PACT Summits

[TeaLeaf]

Next meeting 1300 UTC on Sat 16/1.

OB, you're welcome to join to introduce yourself as Deputy (it appears some orgs send both reps along to the meeting) but you're not required to attend if you don't want to be there!

[OldBloke]

Next meeting 1300 UTC on Sat 16/1.

OB, you're welcome to join to introduce yourself as Deputy (it appears some orgs send both reps along to the meeting) but you're not required to attend if you don't want to be there!

I thought we'd agreed that Smilo should be our 2nd rep? Of course, I could be completely mistaken

[TeaLeaf]

I may also have misremembered!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[smilodon]

Happy to attend if required.

[Obsydian]

Are there minutes from these meetings, or possibly audio recordings?  It would be nice to know what was being discussed and hear what the topics of the day are for the alliance.

[TeaLeaf]

There should be full minutes.    I'll try to post them up here for the Board members only to see.

[Obsydian]

:thumbsup:

[TeaLeaf]

I know it goes without saying that these are provided in confidence and must not be discussed or shared outside our boardroom!


Scheduled Date: Saturday, 21 November at 1300 UTC.

Topics for Discussion:
Q&A with Tealeaf and Oldbloke of Dead Men Walking.
Continuing consideration of a new attendance/activity policy. We're approaching a vote on this issue. Chimaera has provided a five-point proposal for moving forward, which will serve as a basis for discussion.

Meeting opened at 1305 UTC


Attendance

[19th] Slato - Deputy
[19th] ToRN
[IMP] Chimaera
[IMP] Juntau - Deputy
[QSR] n1ghter - Deputy
[SUN] Tannhauser
[TAC] Deathrises
[TAC] NuttyRob - Deputy
[TCF] skuripanda - Deputy

[dMw] smilodon
[dMw] Tealeaf


Administrator-Lead Topics:


Interview with Dead Men Walking

In attendance were Tealeaf, who joined DMW in 1996 and servers as co-leader of the overall organization, and smilodon, who serves as one of their forum administrators and the semi-autonomous leader of the Star Citizen group. Both serve on their governing Council. Tealeaf introduced Dead Men Walking as a tactical gaming community. They focus on a mature attitude - they are not necessary mature in age, but expected to be in behavior. DMW was founded in 1996as a Counterstrike clan, focused on the "Professional Counterstrike" playstyle as a European equivalent of Network 42. They've since gradually evolved into a multi-gaming community. One of their functions is to provide hardware and servers as possible to create a safe environment - including a server specifically for members' children. Member age ranges from 7-8 for members' children, "full" members are generally around 18, and the upper range is 75.

Dead Men Walking is a social community. They have about 3.5-4K registered members, about 500 people that follow the forums and about 110 that regularly game. Because of their small core of active members, they get to know each other very well. They often host social events, including two annual LAN parties.

How much overall control does the overall DMW leadership exert over the SC branch? DMW's structure allows for autonomy and local control, and they recognize that they cannot micromanage. Rather, they have to trust people to deliver. If leaders go off path, the Council can step in. In practice, this means that PACT votes wouldn't have to go up to Council. The job of the Council is not to run the game. Also, regardless of PACT standards, DMW charges members to uphold their standards in all games.

How many SC players does DMW have? They currently have 50-55 backers, and maybe another 20 interested but who have not bought in. They anticipate 80-100 once the game goes live. DMW does not want to be a 500-1000 member organization because you lose sight of people. They want to maintain knowledge of members to keep trust and an active social community. Different people and different Orgs will bring different things to the game - DMW's stability and longevity is testament that what they deliver works.

Are they any specific aspects of the new PACT Initiative Agreement that DMW would like further clarification on? Their Council met yesterday and agreed that the Agreement seems straightforward. Both the text and the reasoning behind the Agreement made sense.

Are you willing to utilize third-party tools for PACT members? Imperium is utilizing their own Portal system due to size requirements, and has offered to handle a PACT job board. Yes, as long as it doesn't interfere with DMW tools or activity. They are very interested to explore this option.

Could you clarify your membership policy? As a group, DMW holds fairly sensible standards. However, they can't track everyone all the time. As things become enforceable they will narrow the scope of their requirementes. They support exclusive membership, but also pointed out that PACT allows Signatories to define the term "exclusive" for themselves. They do not support pirates. An example was put forward by a Representative of a DMW member with a lot of interesting and potentially troublesome affiliations. It was explained that this particular member was met at a Star Citizen meet-up. They don't know much about him, which is why he's stuck as a Recruit/lowest rank. He has a small Org for people that play with him, including his two children. He's considered an affiliate, but not a full member yet. He's very excited about the game and, as is the case with many enthusiastic new Backers, he's collecting Org affiliations. DMW has not yet done a full audit.

