2015.08.09 Ragefire Leadership Summit

As stated before - nowhere did DBG EVER state there had to be 100% agreement - This was one of (the two guilds i wont mention) during the time the initial rotation was put into effect -

All the guilds met, and discussed -- there is 88% in favor here out of 12 guilds on this new rotation
There was 2/4 (50%} in favor of the initial

Lower percentage across less parties. Mathematically, democratically and logically = The new rotation has more support

Therefore - The new rotation should stand.

If this new rotation doesnt get blessed then good luck on Kunark. We all fold into TL, Apok gets nothing untill they dissolve. Then we set it right.

OK - everyone stop with the vitriol.

Anyways - to answer your question, at Dojii's very own meeting, the rotation guilds (ALL OF THEM) voted to allow 75% of the vote to carry changes.

That happened on everything at the meeting yesterday.

Thus, the changes take effect.

How can it be our fault that Apok didn't want to submit points to be discussed? Stick around to actually be productive, help, and vote?

It's not our fault.

That's that.

Again Saladus, your vitriol is for the person and/or the procedure.

Timeline has EVERYTHING to do with the wording regarding enforcement of a document or procedure.

The rest of your post is moot based on timeline and procedure and is just more crying about not getting your way or not liking who did it or how it happened. You can continue to bring up example after example of how you think it wasn't done fairly but in all honesty, reading the documentation in hand, that ship has sailed, and the procedure for changing it is spelled out in simple terms that "ALL" guild must agree to changes.

100% unanimous choices ? That basically gives 1 guild Veto Power ..

Well. False Prophecy Veto's that idea - And False Prophecy states that we go with the other 10/12 Guilds that the majority vote holds -

88% in favor of the new rotation - Clear enough answer for me

You'd be incorrect. Because if it's 100% vote to make any changes to the rotation, which, includes adding mobs to the rotation, it'll likely never happen.

Because you can't add the bosses to be rotated. You can't set gatekeepers to get added to the Kunark boss kill list.

Congrats on FFA Kunark!

ID EGO SUPEREGO is just bombing the forums today, who from obviously Apok is it?

Judging from the logs its Melveny or Skelly 100% bullying you guys

Marth just gave the best reason ever for Apok coming to the table before its too late. If you continue in your childish insistence that any changes made must be unanimous, you've doomed yourself to starvation. If one-guild-veto is what you want, you're also directly advocating for the rest of the server to shun you and have their better future over your guild's corpse.

Been wondering at what point a person qualifies as spam.

Emotional appeal after emotional appeal, with no contributing content.

It's simple, really.

DBG either wants all guilds to agree to rotation changes or they don't. We'll know soon.

Link to the original and current rotation in place being approved by a DBG representative.

http://s51.photobucket.com/user/haggletoon/media/rotaapproved_zpsx5dstcqs.jpg.html

Link to the original letter from Holly, in her own words, stating the verbiage about how resolutions are to be handled.

http://s51.photobucket.com/user/haggletoon/media/Primea_zpslkdbe2yh.jpg.html

Please take note of each items time stamp.

There is no ambiguity whatsoever with the approval/enforcement/amendment procedures stated within these two documents.

I believe that it is fairly narrow minded to consider that the mechanics of a rotation need to change to allow more items for that mechanic to be applied to.

"Read: the rotation mechanics need not change in ANY way to apply said mechanic to ANY future item"

The variety or numbers of items in no way changes the mechanics of a rotation.

It is your attempt to change the "mechanics of the rotation" by using the very things that the rotation mechanics are used for.

Apples are not Oranges.

Abstaining from a vote is not a no vote. Ergo, even if Apok wishes to say that a rotation change has to be 100% they have no leg to stand on. By refusing to vote, they ceded their right to vote no and thus the new rotation proposal has 100% support. The new rotation proposal should be ratified by DBG and put in place immediately per any rules of procedure I have ever been a part of.

^^^^^^ This.

This thread could probably be locked at this point.

Any issues should have been brought to peoples respective guild leaders by now, and even those without guilds have had ample time to express themselves as well.

I suppose it's a form of kindness to continue on attempting to clarify a situation through endless restatements, but it's currently out of peoples hands. It has been mentioned a few times that Daybreak has decided to review the events of the last two ragefire meetings themselves, which would certainly supersede any drama that may come from previous worries over "100%" unanimous guild approvals.

We're in their world now.

edit: might also be worth stating that any guild that refused to participate in a meeting that the company was going to take the time to review is not just a huge slap in the face to the player community, but to the staff taking the time to deal with this.

Let the farce end

I'm going to continue to bite as I'd rather answer this question for others reading rather than engage in low debate such as an ad hominem attack, even if you are not yourself interested in the answer.

Unfortunately there is nothing to elaborate on here. According to Apok, the current rotation is set in stone unless a 100% unanimous agreement is made to change anything. This includes the removal of any targets currently on the rotation (Lady Vox, Lord Nagafen, Innoruuk, and Cazic-Thule), or the addition of any current our future targets in the game such as Yael, the Sky island bosses, or the efreeti cycle currently, or such as Venril Sathir, Trakanon, or Phara`Dar next month).

If Apok is suggesting that no discussion, let alone unanimous agreement, is needed to alter the rotation mobs (yet is required to alter the rotation rules), then please let me know so I can immediately remove the current mobs from rotation and return the server to pure FFA.

The point is that I don't care what position Apok picks, it's flawed. They select they flawed position that suits term best depending on what's being discussed. As a whole though, their approach doesn't stand either the test of time or logic. They no longer have any other guild on the server supporting their rotation, and hopefully Daybreak takes note of this.

I am not trying to crush or destroy Apok. They are a capable guild struggling to both save face and guaranteed loot right now. It's a tough time for them. What I want is not for them to get in trouble with Daybreak or be despised by the server. I want them to just join in with everyone else.

I love that these "trolls" conveniently ignore several posts about Apok agreeing to allow a 75% vote of the current guilds on the rotation in order to make changes.

Please, explain in your endless wisdom, how ALL GUILDS agreeing to a 75% majority, means that ALL GUILDS have to unanimously agree.

You're wrong, and I assume bored, and I'm just curious what topic you'll move onto after DBG endorses this rotation.

Jain, you still need to address how you feel the construct, that is the mechanic of how it is decided who gets a TURN at what mob, has anything to do with the adding or subtracting of items (mobs) that the mechanics of the rotation is used for.

The rotation mechanics can be applied to lunch breaks, bathroom breaks, work shifts, etc etc without the need to adjust the mechanics itself based on how it is applied.

Don't confuse the vehicle of "whom" goes next, with the destination of "what" is next.

I would like to point out, that the DBG "Approved" rotation was really not given any time to mature before another rotation was proposed. If nothing else, that could be why they are hesitant to get involved. I would want the people to test the waters as well before deciding it's unfair in some way, if for no other reason than I don't want to be wasting my time re-doing stickies/posts and having to re-inform what's being enforced to my guides.