• 2890 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 6137 Players Online
  • 3247 Players on Bedrock
  • pe.mineplex.com
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

Game Insights: A Shell of it's Former Self (And Why You Shouldn't Join)

Discussion in 'Server Discussion' started by Niervaco, May 22, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. It is here! The Game Insights thread no one was waiting for! This time, I get to be real with everyone before Game Insights decides to advertise itself on the forums as something it's not. There is some important thing I feel as if the community needs to know about Game Insights and it's current path before joining and as a long standing Game Insights community member, why I don't recommend joining. LETS GET ROLLING

    It's important for those who don't know to know what Game Insights is. Game Insights presents itself as a team dedicated to game balancing and feedback hub. They were never advertised much, so there's a good chance you've never heard of it. GI is the team that's been responsible for the last year or so of pretty much all game patches, good or bad. You can join the GI Discord... somehow. Ask a team manager for an invite (it's really messy right now). Those who put ample amounts of quality feedback to their favorite games are invited to join the GI team as a GI member, no application needed. However, this isn't quite what it's like today, I'll get to that later.

    HISTORY (2017):
    The birth of Discord GI, somewhere in April 2017 and it started with SSM only. This is where I started out, one of the first people joining GI on Discord (All of my apps for forumGI were rejected, but forumGI is defunct so yeet) and how a lot of prominent Discord members started out. Hylore was our lead, and it stayed that way for a while. Shortly after SSMGI was founded, GGI was created as a catch-all for games not really big enough for their own Game Insights teams. For a good while, all was actually quite well. We collaborated and worked together to bring many SSM patches since. Pig meta was brought to you by SSMGI, and anything after that was also SSMGI. Not like we purposely broke pig, but that's just what ended up happening thanks to an error. During this era, we've had a few rough encounter of ex admins in a time I'd like to call...

    This started when two admins, Relyh and T3hero, started messing around in the antics of GI. Relyh was enforcer of all, and we didn't really appreciate his choke hold as an admin. Rumors were Relyh was really close to just cancelling GI as a project on the whole level, thanos snapping Game Insights. T3hero, in his usual T3 self, banned one of our GI members on all Discords for saying that GI basically works for Mineplex to an extent, then conveniently finding out he was forum banned (later un-forum banned) to use as an excuse to keep him banned. This cause mass upset in the GI team and caused both admins to begin enforcing the team to prevent discussion on the matter. Both of these events caused unrest in the team and some of us developed a bad taste for admins in the team as a result. This didn't last too long, and both admins are now no longer admins, but it's just the beginning of a trend of rank elitism in GI.

    I honestly forgot where to put everything that happened afterwards... so I'll just jump a bit. Somewhere along the line these things happened in no particular order.
    - #pc-bugs removed from GI channels
    - The Great Game Purge
    - Champs GI reform because of bad communication from a patch
    - Hylore steps down from GI Lead, (censored) takes his place
    - SSMGI is threatened with disbandment for "toxicity" (I'll get to this a little bit in a second)
    - Sampson who?
    - Moderation team grows in size with some questionable but mainly okay results

    After one of the second patches, GI seemed to have smoothed out, I got demoted sometime in 2018 :( but I still kept my activity in tip top shape, creating a community founded stat document for GI when Production Lead saw fit that GI shouldn't be able to share live statistics anymore. After this, things were dormant when it came to actual big changes in Game Insights. The moderation team developed big during this time. There was a few bumps between beginning and moderation, but it's a ton better than moderation on the MOD server and isn't overly strict to this day. Things seemed fine.. until...

    I'm not affiliated with ChampsGI much, but you get a shout out here because you were shutdown with us SSM peeps too. In the beginning of 2019, SSMGI server was officially locked down for "toxic people" and integrated into the General GI Discord. The leaders then blamed the GI team for being too toxic, but that turns out to be a lie later down the road. Yes, the leaders blamed the community for being too toxic for the merger. Eventually, all GI functions were moved into this one discord. This upset the SSMGI community so much that a separate discord was created to freely discuss SSM, to the dismay of both the ex and current GI lead. To combat this, GIL (Game Insight Leaders) stated that any feedback taken from this discord would not be listened to or documented, and that all feedback should stay in the GI discord. Hear that, this is a threat to all community members that don't like the discord and prefer to discuss elsewhere. Your feedback won't be heard, intentionally and on purpose. The source? Two Game Insights Leads, one current and one former. No lies here. No slander, just truth.

