev willing to focus on illegal rp and everything was done on their whim again, legal factions took focus and IFMs suggestions were yet again ignored.

 

1 hour ago, Ragontor said:

 

Initial Proposal > Feedback > Finding Compromises > Reproposing > Feedback > Final Proposal > Vote/Feedback > Implementation. Not every decision needs to be this of course, as that just jams everything up but if its controversial or a big change, then it should follow a process.

This isn't far off how things have been working, the issue is when we have done a bunch of these steps within IFM then no dev wants to take up the implementation of a system cause they only care about working on systems their friends have suggested or PD/SD related things as that's where they roleplay. This happens a lot with mapping, if you're an official faction and want mapping you're less likely to get it than an unofficial faction that just opened as long as that faction is close to the mapping team.

[Dinero.]

1 hour ago, Flip said:

if they made that change you'd be crying about requests taking too long to be completed within a week.

Your argument assumes IFM in its current form is the only viable structure, which is the core issue. If requests take too long to process, it’s because IFM’s bloated bureaucracy is slowing everything down. Consolidating IFM into smaller, more efficient teams or even delegating tasks to faction representatives with admin oversight could streamline this process without sacrificing effectiveness.

1 hour ago, Flip said:

the idea of "just fucking listen to official faction leaders" makes no sense,

No one is suggesting blindly agreeing with everything they say. The point is to prioritise active communication and collaboration, something IFM consistently fails to deliver. Disagreements among factions don’t negate the need for leadership to actually listen and find compromises; it highlights the need for leadership that can mediate effectively instead of dragging its feet. Saying “we need people with experience” is meaningless if those people don’t deliver results.

1 hour ago, Ragontor said:

Its more so removing IFM and combining it into other divisions to have a wider net

The system itself is inefficient because it centralises too much power in a team that fails to address the needs of the illegal community in a timely or effective manner. Expanding the division won’t solve the problem if the structure remains broken.

[Ragontor]

12 minutes ago, Flip said:

Removing inactive staff is absolutely something that's been needed for a while, and this is something I had argued about in staff chat a while back. Combining IFM into one team that handles legal and illegal factions isn't the best move though. The reason things have been separated into different divisions (I can speak from experience with IFC) is because when certain requests aren't a specific person's or group's responsibility they often get ignored. If we had a small team that handled everything, you'd get people only focusing on the thing they care about still anyway and parts of the server would go ignored as there's noone appointed to focus on it. This is already an issue when it comes to the dev and mapping teams. IFM have given plenty of ideas to devs for illegal factions, these were to be taken up be Kendrick Underwood, when he left there was no dev willing to focus on illegal rp and everything was done on their whim again, legal factions took focus and IFMs suggestions were yet again ignored.

The issue is also how you balance the current player base, the potential pool of decent new staff members, and the positions open for people to sit in that are specific. 100% how it works now, is how it should work if there was 3x the player base, but with how it currently it isn't practical.

 

Now in saying merging divisions together, it doesn't necessarily mean I expect everything to merge into one (even if that is what I suggested, was more so to carry the point), but to at least centralize IFM itself. Having Head of Melee Schemes, Head of Drug Schemes, Head of Strawman Schemes, etc. is just pointless. It spreads the shared responsibility way too thin within a team that should be able to work as a team, to get shit sorted. Quite frankly its going to take a few attempts to get the right flow, but the issue is getting that process started.

 

It's quite funny that legal factions get priority at present, I wouldn't think they would really need much active development. 

 

 

[manslaughter]

3 hours ago, Flip said:

Those of you thinking one or two people can run IFM on their own clearly have no insight into how much has to be done, if they made that change you'd be crying about requests taking too long to be completed within a week. Maybe think about things for longer than a minute before putting forwards a stupid suggestion like that.

 

Also the idea of "just fucking listen to official faction leaders" makes no sense, they don't all agree, they're not some hivemind. For example, the recent ROE change had half of the server saying we need to relax the rules on hits and up the limit from 1 M4 and 4 men per hit. At the same time there were people wanting to go in the opposite direction who's main issue was cutting down on unrealistic attacks and block wipes. These opinions were coming from different official factions, which ones do we listen to? Just the people we like? No, we need people with experience around factions to talk it out, discuss ideas and come to a decision on what's best for the server.

Relax bro. See how angry you got, if it was anyone else we’d be forum warned for “flaming and toxic attitude”.

