Voted no: I would have voted no for any king. The conflict in interests is just too high. I understand any member who is in a kingdom has a conflict of interest. However a standard member or even a mayor and count are less likely to abuse power than a duke or king trying to promote themselves.

Like I've said in another thread, Kings and Queens already assist the community by leading their respective Kingdoms and some other people go even further by creating youtube content like the Town Crier. IMO these people already have influential positions and help people out so there is no reason for them to require an ambassador title.

These ambassador roles are a great opportunity for other people who are not well known (if at all) who give a lot already into helping the community have a light shone on their hard work, it's a chance for others to get a step up into the light and get recognition for what they do and will do.

I politely and personally request that monarchs step aside and allow the less influential members of the community have a chance at these positions.

I would also like to add, monarchs lead entire Kingdom communities, that's a lot of people who will give their vote for their monarch out of a sense of loyalty and familiarity. That means Monarchs are immediately from the start at an advantage when it comes to vote numbers and monarchs in charge of the largest Kingdom communities will have the most votes most likely, let's not be naive about that.

I would run decisions about who should and who should not represent the company, or be recognized by the company, or any other thing that is a unique benefit through the filter that asks: could this have even the appearance of impropriety? If so, I'd avoid it. The people involved may be great people. They may be wonderful selfless leaders of the community like many of the kings are, but how would an outside person know this? There is no transcript of every single conversation that everyone has been involved in open and available to the public to assuage their fears that there may be something improper happening. That invites doubts about the integrity of all involved, doubts about whether money can buy you influence, doubts about whether SBS is favoring specific high level people over others, and in a world that creates hordes of raving tweeters who can be whipped into a frenzy over a single doubt about the integrity of a process you want to avoid those doubts.

Posted By Dleatherus at

disclaimer: i make these comments purely as an individual, and not on behalf of my pledge level and in response to comments being tossed about regarding other kings being content with sticking within their boxes, why they weren't nominated etc - again - i speak only for myself

I was asked by a large number of individuals if i would like to be nominated as an Ambassador

I declined in each case not because i want to stick to my box or any other reason other than i knew right from the get go that my being a king and also an Ambassador (if accepted) would give the perception (not the reality) to many within this community of the whole pay to win issue, conflict of interest, too much power in one account etc

for this reason, and the controversy that it would inevitably cause in the community, i politely and reluctantly declined

again, just my personal opinion, but i believe that no duke or king should be made an ambassador - not because they aren't qualified (many of them unquestionably are), but to avoid the very controversy and polarization of the community that can be seen in several current threads on the issue

there are already MANY qualified individuals who will serve in the position, and many more to come

i do not need a tag to help people out with info, or welcome them to the community, nor do i wish members of the community, both existing, and those yet to join, questioning whether the comment i made in the forums was as a king or as an ambassador

ironically in order to 'help' the community, i declined

hopefully this clears up some of the questions being asked of me as to why i wasn't on the list

ty

Well said, D. I fully agree a King or Duke should not be an ambassador and that we should stick to our boxes so to speak.

Let's see this from another angle aswell. New people discover the game and come to the forums and eventually decide to choose a Kingdom. Having a King recognised as an Ambassador of the community with a nice shiny forum border etc could sway a persons opinion in favour of that Monarch. If it looks like one particular Monarch has been elevated to an important position by SBS it makes them look like a more golden choice.

Posted By SoulSpark at 3:00 PM - Fri Aug 18 2017

Let's see this from another angle aswell. New people discover the game and come to the forums and eventually decide to choose a Kingdom. Having a King recognised as an Ambassador of the community with a nice shiny forum border etc could sway a persons opinion in favour of that Monarch. If it looks like one particular Monarch has been elevated to an important position by SBS it makes them look like a more golden choice.

definately

what about the scenario of one king being accepted, and another rejected (be that by SBS or by votes from another community)

could that be perceived by many that SBS approve of one king/duke and not another?

how does that effect that king's/duke's standing within the eyes of the community etc

these might seem like trivial things but communities, especially prelaunch ones that sometimes have nothing better to do, can be torn apart by the undercurrents of these issues

Those are good thoughts Dleatherus, and I agree with everything said here as well.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how the chips fall.