    Now we get to today... how GI is truly showing itself how it isn't what it used to be. Ready for the good stuff? You'll get it here.

    Sometime in early 2019 our ex-game lead dropped a bombshell leak on the Game Insights community. Horrid events were detailed, like moving to MOD (Mineplex Official Discord, or MPD for most of you), making the Game Insights team 100% private only like forumGI, completely shoving the game community out of discussing balancing for its own games, and completely gutting all GI members and re-recruiting new members into the team. Who made this choice? Not the Game Lead at the time. Those who are higher up than him were making choices he couldn't fight against. This, alongside many reasons that attribute to poor upkeep in other topics, is why he ended up resigning and demoted at the same time. However, this document was dumped onto the public, where enough uproar from the community was created that the GI leadership team panicked and they quickly dismissed and reverted any discussions and any developments regarding moving to MOD and becoming private. Enough loud noise was created to, for once in a millennium, the Game Insights Leads listened to the community, for now. However, reform was promised whether we liked it or not, so now that leads onto the most current event...

    Apparently after Ideas Team was complaining that Game Insights isn't doing its work for giving feedback they... rework the entire team infrastructure and layout? Yes, that's exactly what's going on. In this process, some Game Leads were basically demoted in favor of a more professional take on Game Leads. (Game Leads led smaller GI groups for specific games like SSM or Minestrike.) This new position is called Category Manager or, as I like to call them, catmans. However, this position is the least characteristically "Game Insights-y" of all Game Insights positions. This position doesn't quite focus on game and chat experience as other GI positions, despite only 3 of them managing recruitment, feedback, and oversight for the entire Game Insights team, feedback for Ideas Team, and more.

    This doesn't quite fit with logic. Why fit a Game Insights manager position + feedback manager with less experience than the actual rest of the Game Insights team? Well, the higher ups above me explained that this is to communicate with Ideas Team better and manage feedback in order to filter poor ideas 'n stuff. However, this is extremely counterproductive. What they could've done instead of replace Game Leads with catmans, is complement Game Leads with catmans, and rename catmans to Feedback Managers. They can serve a completely experience independent role when you can still have someone fulfilling the actual experience leadership position. This is more efficient since you'd have dedicated people making sure ideas have been discussed, communication with IT is established, and sort through feedback and ideas without ever needing an ounce of game experience. It's more people dedicated to patch up an alleged hole in communication, but this isn't anywhere near what happened, so I have doubt this is the actual reason. Especially since our dedicated SSM Game Lead, Cerbert Envious, was esentially demoted in favor with someone with less game experience and less chat experience with the community to manage not only SSM, but also Champions and Minestrike Game Insights and other "Hardcore" games. Some would call it a strict downgrade, others call it a manager position instead of a GI position, but it remains a controversial promotion in the meantime.

    This might offend some, but the latest large GI batch of 10 people will probably go down as the most controversial batch to go down in GI history. Why, well I'll keep it short and bitter. This GI batch focused less on game experience than all the other batches. Alongside that, inactive members have a chance of being promoted in hopes of turning active. Yeah, you've been shuffled aside for someone who isn't even active, or as experienced as you to join the Experience and Feedback team. How bonkers is that? Very, but there's more. Recruiting potentially inexperienced and inactive members into Game Insights is an insult to the roots of the team and the members who actually had to be active and experienced to join the team. Inactive members shouldn't be promoted into Game Insights team at all, given the catmans are hoping they'd become active or not. In the Game Insights Policy under "Becoming Game Insights" one of the first things explained is that "We select new GI from active members in the Discord, with track records of affecting change in their community and with lots of expertise in the games" and this batch philosophy goes directly against this. While they might not be able to revert this batch, I recommend the catmans and GIL to never attempt a batch philosophy like this again, as it only damages GI's efficiency, reputation, and capabilities.

