05 May 21, 05:49PM
(This post was last modified: 05 May 21, 05:54PM by RandomPanda.)
I myself do find the community consisting only of personally selected members of the community odd, and dare I say somewhat bias. I understand that paying to be a member has membership perks... But it also comes across as a mafia scenario.
What I propose is a more diverse setup of committee members. Membership by individual clans, and the selected clan must be around for over at least a year. That being said, each clan that pass those requirements will internally vote on their own members to nominate one, singular, representative.
This may sound like a senate, probably because most modern government is setup like this. Besides. The only other solution is dictatorship. And we don't want that. Right?
The developers would get less complaints from the gaming community if they felt their voices were at least being heard in a equal, yet mutually controlled environment. And hey, at least if they don't like something it would probably be on them for misrepresenting their case supports.
What I propose is a more diverse setup of committee members. Membership by individual clans, and the selected clan must be around for over at least a year. That being said, each clan that pass those requirements will internally vote on their own members to nominate one, singular, representative.
This may sound like a senate, probably because most modern government is setup like this. Besides. The only other solution is dictatorship. And we don't want that. Right?
The developers would get less complaints from the gaming community if they felt their voices were at least being heard in a equal, yet mutually controlled environment. And hey, at least if they don't like something it would probably be on them for misrepresenting their case supports.