A classy move. Much respect.

I don't know if I agree with the assertion of optics, not because I'm on the ballot for votes, but because CoE doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Ambassador in terms of how others games have done it is based on the community they bring, the awareness they raise, the help they provide, and the hype they bring. You don't get an ambassador position in most other games without either

1) building sufficient hype 2) Having a large enough following 3) Contributing significantly to the health of the community/game

For example the following games are doing their ambassadors in the same way, only they are called influencers/twitch partners and get actual perks for all of the above.

https://www.crowfall.com/en/news/pannderings-the-crow-circle/

https://playdauntless.com/partner-program

If your argument is optics, I should in theory be seeing a lot of outrage over the above two programs. They certainly get special treatment, even above and beyond what CoE is offering, and Crowfall is a super hardcore game with most of your sandbox community [that isn't EVE] residing there at the moment.

They don't seem terribly miffed by the above two programs though, even though both programs offer more tangible rewards then just the possibility of more recruits/hype for their community.

I could see the argument if space was limited, or if saying yes to one means no to another. I would say that optics is sort of in play there, where you could argue that they are picking winners and losers to fill an arbitrary number. However they haven't given an end goal number and near as I can tell their plan is to never have an end goal number.

I think if they provide comprehensive feedback to those that didn't get in on why they didn't get selected that would cover the optics argument fairly well. Now that might lead to its own drama and what not with people being mad and arguing against Soulbound's reasonings. That could be problematic but that salt will be there regardless for those that don't get selected into the program.

Now if this program was more like EVE's council, that would be a very different talk, and there would be so much more to consider. For those unaware this is EVE's council system

https://community.eveonline.com/community/csm/

Or if ambassador's were mods, I think that's a real argument to be had and something people tend to get upset over. Though I don't personally agree with that assertion as even paid non community mods have gotten in super trouble aka the bob incident in EVE. It's also what others games like Ashes of Creation are doing, and certainly garners backlash, but it's not a real winnable situation all told. I would still think there is a real claim to be made there though, even if I don't personally ascribe community mods as inherently corrupt individuals.

Posted By Cyneric at 12:27 AM - Sat Aug 19 2017

I don't know if I agree with the assertion of optics, not because I'm on the ballot for votes, but because CoE doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Ambassador in terms of how others games have done it is based on the community they bring, the awareness they raise, the help they provide, and the hype they bring. You don't get an ambassador position in most other games without either

1) building sufficient hype 2) Having a large enough following 3) Contributing significantly to the health of the community/game

For example the following games are doing their ambassadors in the same way, only they are called influencers/twitch partners and get actual perks for all of the above.

https://www.crowfall.com/en/news/pannderings-the-crow-circle/

https://playdauntless.com/partner-program

If your argument is optics, I should in theory be seeing a lot of outrage over the above two programs. They certainly get special treatment, even above and beyond what CoE is offering, and Crowfall is a super hardcore game with most of your sandbox community [that isn't EVE] residing there at the moment.

They don't seem terribly miffed by the above two programs though, even though both programs offer more tangible rewards then just the possibility of more recruits/hype for their community.

I could see the argument if space was limited, or if saying yes to one means no to another. I would say that optics is sort of in play there, where you could argue that they are picking winners and losers to fill an arbitrary number. However they haven't given an end goal number and near as I can tell their plan is to never have an end goal number.

I think if they provide comprehensive feedback to those that didn't get in on why they didn't get selected that would cover the optics argument fairly well. Now that might lead to its own drama and what not with people being mad and arguing against Soulbound's reasonings. That could be problematic but that salt will be there regardless for those that don't get selected into the program.