    I think some people will get the title here, but others who don't I'll fill in shortly. Are you aware of the constant rumor that staff members can't say anything bad about their own server in risk of demotion? Well, the same is true for Game Insights. Even in your own personal discords or non-Mineplex discords, if you badmouth Game Insights or Mineplex you risk a demotion. If someone in a high GI position sees you badmouthing Mineplex or the team, they do have the power to demote you over it. Is this slander? No, because slander requires something to be false, and this is confirmed true by someone very high in the Game Insights stack. I attribute my long-standing Game Insights 2018 demotion to this, as my feedback and chat experience is lengthy and positive. Is this bad for the community? Yes, very. This is behavior I think everyone should know about, as at the moment it's being kept hushed down probably because it'll do nothing but bring a negative impression on Game Insights. However, this is what they want to do without shame. I figured everyone should know that not even the community aimed project, Game Insights, is immune from this infliction.

    Now this goes together with the section above, but it's still important to emphasize this in a section alone. Since you're being watched everywhere and all of your behavior is being documented, countless amounts of game experience and feedback won't get you into Game Insights if you happen to disagree with the parent server. Game Insights Leads will disagree, but I believe it to be a lie. The ones who oversee GIL, and GIL itself, have a trend of caring more about server image than the rest of GI and a few top height GI overseers rarely actually communicated with the community before the big document leak from the ex game lead. Daniel, the current GI Lead, is trying his best with the team but eventually he might also fall into the position where those above him will hand him a nonnegotiable change to GI. He's a fairly decent lead, and I hope the best for him, but sometimes things happen you can't do anything about, and that might've not happened just yet. The latest batch also ties into the server image over experience as well. Contrary to a snippet in the big update document provided by Daniel, there's more proof stacking up over the server image vs experience theory to prove it than dismiss it. Saying "yeah we'll promote edgy people" doesn't combat actual proof of demotions and questionable promotions that cant really be explained in any other way other than this. I'm sorry, but I'm still sticking to my stance.

    What's the way to privatize GI without actually privatizing GI? Make all meaningful discussions internal. In the new document roadmap presented by the Game Insights Lead, the community only gets a play after GI has done all the discussion. From GI coming up with the actual document and testing, the community only sees the document after GI has done all the talking, and then comes back and the community never sees it again until the patch comes out. Even MCL gets to see the updates for their respective games before the community gets to see the end result. After the patch and the community sees the patch in action is the only time they get to give input on the end result, and that time slot only lasts for a single week. After that, an emergency patch is issued and the game is put on a bookshelf for a very long time again. IMO way too short of a time span, should be two weeks at least. Minor jab, MCL shouldn't be involved in the testing session at all. They're not GI, they're not QA or QAT. They are just experienced members who happen to be in a separate entity and get to do testing. If they're experienced members who want to do testing, they should go through the GI tunnel instead of getting special privileges for something that their position doesn't relate to feedback or testing at all. The community rarely gets to see what GI is doing. A slight mention goes to the fact that SSMGI was forbidden to let common folk see the live stats of their game. This affected everyone in the community so much, that even the statistics page on this very website isn't correctly updated, instead relying on the old statistics document to fill in wrong values. Yes, I submitted error reports for this, twice, and it's still not fully fixed.

    Let's get to the other half of this title...

    Now if you actually read this far, congratulations. You're persistent on getting to the conclusion. Why do I say you shouldn't join. Well, lets summarize everything that's been happening so far.
    - GI promoting people that aren't experienced / aren't active
    - Backroom discussions about anti-community moves in GI
    - Game Insights Leads are spying on you, everywhere
    - Down talking the server or the team will demote you and prevent your promotion
    - A history of admin mischief and dodgy reasoning for very influential updates
    - GI not promoting people who are very experienced and active because of the 4th entry above
    - Those in power actually going through with anti-community updates at times (SSMGI Shutdown)
    - GI internalization prevents common user interaction with actual update documents
    - A path towards Mineplex orientation instead of community orientation

    Game Insights isn't what they make themselves out to be. The team has so many problems that they need to sort themselves out before any new members should join the team. They might make a move to advertise themselves on the forums after this thread, and they might present themselves as something else that they are in reality and in practice. This is why I'm making this thread. People should know the history and the actions for the team they're interested in joining before they click accept on the Terms of Use. This not only serves as along public service announcement, but also serves as a wake up call for Game Insights to fix itself and change it's path they're heading down. Becoming more Mineplex oriented isn't what Game Insights is about.