At this point, a Representative stated that he is looking forward to having a Signatory from Britain. He spoke of the necessity to understand and appreciate that the game is not yet released, and to make efforts to come to meetings every month. PACT embodies the best in each region, and represents the best of what we think SC will have to offer.

If you've found a large amount of resources in a system no one knows about, well beyond your needs, would you share this information or keep it to/for yourself? DMW will assess all such examples on a case-by-case basis. If it's more than needed, they would provide the information to improve credit with other Orgs. DMW works on the basis of "fair". If it's fair, that's what they'll do.

If you receive information on a future attack on a PACT Signatory that's offline or on off-hours by time zone, would you help? If so, would you send members or just an alert? This is why they're interested in PACT - to open up new areas of the game or new opportunities. Their membership would help form links to other organizations, who mutually support each other, and would give more opportunities for involvement. A lot is still up in the air, but they will be very interested in this dimension of the game. They also pointed out that this was noted in their written submission. However, there are reasonable limits - while they will follow their friends, they wouldn't follow them in jumping off a cliff.

What are your eventual goals and long-term objectives? DMW recent polled their members, and understandably received a wide range of answers. The overall goal for DMW is to empower members to accomplish their goals. These include exploration, finance, collaborative missions, etc. They will play the game together, and will play to have fun - all in line with their established ethos.

Have you explored any other alliances or agreements? They've participated in loose alliances or networks in the past. For example, they've joined with other guilds in WoW to support each other as membership drops. They have always had associations and friendships, and the specific type of game dictates whether those alliances can happen. They have nothing else on the SC front, though they've researched STAR and other arrangements. DMW wanted an arrangement that allows them to play the game "without a dress code". Specifically, more autonomy and a less-strict structure, united by common belief and collaborative work. Basically, having fun and joining in.

Do you have any experience with other nationalities/cultures/langauges? Specifically, the Russian community? DMW is based in the UK. They did have people fly in from continental Europe for LAN parties. The English tend to be crap at foreign languages. They don't have much experience with people from eastern Europe or US/Canada due to time zone differences. They've never had a problem, though, as they are an inclusive rather than exclusive community. PACT would give the opportunity for members in off-times to play with other friends.

Tealeaf provided the following quote:

"Teamwork - Fair Play - Fun

Dead Men Walking is a long-established multi-gaming community with an excellent reputation for fair play, mature attitude and teamwork. Established in 1996 our continuing mission is to provide a home for PC gamers who recognise that achieving success as part of a team is far more rewarding than racking up individual scores. Quite simply, frag-hunters, lone wolves, griefers, cheats and the plain selfish will not fit in here."

If you have members that have violated PACT rules but not your own, will you have issue with managing the repercussions? There can be situation where friends can do stupid things, and can lead to major conflict with other PACT Orgs. If accepted, DMW will be focused on maintaining the relationship with PACT. They haven't found anything in the PACT Agreement that conflicts with their own rules. If a member steps out of line, they'll sort them out. They have had similar situations in other games. They try to approach things in an adult, mature way but have had to ban people in the past. They put an emphasis on educating their members as to why rules are they way they are, rather than just enforcing them. When it comes down to it, they have no issue with enforcement.

What are your previous experience with space sims, in particular? BSGO allowed people to jump in and kill time. They enjoyed SWTOR. Unfortunately, there haven't been many space MMOs. STO burnt them out a bit. With SC, even if you're not much of a dogfighter you'll find something.

Regarding the metagame, do you have any plans for intelligence/espionage? How will you handle such concepts or issues within DMW? They recognize that there is much yet to be revealed about in-game mechanics. Outside of the game, one of the benefits to DMW's approach is that most members play multiple games. When you join, people get to know each other very well. This makes their community harder to infiltrate. They do common-sense checks within the constraints of the online world. Because DMW is relatively small, it's more difficult for troublemakers to gain traction. Regarding the overall metagame, DMW does understand that joining PACT will put something of a target on them and that they will attract added interest from other Orgs. They're prepared to handle these issues appropriately, and are very interested in learning how other Signatories are approaching this.

As for their own comments, smilodon had no questions. Tealeaf's interest coming into the meeting was to find out the people he'd be working with - if accepted, he would be serving as Representative. His conclusion was that PACT sounds like a good group of people. The actual agreement falls into line with their community. There are no disagreements and a nice alignment. DMW looks forward to approaching future challenges together.

