BuzzerBeater Forums

The BB staff has been mostly stagnant on the micro-nation issue for a while now, but there have been some recent pushes to get something done on that front. Just so people don't freak out, it should be known that nothing will change without first receiving massive amounts of feedback from the BB community, and specifically the micro-nation communities.

A really good idea, proposed many times, is to allow second teams (for those that want to pay for them) in micro nations. I think this would really invigorate those nations and not harm the wider game. Oh wait, forget it, you invented a fake nation instead. Sorry.

After lenghty discussion with the community. All options had their fans and their opponents. That option was not chosen, that's all.

It really saddens me when things are cut off this way by staff members.

Now let's examine some facts shall we?
1) We are in the 8th Utopia season. Several people might have a different opinion after they have seen this experiment in action for an extended period of time. Some might still have the same opinion and some might not
2) I also urge you to go and re-read the thread and stop playing the card that the users specifically chose 'Utopia' the way it has been implemented.

Marin's opening post and subsequent interventions were not exactly clear on the possible plans and the options were never explained in detail, so no argument pro and against could seriously be made because nobody had any idea what the options would be in reality (probably Marin included at that stage). We had generic ideas, never actual detailed proposals and definitely the discussion was of rather underwhelming quality because of it. In a way, you could also say that the poll and the thread was quite blatantly 'biased' because of it, to use a terminology you like to use when referring to polls. The option of having second teams in other nations has never been presented together with logical safeguards for the original country users, so it was obviously never presented fairly from the beginning.

I bet that if I start a poll in global about this now (which I can't because it would have to go in suggestions where regular users don't see it), with a detailed description of how it would look like and proper safeguards, the majority of users would vote to allow people to move/start a second team in a limited set of nations instead of Utopia (for example to micronations where the users express the desire to have foreign second teams)?

Last edited by Lemonshine at 3/20/2016 10:48:27 AM

After lenghty discussion with the community. All options had their fans and their opponents. That option was not chosen, that's all.

Although lemon has already covered this, since you replied to me, I'd like to say my piece too. I remember the lengthy discussion. The way I remember it the vast majority of people were expecting to be able to have a second team in another real country, and this is what most desired. You may remember things differently but I don't even recall it being close.

I don't even recall much was said about a new fake country at all, but perhaps I just dismissed this as I found the idea ridiculous in the extreme. And still do. Sorry Utopians, you just don't exist to me. Though I do have your flag, so colour me hypocritical.

What I remember is a few xenophobes in some countries (not all of them micros), and I do remember it was only a few, crying about having to play against foreigners. How horrible it would have been for them to have people using a foreign tongue on their forum. I myself am quite happy to see the many foreign born users (sorry to those that don't like that word) in England. In terms of BB, especially when I was NT coach I regarded them as English users anyway. But then some people are just racist. (There are those who hate the English both in life and BB). I believe the choice was made with the idea of not upsetting anyone, instead of doing what was best, and a poor decision was made.

While that was slightly off topic in my reply to the BB, my point is that discussion is largely irrelevant. We have no say. Even when the majority speak. Its merely a salve to make us think the BBs care about our opinion. And before you cry back that the majority is silent, I was referring to the majority of those whose opinion we knew. Those who don't speak can't have their opinion heard, and so can't be counted.

I will be honest here. I didn't read both of your posts with great attention.

I'll be honest myself, I don't think you ever do. I read yours though. I read every post I reply to. I feel its more respectful that way.

Many people accused Utopia to have had a bad effect on the market prices. I let those people imagine what 1000 teams with economy from D1/D2 would have done to the market prices instead of mostly teams in D3 and D4.

I'll let you imagine what you want. You've no idea what that would have done, and you can't imagine it would be the same as utopia, similar to it, or completely different. Or even how many users would have bought a new team under those circumstances, because it didn't happen.

Now I think this thread is about Salary floor, not Utopia.

As I said, I read your posts, and you often do this. State your case and attempt to make it the last word by blocking replies by insinuating you'll delete anything off topic that follows. I recommend if you do that, then you go through this thread and delete everything slightly off topic, and then go through every other thread on here and do the same. Otherwise I'll just continue to regard it as another attempt to close down something you don't like.

Overall, Utopia ended up exceeding our expectations and for the most part it has been quite well received.

That's your opinion, and you have a right to it, but that doesn't mean it's factual.

With regards to the Utopia decision your judgement seems to be clouded by a strong bias

I have already admitted to this so well done for noticing.

you're retroactively trying to make it seem like that was by far the superior and most desired option

Nonsense. I'm retroactively stating that that is what I believe. You can believe differently but that doesn't make me wrong, or as you imply, that I'm altering facts. (Saying make it seem implies I'm lying. That is a very disappointing slur. I might be wrong, but I say what I believe. If you don't believe that, then why ask me to believe you're sincere?)

Regardless, as Perpete is getting at, the change was made and there's no point having a big debate about the issue now.

And from your earlier post in this thread:

The BB staff has been mostly stagnant on the micro-nation issue for a while now, but there have been some recent pushes to get something done on that front. Just so people don't freak out, it should be known that nothing will change without first receiving massive amounts of feedback from the BB community, and specifically the micro-nation communities.

You brought that up, not me. Are you reading this Perpete? I know he's not, so perhaps you BB-Ryan could point out to our non reading EGM that you were the one who took us off topic, thereby allowing me surely to respond. I chose Utopia as the highest profile attempt to get massive amounts of feedback from the community, and one where I honestly believe the community was ignored.

I don't honestly remember the community being consulted about much else but I'm sure you and Perpete can refresh my memory. Well if someone asks Perpete for me.

Unlike you I've tried not to snip huge great chunks out of what you say, and just pick out little soundbites you can attack.

Or perhaps like Perpete you didn't read the whole thing. It wouldn't surprise me, I'm more surprised you actually replied to me this time.

I don't know if you're having a bad day or you've got an axe to grind, but the negativity and hostility isn't necessary.

An opposite opinion is not by definition hostile. But yes, I admit when I'm told I'm off topic for responding to something said by a BB, then yes, I can sometimes be hostile.

I'm going to follow your example but just snipping the rest of what you said as it really doesn't alter anything I've said already. I'm not really sure if you haven't read what I said, or didn't understand it, because the quote you use:

You brought that up, not me.

is so badly edited simply so you can repeat the very thing I've already replied to.

I really do believe the intention of the staff here is to quash opinions that don't fit with theirs, by labelling those who post as negative or hostile. And of course, the fallback position of being off topic, when its often the staff who start to go off topic, as in this case. Not to mention the dismissive notion that its the same few voices saying the same things when it clearly isn't.

One thing I'd like to make clear. I don't post here out of malice. I don't waste my time on games that I dislike. I've played for a long time, I was an NT coach in England for many seasons, I've helped plenty of people in England in ways large and small, and I have many posts here that reek of positivity and calm. I'm not saying that because it should make you respect me or my view but it should be clear that I enjoy this game immensely, and if I post something negative, its because I care about where the game is, and where its going.