    Game Insights has its roots embedded in the community first and foremost, for the benefit of the players of their games and for everyone overall. Joining the team might serve as a shock since everything is changing to become less community focused, and more internal like a standard Mineplex team, with more strict rules about discussion and public opinion, also like a Mineplex team. This isn't what GI is about. We need to make Game Insights community focused again. Take away the ambiguity between GI document creation and testing. Let GI and the community cycle in an endless loop of "document to public view to document to public view" so that the community never gets left out while we wait on development. Allow GI to discuss their opinions freely, optimize the team for feedback and idea throughput by adding dedicated people for organization instead of potentially bottlenecking the team with only 3 people basically handling internal and external team communications + ideas organization + assuring things are discussed. That's a lot of things to handle for 3 people. Solutions for admin mischief? Well, you can just be honest with the community. Ask what their concerns are and address them instead of keeping empty promises. Fulfill those promises. What's wrong with having separate discords for big games? Those were fine and they formed their own tight-knit community with lots of discussion that was basically disrupted by bunching everyone under one umbrella. Don't spy on everyone in every discord, people should be allowed to mention their opinions about the team if they happen to be against the team or the server's actions or behavior. Fulfill GI's original purpose of recruiting the top experienced players adept in providing feedback and ideas to keep the team as efficient, productive, and accurate as possible. Promote active people who provide good feedback to compliment those elite players and then have people dedicated to sorting through feedback, ideas, and cross team communication and you have my dream Game Insights setup.

    In the end, and as a TLDR, I recommend staying away from GI until they sort themselves out with their multiple issues and the team begins to fulfills it's original purpose in tip top shape once again.

    If you read all of this, congrats. You deserve a box of Reese's Kit Kats. I commend you for your patience and I hope you fill out feedback for this post in the most unbiased, honest-to-me way possible. It might take a while, but I'm patient and I'll get back at you eventually with a response. Have your own discussion down below and as always, have a good time. Now it's time for me to go back to Groove Coaster.

    Posted May 22, 2019,
    Last edited May 22, 2019
  2. Alright, I read the whole thing, so where are my Kit Kats?

    Anyway, I agree with the point of this thread. I joined GI discord when it was first semi-released to the public, and I was never really too active. Now when the whole drama about Bastet leaving and the discord being removed was when I started paying attention to what was happening. I was really annoyed and while not being a major advocate for solving the solution, I did care.

    I was around during the removal of SSMGI too, but I hadn't really spent much time there and wasn't too upset. I do understand, however, how other people felt about this change

    After the recent update with the new category managers and whatnot, I will have to admit that I was confused and didn't really understand the update.

    When they explained how GI discord members could get GI from activity, I was a bit torn about the idea. On one hand, it sounded nice to me (yes I'm selfish) as I'm much too lazy to make an application and would rather be active. On the other hand, I felt like it would reduce the quality of GI members and make it too easy to get. When the new members were accepted, since I wasn't very active, I didn't really care.

    However, once I read this thread I understand why the quality was decreased. I feel like the system should at least go back to the old way, if not the old old way. One thing I would change with the old ways is the publicity of the discord, I liked how a few months ago there was an easy application (basically filtered out trolls) so that everyone who wanted to could oversee GI making decisions.

    This thread actually taught me a lot about GI that I didn't know about. It upsets me a lot that GI members cannot say anything negative about GI at all. Isn't the point of GI to be a place to share ideas? While complaints against GI aren't exactly sharing ideas, I do find it strange that in a place where you state opinions you can't state your opinion on the place. Stuff like this really bothers me and it upsets me that that is going on.

    I wrote a longer post than usual because I'm not on mobile, and I really appreciate the time you spent on this thread.
    Posted May 22, 2019,
    Last edited May 22, 2019
  3. Don't recall stumbling upon a thread like this for a while, but that's a pleasant surprise of sorts, these are typically the more interesting threads to read and partake in. Though there is likely some elephant in the room that needs to be addressed if threads like these are being made, so in that way seeing a thread like this isn't necessarily good. Oh well, it's worth responding anyways.


