• Hey! Guest! The 36th GMC Jam will take place between February 27th, 12:00 UTC - March 2nd, 12:00 UTC. Why not join in! Click here to find out more!

The GMC Rad Reviewers [sign up & Discussion]

Otyugra

Member

Ahh haha... Re-reading that thread always makes my day. Thank you NPT. I think it's likely that neither of them made a review, so if that turns out to be the case, I'll open a discussion on whether we want to end the group or not. If I don't hear back from either of them (which I doubt), then I will simply end the group without their input. I believe this group had good intentions and did good things.
 

Rusty

Member
Otyugra's power trip is coming to an end?

It's always sad to see a community feedback group fail, so let's take this moment to remember the good times. From Otyugra's GCSE English lesson, to the made up ranks that were never used, to the motto. Oh that motto.
"We find it quite sad
that games are unseen
so we declare to be rad
and review till we dream."
Otyugra's South Park Moments:
It is here that I want to remind you all that I am the leader, and that my leadership should not be undermined.


Otyugra's Donald Trump Moments:
you start walking down a road to getting yourself fired from the group


Otyugra's Dad Meme Moments:
If you sign up to write two reviews per two months, actually attempt to write two reviews every two months please. I'm very disappointed.


And of course Otyugra's flat out bullying once people quit (after he asked them to do so);
There is "life getting in the way" and then there are excuses. I strongly doubt any of them didn't have the opportunity for 60 days straight to write two reviews. It's disrespectful to me to waste my time, and right now you're also being disrespectful. Like it or not, I have a right, and even good odds in my favor based on personal experience, to make assumptions about whether or not the members had the chance to do as I asked of them.
@mazimadu wrote some nice reviews, @nvrogers is always a pretty solid and detailed reviewer. Overall though, this has pretty much been the Otyugra show and in the 9 months it's been open it's produced less content than the randoms browsing the forums anyway. You have been cruel, demeaning and downright rude to volunteers who had offered to spend their free time supporting the group, all in the name of a made up title you assigned yourself.

This may seem like an attack, it's not, consider this a review of your behaviour in this group over the last 9 months. I can only hope that you see this, see how you have conducted yourself towards others and try to behave with a bit more grace and tact in the future. People who volunteer their time owe you nothing and when you offer people nothing for their work, you have no automatic power or authority. You were not a company CEO, you were never a company CEO and "firing" people and "demanding deadlines" was never in the job description of running a reviewer group. If you were hiring me and paying me for my art services I would still find this behaviour unacceptable.
 

mazimadu

Member
@Rusty On my end I leafy because I had other concerns that took me away from dedicating time to giving detailed reviews. Despite calling him out on it, @Otyugra 's behavior never really bothered me and he offered good feedback on the reviews I wrote.
If he was rude to others that is sad to hear.
 

Otyugra

Member
@Rusty, would you be willing to discuss this further with me; do you believe a formal argument would change your mind about anything? If you do not think anything I could say would change your mind, then I have no want or need to talk about this. If what you think is as true as you believe it to be, then why not let other people review my behavior and come to a conclusion on their own? I, for example, have thought about my behavior based on what you brought up, and of that all, I do not agree with any deontological point you made. It seems to me that we value different things and that under my own utilitarian value system, I did nothing wrong.
 

Rusty

Member
Otyugra, you have drive, you are assertive and you are talented. You have everything that you need to succeed as an artist or as a game designer but this entire topic lacks tact, grace or humility. The people who joined up to the Rad Reviewers offered their time for free, instead of thanking them for it you demanded from them and threatened to "fire" those who disobeyed. When you offer nothing you are in no position to demand anything.

Otyugra, you have real potential but if you treat people the way I've seen you treating them in this topic then nobody is going to want to work with you and you're not going to get anywhere. I value respect, and from what I can see in this topic, you've given none and demanded much of it.
 

chance

predictably random
Forum Staff
Moderator
I hope we can tone this down. Perhaps it wasn't organized well, but it was also disappointing to see members sign up but never write any reviews. Either way, I think we can discuss this without such harsh criticism. It's bordering on ridicule.

I don't care much for these reviewer clubs either way. But maybe a better approach in future would be asking members to post a review as a prerequisite for joining. Maybe that would stop members from signing up, and then losing interest.
 