With this, the interview ended and DMW's representatives left the channel. A vote to approve or deny their membership application will be started in the near future.


Attendance

The 19th Corporation led with the statement that, regardless of the ongoing discussion on attendance, Broadside should be expelled as a Signatory. A vote will be started in the near future with specific details.

Chimaera of Imperium has provided a draft five-point proposal for an attendance and participation policy. After discussion, they were amended to the following:

Organizations must have at least one alternate.
Organizations must have an attendance at meetings at least once per three months minimum.
If no attendance is had at the minimum once per three months, the organization is contacted by Tannhauser and placed on-notice for non-attendance.
If the organization does not attend a meeting following being placed on-notice, they will be moved into an inactive pool, removed from the signatory list, and access to the forum suspended for the representatives until such time they are able to prove they will be able to attend meetings.
If, in the event that an organization hasn't responded within three months after having been placed on inactive status, the PACT Administrator shall inform the Council and the Council members can put forward any objections to removal. If there is no objection, there will be removal. If there are objections, then it will move to a vote that requires a 75% passing vote to remove the organization.

The Administrator requested that this be reword for incorporation into the PACT Agreement - i.e. threaded into the current Articles or instituted as a new Article. Once final language is made available, a vote will be started to approve the change. Consensus was that this is a step in the right direction for PACT.


Open Discussion:


Expanded Permissions for Deputies

The Administrator will be working to expand PACT Forum permissions for Deputy Representatives. Posting rights will be balanced with restrictions on voting. This was met with general approval.


Suspicious Activity

Imperium reported that they had a player appear in their TeamSpeak on 18 November, requesting a position in their upper management structure. He linked a fake LinkedIn profile page. He then demanded to be put in touch with Fleet Command, so they he could then demand a position within Fleet Command. After being threatened with a ban, he returned his own threats of hacking the Star Citizen Base website and associated TeamSpeak server.

His information is as follows:

Aliases: DragonDreamweaver, DragonDreamveaver
IP Address: 24.30.16.42
TeamSpeak Unique ID: yyOykCP9mns5ny3KHdwRrmfxhcI

He was originally part of Intergalactic Airlines. They were contacted for more information, and provided an... in-depth response. Chimaera will provide this for prosperity. This player has been added to the Watch List to alert other Signatories in case he makes similar demands of them.


Meeting closed at 1443 UTC

[Obsydian]

Thanks TL - very informative.

The guy who tried to join Imperium... is this him? https://robertsspaceindustries.com/citizens/Dragon_Dreamweaver

[TeaLeaf]

No idea tbh, sorry!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[TeaLeaf]

Nothing spectacular to report from the PACT meeting.    Agenda was extremely light and mostly social.  

One minor change to the PACT agreement to introduce and expectation of minimum attendance and a procedure to remove orgs that do not participate.

I'll post minutes when available.

[TeaLeaf]

Minutes from the 28th Summit.

The 29th PACT Council Summit is scheduled for Saturday, 20 February at 1300 UTC.

Meeting opened at 1300 UTC.


Attendance:

[ACES] AHomelessWalrus
[DMW] Tealeaf
[DMW] Smilodon (Deputy)
[IMP] Chimaera
[QSR] n1ghter (Deputy)
[SUN] Tannhauser
[TAC] Deathrises


Administrator-Lead Topics

Participation and Attendance

The proposed additions and modifications to the PACT Agreement regarding attendance were discussed. Tealeaf recommended moving the procedures for handling non-attendance to Article IV, and the rest of the Council agreed that this was the most appropriate way to document it. The final, final proposal stood as:

Article III â€" Signatory Membership Requirements and Obligations

4. Signatories must prove they have the capability and desire to contribute to the overall function of PACT and PACT missions. PACT Signatories must also adhere to attendance requirements, which stand as minimum attendance at one meeting every three months.

Article IV - Structure and Procedures

3. Signatories must appoint a single member to be their Council Representative and a single member to be their Deputy Representative, to act in the stead of the Council Representative in the event of the Representative’s absence. The Representative and Deputy Representative may be changed at any time by a Signatory, after informing the PACT Council of such changes.