    I'd prefer to respond to each point in chronological order, but I think this is by far the most important point (for me at least) to address because the topic concerns me. I was one of GI introduced in this so-called #BadBatch, and debatably one of those "inactive members have a chance of being promoted in hopes of turning active" (to be fair the channel I focused on the most wasn't very active either, so IIRC I was active enough to comment on most issues that were raised in there, at least in recent times). Of course, given that I accepted the offer I know I have to be active now, but relying on this gamble isn't the best idea in the book. And while I admit I'm definitely not the most experienced player on even what is supposed to be my area of expertise (SG) I would say I know enough that game to have a fair idea of what needs to be changed to point the game in the right direction. Playing into your criticism, though, I doubt I have the knowledge needed to make this judgement in the other games in my section. Just means I need to make the effort to learn them. To sum this up, as I believe I have told you before, overall I agree with your concerns here, even if I am a target of them. Before I move on to any other points, I should note that this inactivity I've had over the last 2 and a bit years or so means I'll have to skip over some of your points, because I won't be able to adequately respond to them.

    Rejecting feedback simply on the basis for where it originated? There are words I'd like to use to describe this, but this is a kid-friendly forum so I cannot. I believe that intention gets my point across here well enough though.

    As experienced as GI are supposed to be, discussing what changes and fixes games need should not be restricted to just us, it should be something that all the community has the opportunity to collaborate on, so that we are able to get as many different perspectives as possible and we minimise the chance of skipping over something. I heard of the planned purging of the GI Discord at the time, but I didn't really look into it too greatly, so what opinions I'm forming over this decision I'm basing largely on what you have stated. But from what you have said, it wasn't a good idea. It neglected the rest of the community and their experience, and drained the pool of opinion down to a few select drops, which just raises the possibility of a poorly thought decision getting passed into gameplay if you ask me. I'm glad it was something that was reversed, and a little surprised as well, given Mineplex's reputation with this sort of thing. Hopefully there isn't a repeat of this scenario.


    This is a bit of a debatable for point for me, as, if you were active on the forums around 2015-2016, you should know I've had a bit of a rocky relationship with Mineplex, to say the least. Yet I've still managed to be selected for GI. That said, my previously mentioned inactivity has likely helped my case more than anything, as it means any grudges and what not have been dropped (or at least I hope they have), plus this is only anecdotal. And, to further contradict myself, I've already had to change my signature on the forums to get rid of the old Mineplex anti-cheat copypasta at the request of a higher up (not naming names), for the reason that someone mightn't understand the context. As this higher up would know, I'm not a fan of having to change it, especially since it was rather harmless IMO. If the restrictions on our opinions are as stringent as you're trying to say they are, it is rather self-defeating. After all, our role at the end of the day is to improve the server, and we can't improve if we refuse to acknowledge the problems we have. Overzealous with the restrictions of negative opinions is unfortunately something Mineplex is a bit notorious for, though, so I wouldn't be too surprised if this turns out to be the case. Not that I'll let it change my point of view on things.

    These are all the points I'll respond to for now, might comment on others later if I feel the need to. And, in case it must be noted, I'm speaking for my own here, not for GI, Mineplex, or anyone else.
    Posted May 22, 2019,
    Last edited May 22, 2019
    Eroil likes this.
  4. Managed to read through the whole thing- wasn't disappointed at all. It's a very well-thought out and well-reasoned exposé of sorts, and while there is usage of anecdotal evidence to support claims, I don't seem them as fallacious because they're just your experience (and might I add, the experience of other people as well).

    How I feel on telling people not to join GI is maybe a different story. I think one of the best ways to get things changed is to have them changed from the inside, i.e. by a GI member; criticism from a team's members is also more respected than that of an outsider.
    Posted May 22, 2019
  5. After long last.. someone TELLS us the TRUTH.

    Thank you for creating this detailed, beautiful thread which finally informs us of what's going on behind the scenes in mineplex.