Otyugra

Member
@Rusty, realizing that I had to first get complimented by you before I could take your argument seriously, humbled me a little (though as @chance pointed out, acting so harsh in post #152 really wasn't making that easy for me during post #154). You may recall that you and I have a long history of not getting along, and thanks to a childhood of being bullied (we could debate what constitutes as having been bullied, but instead please take my word for it), my first reaction was to keep my guard up around your arguably-strong criticism of my character.

You might actually be right about me no acting tactful enough, "graceful" enough.

Regarding tactfulness, I am who I am, unfortunately. There is only so much I can do about my ability to emotionally empathize with others. I don't have autism (thank God) but I am very logically (rather than emotionally) minded, and as such, that is how I treat those who are under my leadership. Some will agree that my methods are simply just other valid ways to go about this. I think that most people would agree to that, hence why I encourage others to form their own opinion about my past methods. All that said, I will in the future, if there is a future, try to work on this.

Regarding graceful, you might say some of the decisions I made in originally constructing this club --ahem, this group-- were born from me being slightly socially inept, and too whimsical, but I believed then, as I do now, that a little bit of whimsy can be a wonderful thing when we simply stop being ashamed of it! When I look back at the mistake that was the group motto, part of my gets a warm feeling from the inviting and friendly nature of the word choice. After all, aren't many video games whimsical, and does that often add to the experience? I can see it from your perspective now, and I agree that one man's warm feelings from a motto can be another man's new-born skepticism of the quality of the reviews/ mental maturity of the reviewers. The same goes for any other decision I made that was similarly very whimsical. That is why I agreed to tone everything down. I only kept the name of the group, did I not? I'm not sure why we are still talking about this as though I didn't already learn my lesson many months ago.

Regarding humility, however, I firmly disagree with you. I am definitely no anarchist, despite being moderately-libertarian. One reason among others is because I believe anarchy is incompatible with the teachings of Christianity, of which I am firmly a part of. I believe mankind is naturally inclined to do the selfish thing. Without the authority of my monotheistic God (and by extent the law and order he so strongly asserted), the United States would be a horrendously worse place to live in. Rules such as "If a man [...] swears an oath to bind himself by a pledge, he shall not break his word" are God's prophet's rules, not my own, and I will enforce them as hard as he would want me to, even in a slightly casual setting such as this. Putting God's rules before my own is what I call being humble. Feel free to call me out on individual things, and one by one, I can double check to see if that is what the Bible would have wanted me to do or say. If I find I was in the wrong, then I will apologize and fix my ways.

You and I define respect differently. I think holding people accountable, is showing them respect. You believe being kind and forgiving is how to show respect, and while I can appreciate those values, I think it is a misguided way to view respect.

EDIT: @chance I like your idea regarding the one review barrier to membership. If the group survive, or if I get a chance at starting over, I'll remember that. Thank you for being a mediator. I'm sorry you don't like the idea of the review clubs, and I'd love to hear your reasons why.
 

chance

predictably random
Forum Staff
Moderator
@chance I like your idea regarding the one review barrier to membership. If the group survive, or if I get a chance at starting over, I'll remember that. Thank you for being a mediator. I'm sorry you don't like the idea of the review clubs, and I'd love to hear your reasons why.
I didn't mean to imply I dislike them -- just that I'm not particularly enthusiastic about clubs within the GMC.

There's no reason why your group can't survive. Maybe it just needs to be "re-invented" to address some issues. This had a rocky start by focusing too much on process. For example, maybe relax the requirements for review format a bit. That seemed to intimidate some members.

Also, I'd drop the idea of monthly / quarterly review "quotas" for membership -- since that clearly didn't work. Instead of quotas, maybe award "points" for each review. That way, members can still be recognized for their contribution, without the pressure of deadlines. Let members move in and out as they want.

There's lots of ways to organize this. These are just some quick thoughts, based on the difficulties I saw with the first version.
 

Rusty

Member
You may recall that you and I have a long history of not getting along, and thanks to a childhood of being bullied (we could debate what constitutes as having been bullied, but instead please take my word for it), my first reaction was to keep my guard up around your arguably-strong criticism of my character.
Otyugra, I have absolutely no issue with you personally. All I have tried to do in this entire topic is show you your own reflection and point you in the right direction. In the past (as far as I can remember) our history contains me quite enjoying the style of your GMC Jam games (of which you misunderstood the first time) and me telling you not to put so much pressure on yourself to deliver webcomics (which was starting to cause some community backlash against you).