 

when df did I say leave it up to 1 or 2 people? I said leave a position of leadership to 1 or 2 people and then communicate and UTILIZE faction leaders as a committee or “board”, for a lack of words, to determine decisions made for factions. You’re barely touching 100 PB daily, you don’t need a whole IFM team. You’re not getting bombarded with major IFM requests every single second of the day. Maybe try and … idk, listen to the community saying the same shit over and over instead of trying to justify why we’re wrong and throwing lowball shots because what? You took 3-4 months to look at my factions strawmen app and then denied us because we’re “applying as a faction” or whatever bs you came up with. It demotivated factions/players when you continue like this. 

[Flip]

3 minutes ago, manslaughter said:

You took 3-4 months to look at my factions strawmen app and then denied us because we’re “applying as a faction” or whatever bs you came up with. It demotivated factions/players when you continue like this. 

 

So there it is guys, he finally admitted why he really wants IFM gone. It's because he didn't get strawman. This isn't a thread to air out your personal grievances, if you're not good enough for a scheme that's not everyone else's fault.

[manslaughter]

Just now, Flip said:

 

So there it is guys, he finally admitted why he really wants IFM gone. It's because he didn't get strawman. This isn't a thread to air out your personal grievances, if you're not good enough for a scheme that's not everyone else's fault.

Literally missed the whole point/purpose of what I said. 
 

community, this is a fine example of why people leave/keep leaving and why you aren’t listened to.

 

Flip (and many others with this mentality) have a toxic, continuous hatred for certain members. And when those certain members speak out they’re shunned and talked down to like children.

 

instead of actually comprehending my post you took from it that I’m complaining about not getting strawmen, when it really was the fact that it took months to get an answers and then a bs denial when we were trying to find out how we can reapply and got denied. That shit flew over your thin ass head apparently. Whatever tho, y’all do you 

[Flip]

Just now, manslaughter said:

Literally missed the whole point/purpose of what I said. 
 

community, this is a fine example of why people leave/keep leaving and why you aren’t listened to.

 

Flip (and many others with this mentality) have a toxic, continuous hatred for certain members. And when those certain members speak out they’re shunned and talked down to like children.

 

instead of actually comprehending my post you took from it that I’m complaining about not getting strawmen, when it really was the fact that it took months to get an answers and then a bs denial when we were trying to find out how we can reapply and got denied. That shit flew over your thin ass head apparently. Whatever tho, y’all do you 

Why are you posting on here if you don't actually want the server to improve? You post clearly lying about a strawman application taking 3-4 months when there's people actually looking to be productive and make improvements.

[manslaughter]

For the server to improve, certain staff members need to shut up and take accountability, then implement. You’re a case in point.

 

I wish I could just shut your ass down with proof but my account is banned. By the way, you were the most attentive/active during your time within IFM so don’t take it up the ass when it ain’t fucking you. I’m simply saying 2 things can be true at once, and IFM are/were a big factor to the failure of this server. This is coming from a faction leader who helped contribute to this server like others in this group, so I can say whatever df I want at a minimum. 

[Flip]

1 minute ago, manslaughter said:

I’m simply saying 2 things can be true at once, and IFM are/were a big factor to the failure of this server.

I don't disagree, I just think destroying IFM as a whole won't fix the issue it will exacerbate it.

[Cashew]

3 hours ago, Salazaros said:

Time to give @asapdev a fair chance. Cause we firstly need a consistent developer on the development of the SAMP server. If he is up for it! @Mmartin
 

 

I think it’s best to acknowledge this - whilst asapdev is no doubt a talented developer, his motives and refusal to help out until being given developer access and stuff you can only access after signing an NDA, amongst other things I won’t disclose publicly, means this isn’t going to happen. I tried to work with him previously so that he could contribute as he says he wishes to do, but we couldn’t find mutual terms.

[Cashew]

1 hour ago, Flip said:

This is already an issue when it comes to the dev and mapping teams. IFM have given plenty of ideas to devs for illegal factions, these were to be taken up be Kendrick Underwood, when he left there was no dev willing to focus on illegal rp

You know I love you flip but this just isn’t true. When Spectre and IFM stonewalled the company enhancements update I was working on (still laughable), @Cake and I both said that we would dev purely stuff for illegal RPers to sweeten the deal. We never got a concrete answer on what they wanted.

[Flip]

I don't know what you mean by 'concrete  answer on what they wanted'. There's a whole faction team/dev section on the forums with multiple threads outlining systems we want implementing. A fraud script, weed growing scripts etc.

[Salazaros]

9 minutes ago, Cashew said:

I think it’s best to acknowledge this - whilst asapdev is no doubt a talented developer, his motives and refusal to help out until being given developer access and stuff you can only access after signing an NDA, amongst other things I won’t disclose publicly, means this isn’t going to happen. I tried to work with him previously so that he could contribute as he says he wishes to do, but we couldn’t find mutual terms.

Unfortunate then and thank you for the reply!