    I've been looking into joining GI myself, but if this is the truth behind that team... I wouldn't be interested until they can sort themselves out.

    Mineplex doesn't seem to understand that they can't only rely on their officials for ideas and information, but the community of experienced, well rounded normal players as well. We are the ones who play the game day after day, experiencing the changes and bumps in the road 1st hand, after all.

    Officials of mineplex, Please take this matter into serious consideration, and start the construction of our server the right way.
    Posted May 22, 2019
    FluteVegetables likes this.
  6. A good read as always.
    I do hope things will improve with GI and that they'll be able to "sort themselves out" like you said, but the way things are going right now, the future unfortunately doesn't look too bright. At best it will probably stay similar to the way it is right now, though I might be wrong (hopefully).
    Anyways as for getting into GI not being worth your time, I feel the fact that the community seems to have even less of a significance over the decisions made to be more of a reason to try to get in than anything. Yes, the system might be bs, but at worst you'll be kicked off the team and return go the point you were beforehand (which isn't ideal of course, but it's probably still your best shot at affecting anything).
    Anyways it seems that for community members that don't mind sinking their time into something that potentially produces no results at all, out of straight dedication to the game for the chance of changing anything- GI might still be "worth", which is why I assume people who do understand how the system works still try to go for GI, like you (I think? Or maybe you completely gave up at this point I'm not updated).
    Posted May 22, 2019
  7. Ahoy, ex GI Team Staff here. I took part in some of the desicions you talk about here and I'll answer them (hopefully) in more in detail.

    I hopefully will respond to all points here (Or just put most of my points now and edit the post with some extra points later). Forgive how badly I formatted this post, I'm on a phone at the moment.

    Firstly, I want to say how GI isn't as bad as you put it. Sure GI management is making disagreeable and what I believe are incorrect desicions to fix problems they say are there but ones they needlessly created in the first place. But apart from that, the members are amazing and the team was fun to be apart of. To sum up my view of GI: The Structure sucks, the members are amazing. DanielW231 does a great job as Team lead I should include. (Replies are in Bold)

    Posted May 22, 2019
  8. Hello Nier,

    This is one of the greatest threads I’ve ever seen made about GI and its problems. I’ll do my best to respond and give my own opinions.

    Part I: The Initial Discussion and Changes
    Bastet indeed was a great Game Insights Lead. He knew what the discord needed and was going to basically do what the current discord is today (besides demoting team and game staff). Instead, he was demoted and the admins had a horrible plan that was later converted to something Bastet suggested in management before it all went down.

    What angers me so much is how the admins allegedly approach Bastet. Admins that have nothing to do with the discord and its team except happen to be admins of subteams related to GI had the audacity to tell Bastet “Hey, here’s our plan for YOUR team. This is non-negotiable so don’t even try to argue with us.” Of course, if you were in Bastet’s shoes, you would be devasted and very very very upset that the team you’ve put hours upon hours upon ours working and building it up to the might it is (or was) was going to be completely scrapped and reworked by admins who have literally no experience in how GI operates or works. Honestly, just speculation, if t3hero was still a leader when this all went down, none of this mess would have happened. He knew what needed to happen and how to do it correctly.
    So here’s the orginal message that an admin (I wouldn’t drop names of course) sent. These were the terms that were not negotiable with which Bastet had to deal:

    Imagine having to deal with this as the current GI lead that couldn’t do anything about it. It’s ridiculous. Their original plan was to kick out everyone single non-GI member of the discord. Think about it, MPD is just not a place where feedback is given, with 20k people, many of them toxic, unintelligent, and detrimental to any feedback discussion, would have free reign over once very moderated and created discussions. Of course, as imagined, everyone, and I mean everyone, rioted. GI members resigned, and much heat was thrown. Even a discord was made that was for people concerned about the about and it got 40 members in the first day. That’s how angry everyone was. I and a few others approach one of the admins in DMs. After I chatted with him for 2 hours straight, the concerned members of GI got the update paused and reworked. But the damage was done, people were too worried about the unclearly thought-out and delivered update that all discussions in the game channels were virtually halted.

    So a few weeks go by, everyone is worried about what will happen. Will we all get kicked? Will the admins drop an even worse update? Until finally the new GI lead posted a mini-update about it. The only problem was it was a little too unclear and resulted in even more worry and discussion.