Regardless of what you seem to think, I've actually supported you for some time, I see potential in you but the way you are conducting yourself towards others and your own works is hindering you.

If you want to talk to me, about this or anything else, then feel free to get in touch but I don't want to clog this topic up anymore if you're planning on reviving the club.

You and I define respect differently. I think holding people accountable, is showing them respect. You believe being kind and forgiving is how to show respect, and while I can appreciate those values, I think it is a misguided way to view respect.
I have held you accountable and I have not been kind or forgiving in my criticism of you. Kindness and forgiveness have nothing to do with respect, the three are entirely different things and honestly I only endorse 1.5 of them.
 
F

FruitPunchGuy

Guest
Shoot!
Absolutely sorry, @Otyugra ! I'm putting 'em up this weekend!

EDIT:
I realized that there were more posts made than what I read, hence I believe an explanation would be due on my part. School Exams o' mine are set to take place in March and April, whereas the board exams in May, hence I've been doing nothing much but tackling books and past papers. I will say, though, that I am at fault for not setting something up to get the reviews out. Once again, my apologies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

chance

predictably random
Forum Staff
Moderator
It's an improvement. Glad to see monthly quotas removed. I think encouragement (behind the scenes) is a better approach to stimulating review activity. (And you should remove reference to the "monthly quota" in the section called What We Do.)

Other thoughts:
Instead of "Requirements", consider making recommendations. For example, you could suggest that reviews should be complete, and cover the major aspects of the game -- rather than requiring a minimum word-count. Maybe post a few links to examples of good reviews. This might be more helpful than strict guidelines.

Also, I don't see the point of the "Official Ranks" section. Since there aren't any official ranks, that section seems unnecessary.

Under "Notices", I'd omit the "warning points". There's no need to warn people about reviews that are "vulgar, hateful (...) destructive, troll, etc.". That behavior is already against GMC rules. Instead, you could just say that people who consistently write reviews that aren't constructive might be asked to leave the group.

These are just some ideas -- you don't have to adopt them just because I'm a moderator who could make your life miserable and ultimately ban you for frivolous reasons. ;) Just kidding, that's Nocturne's job.
 

Otyugra

Member
It's an improvement. Glad to see monthly quotas removed. I think encouragement (behind the scenes) is a better approach to stimulating review activity. (And you should remove reference to the "monthly quota" in the section called What We Do.)

Other thoughts:
Instead of "Requirements", consider making recommendations. For example, you could suggest that reviews should be complete, and cover the major aspects of the game -- rather than requiring a minimum word-count. Maybe post a few links to examples of good reviews. This might be more helpful than strict guidelines.

Also, I don't see the point of the "Official Ranks" section. Since there aren't any official ranks, that section seems unnecessary.

Under "Notices", I'd omit the "warning points". There's no need to warn people about reviews that are "vulgar, hateful (...) destructive, troll, etc.". That behavior is already against GMC rules. Instead, you could just say that people who consistently write reviews that aren't constructive might be asked to leave the group.
Alright, to compromise, I followed some of your new suggestions but not others. I also made other unrelated changes:
  • I tried to improve the opening text
  • I replaced one of the rules, and added my explanation for why I am keeping the 350-word requirement
  • the member rank section was shortened and absorbed into the What We Do paragraph
  • for the Template of a Review, I removed a few rules and weakened the rule regarding images
  • the Notice section was shortened to reflect your advice
Thank you again for your help. I really hope people start joining again.
 

Otyugra

Member
I uploaded a review, too. Remember everyone to check if your review is long enough. If it has been a while, please find something to review again.
 
S

Shadow Gamer

Guest
Hey,
I know I'm not active around the forums anymore, but I was going through some topics in community chat and I came across this one. Just want to thank @Rusty for his profound critique and insight into this attempt, and @Otyugra for atleast trying to understand and integrate it. Also, @chance 's feedback and moderation.

Sorry for popping in out of the blue and for no reason, just really enjoyed the way you guys handled this in the end. Thank you for the interesting read.
 
Top