Now if this program was more like EVE's council, that would be a very different talk, and there would be so much more to consider. For those unaware this is EVE's council system

https://community.eveonline.com/community/csm/

Or if ambassador's were mods, I think that's a real argument to be had and something people tend to get upset over. Though I don't personally agree with that assertion as even paid non community mods have gotten in super trouble aka the bob incident in EVE. It's also what others games like Ashes of Creation are doing, and certainly garners backlash, but it's not a real winnable situation all told. I would still think there is a real claim to be made there though, even if I don't personally ascribe community mods as inherently corrupt individuals.

I think ambassadors would make bad mods.

I don't want to vote on the moderation team, they should be chosen by SBS and trained by SBS to be up-to-par then discretely added to the mod roster.

Ambassadors aren't going to be mods though. They are like twitch partners for dauntless, or influencers for Crowfall. They have no power to silence, moderate, or otherwise stop a thing from happening. The only authority they have is public recognition of soulbound for the work they do, but little else. Which is surprisingly less stuff then both Crowfall and Dauntless offer, and even way less by significant degrees then what EVE offers.

As far as trained up as mods, I believe that happened and you don't want mods to be discreet. You want mods to be attention grabbing announcements, because they need to be recognized as such by the community to be effective in their job.

A mods job is not just to silence a bad word here or there, or to stop an argument in progress. It is to be the eyes and ears of the devs, it's why EVE did what it did with their council because they realized how out of the loop they were with their own community. You need people in communities to relay how your community feels, especially if your community grows large enough.

I'm more in favor of community mods v paid mods, because in the case of paid mods if things go awry the flak goes back to the company generally speaking. In the case of community mods it still goes back to the company, but the community that mod is from is going to make damn sure it doesn't happen because that rep is never going to go away. Big communities really care about their rep, and most of them aren't willing to risk their rep in that drama.

I wasn't really sure if I wanted to chime in on this, since the voting still ongoing and, as one of the nominees, I didn't want my motives for joining the discussion to be called into question. Ultimately, though, I decided it was worthwhile, since I've seen a mix of valid and... perhaps "overstated" concerns about the idea of monarchs also serving as Ambassadors. I'm going to express my personal opinion on the matter, but obviously, I'm also a potential candidate, so take what I'm saying with however many grains of salt you deem necessary.

The first criticism I've seen is that a monarch serving as an Ambassador represents an inherent conflict of interest; I don't believe this to be true, at least not to a further degree than it would be for almost any Ambassador. The truth is, the overwhelming majority of community members qualified to serve as Ambassadors are currently sworn to an established kingdom, and even among those who aren't (such as myself) many are still nobles in their own right with domains of their own to worry about. The issue of new players being greeted and assisted by people with a vested interest in recruiting for their own community is for all intents and purposes unavoidable, regardless of whether monarchs are "allowed" to serve as Ambassadors. I would hope the expectation of all Ambassadors would be that they not use their position for personal gain, as it goes against the very spirit of the initiative. If necessary, SBS could even make an official guideline to that effect, which I think would effectively eliminate any issue with regard to abuse of the position.

The second, which Dleatherus alluded to in his OP, is that having high-level backers serving as Ambassadors would be perceived as unfair, "pay-to-win," or an undesirable consolidation of influence; I'm not sure I agree with this, either. First off, as for the "P2W" argument, given that the position of Ambassador has, as far as we're currently aware, no real affect on the game itself, and is essentially a "meta-game" appointment, I don't think that being an Ambassador could by any stretch of the imagination be considered "winning." Second, it makes perfect sense that there would be a strong correlation between pledge level and fitness to be an Ambassador, and I would hope this would be obvious to newcomers. It's not that people are made Ambassadors because of their pledge level; it's that the people who dedicate the time and energy to this community to warrant being an Ambassador naturally are more likely to have backed monetarily. The two variables are influenced by the same outside factor: interest in and dedication to the game. I'd hope that newcomers would be able to see that it actually makes sense for certain monarchs to be qualified for such a position.