    Part II: The Finished/Revised Update
    Finally, the update got finished and basically, the changes were: all team staff and game leads are demoted in place of 3 category leads that are a combination of both team and game staff, Ideas Team now has a bigger role in the discord and does more stuff? And worst of all, all game initial discussion happens in private GI channels.

    So, the first part of the update which was demoting game and team staff I disagree with, but I don’t have too much of a problem with the current CATL system so I don’t feel like commenting on it.

    The second part I’ll touch on later. The third part is the biggest problem.

    Part IIa: Restricting Non-GI’s Rights
    The new update cycle is overall better, we get promised a post patch so that’s good, but for the average GI discord community member, this sucks. Now, all initial discussion is GI-only, which means two things may happen.
    The chat will just be completely dead
    Literally, every single possible negative change will be discussed and approved/denied by a very small group of people BEFORE us menial community members can respond.

    Now, the problem with this is that non-GI basically doesn’t have much of a role anymore regarding feedback because all the changes are already talked about without a non-GI’s opinion meaning that, well, we really don’t get a say anymore in the initial discussion. Now, of course, any person could say “Well, you do get discussion after GI talks about it”, but if they have talked about everything already, then what’s even the point? If there’s so much GI superiority now, is there any point in even trying to get something changed as a mere community member? Because I guarantee you that everything a non-GI member tries to talk about will get a “well, we’ve already talked about it and decided x. Thanks for trying to help, but no!”
    So, I’d highly suggest that instead of restricting non-GI’s rights, give more rights to GI. It’s not that hard to do. Instead, all GI are able to more directly edit the documents and are able to attend all QAT testings; therefore, they have more say in everything and non-GI members won’t have to suffer getting left out of important conversations. Problem solved!

    For any non-GI member who is in the discord, that is a huge disrespect. Active members in the discord work their butts off trying to get promoted to GI, and instead, MCL, just some experiences players who happen to be affiliated with Mineplex and this MCL group, get to see updates and give feedback before the active member? It’s hard to comprehend, yet that is what it is, and it’s horrible.

    I don’t know how many times I need to say this but if the admin’s goal is to give GI more rights, then they can do that easily without restricting non-GI’s rights.

    PREACH. Exactly what I’m trying to say.
    Another thing I want to touch on is the Ideas Team and turning it into a “Community Feedback Hub”

    Part III: Ideas Team in the Discord / Shift of Focus
    First of all, the Game Insights discord is such a good source of feedback BECAUSE no one touches it except the GI lead and GI co-lead, which is a separate role from admins, CoM, and everyone else. Now the admins think they can promote their sub-teams to a higher role and tap into the GI discord’s effectiveness for their own feedback benefit. That just won’t work. The discord works so well because there’s no interference from higher-ups, and I can’t stress that enough. We’re trying to turn a discord centered on game balancing to a “FeeDBacK hUb” when that eventually is what will bring ruin to the discord. Keep. It. About. Games. Move your ideas team and general QoL stuff out of the discord and to other platforms, but don’t try to taint (for lack of a better word) the discord with non-GI stuff. It’s the GI discord for a reason. I and I know literally everyone else, joined the discord for games, not to do “!suggest Turn off night vision in hub” or something. Honestly, if you did a poll the discord before this all went down asking whether people would do a discord overhaul in favor of general ideas/feedback OR removing the general feedback entirely, people would vote in favor of removing general feedback because the focus of the discord is on games.

    Now, since management is trying to impose their “feedback hub” idea, they’ve done an unthinkable: they changed the avatar and name of the GI discord to “Mineplex Community Hub” and the logo is no longer what we’ve come to love. Now, on the surface, I know this doesn’t sound that bad, but for a community member that has actively chatted in the GI Discord for a year, interacted with people and met so much wonderful community members in the GI Discord, and just overall spent most of my time in the GI Discord, this is hurtful. It’s like uprooting years of history and achievements and instead of smashing Ideas and GI together belittling GI, its systems, and hard work. They think changing the avatar will suddenly make everyone welcome Ideas and shift the focus when let’s be honest, no one’s going to call it the “CI” discord. Changing the name doesn’t change the contents and I hope they know that because discussion needs to stay on games.

    If they truly want a good feedback system that’s not games, they’d know that it might be better to just simply ask Ideas Team “Hey, y’all should be a little more active and contribute regularly in the discord” instead of uprooting years of history and changing integral parts of the system to accommodate for the Ideas Team’s lack of caring for the discord. If there are problems with the ideas team collecting feedback, then maybe the Ideas Team should change instead of everything else.

    Part IV: The Most Recent GI Batch

    There’s been controversy over the new GI Batch. Basically, they were promoted

    Of course, I do have a problem with the newest GI batch, but it’s not as bad as stated above. I think that instead of promoting people who are inactive in the GI discord, management should maybe message those players they want to promote and say “Hey, we think you’re a good candidate for GI. We’ll watch you for a month in the discord, and if we see you understand the environment of the discord, and contribute very actively, we’ll consider promoting you.” This would fix the problem that they’re promoting inactive members in the GI discord even though they may be experienced in the game. The problem with this is people who work their butts off for many months on end to be active and get promoted, get denied and instead people who have practically 0 messages in the discord get promoted. It looks bad on the outside. I’m not trying to throw shade on the newest GI batch, but I thoroughly think that next time, maybe promote all the active members in the discord first, who are deserving of the role traditionally, before promoting these new people.

    Please just take everything I said here to heart. I know that I’ve not worded this in the kindest manner, but please know that I do not hate GI. In fact, I love GI very much, so of course, I am obligated by my love and care for the success of the team to defend it and try to give the most feedback I can. To admins that may read this: I talk negatively about admins here. While I try to keep them as anonymous as possible, please know that I really don’t hate any of you guys. In fact, you all are my role models for many things and I appreciate the hard work you guys do, but I care deeply about the discord and thus criticize actions you’ve made, but not you, your personality, and don’t hold grudges in any way. Please don’t take anything I said personally here, it’s all just trying to get the best outcome as a community member. I really don’t hate or think you’re bad people, but some actions that have been made need improvement. To the sub-teams I talk negatively about: I don’t hate you guys either, nor do I hold a grudge either. In fact, I probably want to be on that respective sub-team eventually.

    I know that putting my thoughts are here are risky and I risk getting on a lot of people's bad sides and it negatively affects my chances to get promoted to any sub-team. I even considered making and putting this on a forums alt account. If someone with power is, in fact, reading this and is making personal grudges against me, I ask that you don’t. It’s all purely to try to empower improvement.
    Posted May 22, 2019
    DanielW231, Mr_Ant87, Hyrawr and 3 others like this.
  9. Thread Locked.
    Before you all spam my direct messages with hate mail, think about this logically. Along with that, I ask you to take a second, truly read the thread and understand it’s tone. I don’t believe Niervaco is a malicious person, nor do I believe their intent was to completely bash CoM and the new GI leadership. However, the way you went about this was, arguably, very poorly executed.

    You almost definitely made this thread and shared what you did to spark a reaction. I have no doubts that you were aware of this controversial topic and the reactions it would spark. GI was and still will be a wonderful team. Things take time, and regardless of your opinions on the matter, it is best you take it to someone who can help you. Posting this lengthy thread was very risky-taking, and I applaud you for trying to speak your mind on the issue. But was it truly needed on the forums? I know, as I know Emily and Dean, they’re open to your opinions; regardless if they will agree with you or not.

    At the end of the day, my decision to lock this thread wasn’t to censor your opinions or your discussion. I’m saying this isn’t the right place. Quite honestly, this isn’t a topic you can approach the way you did, as I was personally messaged by GI leadership saying there isn’t much they can say. Regardless of what they say, they don’t feel like you will truly listen or believe them.

    My messages are always open and I’m in multiple Discord’s where you can reach me and we can talk. Forwarning, I’ve never been in GI, so I don’t know the changes that took place, the reasonings, etc. so I can’t really help with that. Thank you for sharing your opinions, but I don’t believe this was the right way.
    Posted May 22, 2019
    Acerna, wattywatty14, Jaek and 5 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page