The third point I've seen made is the only one that I personally feel holds merit. Namely, that the time requirements of running an entire kingdom and serving as a public Ambassador are mutually incompatible. I can't say for certain whether this is true, but I think it's ultimately up to each nominee and the panel SBS puts together to determine how plausible juggling the two responsibilities might be. I do definitely see, however, that those who are most active in their own private communities do tend to be less active in the community-at-large, which is where Ambassadors are meant to shine. It's not just a shiny "Look at me, I'm special" badge; being an Ambassador is supposed to carry real expectations of active service to the general community. If one's time is dedicated mainly to managing their "own people," then that means less time left over to be a guide for newbies, which is ultimately what Ambassadors are meant to be.

In other words, I don't think that anyone's contributions to their own community should factor into the decision, because that's not the venue in which Ambassadors operate. It's great that they serve a similar role in their own private circles, but being an Ambassador means serving that role for everyone. As I said earlier, I think it's up to SBS and each individual candidate to assess whether they are able to maintain the public presence that being an Ambassador requires. If so, that's great. If not, there's no shame in turning the position down, or not being appointed. Ideally, the results of the voting shouldn't affect anything. The best candidates are the ones who serve as informal Ambassadors already.

I personally haven't voted for or against Adam (whom I sense most of this discussion is about) and don't plan to. I greatly respect him and his contributions, but I simply don't feel it's my place to decide whether he will be able to manage Vornair and be an active Ambassador at the same time. SBS knows him, and he knows himself, well enough to make that decision on their own. 👍

Lots of thoughtful and intelligent comments on our new program, both in this thread and others. Thank you D for stating your personal position on this, it is respected.

We put a considerable effort into this program, spending over a month putting it together, meeting and deliberating on how it will all work, considering pitfalls, shortcomings and curveballs along the way.

Even our founder and leader Caspian chimed in on another thread to try and ensure everyone understands what the program is meant to achieve.

Unfortunately, there are still many passionate community members who feel they understand the program and its intentions better than those of us who created it.

If you believe we didn't consider the possibility of Ambassadors recruiting, or having bias, you would be incorrect. As others have already stated , bias is almost impossible to entirely stamp out, it is in our nature and will happen whether we place additional blocks, checks and oversight to try and stop it or not.

We wanted the communities' involvement in this as you also interact with many of these candidates and have good input, but at the end of the day, if any person raised a flag with us they would not have been contacted to go from nominee to candidate.

Soulbound Studios has complete faith that all of those who are candidates, if approved, will be great Ambassadors.

If we didn't they would not have been contacted.

As far as what happens afterwards, for those of you that haven't worked with me yet, please know that I am not the sort of person that looks the other way when issues occur, I face them head on.

An Ambassadorship is not a lifelong position like a Supreme Court Judge, it is a voluntary role that is allowed by the grace of our team. If a member of that team doesn't live up to the expectations we all feel they should, they won't be an ambassador for long.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but please keep those opinions civil and based on facts. Doing so will allow this discussion to continue to be a debate over individuals and not how our program functions or should function.

Imo same issue as the like/dislike button. No matter how the devs want you to use a system, your ultimately gonna raise the finger and use it how you feel fit.

The devs requested the votes be based on your personal experience and their ability to do the job but you look down and see that's just not what's happening. the "conflict of interest" is largely being based off bias, assumptions, and misinformation about the role.

While I'm now confident through the secondary examinations the devs do they will be able to tell who is good, it sucks to see yet another polling system appear to go down the tubes for the same reason the like/dislike system does.

For anyone who hasn't voted, pretend like you don't know their title or position. Read through the criteria, cross reference that with your experience with them and cast your vote if you feel you have enough information based on that. Not assumptions of how a title may or may not do something. If you don't know, please don't vote either. Or feel free to pm the guy. I'm sure any ambassador applicant would love to introduce themselves on discord.

@serp - Wiio's laws 101: People viewing it like they know better than yall should have been expected.