(inserted between current Sections 7 and

8. In the event that a Signatory does not meet the minimum attendance at one meeting in a three-month period, then the Signatory will be contacted by the PACT Administrator and placed on-notice for non-attendance.
If the Signatory does not attend the PACT Council Summit following being placed on-notice, then they will be moved into an inactive pool, removed from the Signatory list, and have access to the PACT Forum suspended for their Representatives until such time they are able to reestablish meeting attendance.
If a Signatory hasn't responded within three months after having been placed on inactive status, then the PACT Administrator shall inform the Council and Representatives can put forward any objections to removal. If there is no objection, then there will be removal. If there are objections, then resolution will move to a vote for expulsion per Section 9.

A vote was called and the proposal was approved unanimously.

Girl Gamers

A summary of the discussions between Girl Gamers and the PACT Administrator was given. Representatives recounted their own discussions and experiences. As affiliation with this organization does not violate PACT guidelines for exclusive membership, any relationship is up to the individual Signatories to determine for themselves.

Activities

A discussion on the stability of Star Citizen 2.1 was held, and many Representatives expressed their interest and satisfaction in the latest patch. Discussion continued on activities in other games, with Life is Feudal, 7 Days to Die and Ark being popular options.

DMW meets CR

DMW attended a local area meet-up in London with Chris Roberts and Sandi Gartner. Among the many topics of conversation:

Star Wars: Episode 7 was designed to be okay, but Episode 8 will blow your mind.
Star Citizen is pretty much complete. The initial features are in and now they're just trying to deliver it.
There are 24 internal testers. The increase in feedback upon rolling out to 1,000 will be huge.
Saitek HOTAS is signed and designed, and they're now arguing about delivery costs. Midrange model will be launched very soon (early February). Two thousand copies of the special edition model will be sold, with a signed and numbered plaque.
Reviewing Games (google) and CDM (Amazon)
Starfarer about to go into the hangar

DMW's general thoughts were that they were very impressed with how personable and relatable they are.


Meeting closed at 1350 UTC.

[TeaLeaf]

Next PACT meeting is at 1.00pm this Saturday.   Current agenda topics includes a discussion on PU engagement rules.  I'll report back afterwards as usual.

[Obsydian]

Excellent!  I've already added a clause on Rules of Engagement to the Charter document based on what I was expecting them to be, but it will be good to get it ratified.

[TeaLeaf]

Minutes from the last meeting.

Meeting opened at 1300 UTC.

Attendance:

[ACES] AHomelessWalrus
[DMW] Tealeaf
[19TH] Slato (Deputy)
[IMP] Ryofar (Deputy Deputy)
[QSR] Roy-Urquhart
[QSR] n1ghter (Deputy)
[SUN] Tannhauser
[SUN] Firefox14x (Deputy)
[TCF] crashbx


Administrator-Lead Topics

Rules of Engagement/Behavioral Expectations in the PTU
Continuing the discussion launched via email and then moved to the forum, the Signatories in attendance discussed their individual viewpoints with regards to the PTU and player behavior. We appeared to agree on the majority, if not all, of what was discussed. A brief summary is that:

The PTU is a test universe, and we're generally treating it as such. Exploring different parts of the game, and breaking it as necessary, is part of the development process. To a certain extent, this requires freedom to act in ways that could be considered inappropriate in a "live" environment.
At the moment, there is no persistence. The only permanent effect of our actions is on our reputations within the community. Thus, excessive or abusive behavior could lead to a loss of that reputation. A good balance must be struck between testing the game and testing others' patience.
At the moment, there are no mechanisms for tracking or policing members' behavior. It's important to educate our members on what expectations may be, and trust them to follow them accordingly.

None of us will take negative actions personally, given that they're meant to test the game mechanics and not harass our organizations or players specifically. If issues do arise, though, please reach out to individual Representatives or the Administrator as deemed appropriate so we can sort things out in a calm and friendly manner. We can't fix what we're not aware of.

It's important to note that this discussion was not meant to create a blanket PACT policy, and the above points are not enforceable guidelines but a record of what was discussed. Signatories are free to set whatever expectations and policies that they wish. It is important to continue this discussion, with prompt notification of any changes, so we know what to expect from each other and how to approach potential issues as they arise. Please continue to use this thread as you see fit.

ORBIS

Roy introduced and explained the new project he's recently launched. After three years in Star Citizen (and specifically, the Russian community) he found that the concept of helping people isn't as common as he'd hoped. He wanted to break the bad reputation of the Russian gaming community as being full of griefers and hackers. The current Org system is a bit limited in the ways one can create and advertise group efforts, and the result was the formation of ORBIS as a "religion".

It is a social group of players who pledge to eagerly help other players and avoid breaking in-game laws, piracy, "podding"/"PKing", etc. There is no structure or central command authority. ORBIS will not wage wars, hold territory, or operate as an independent/autonomous body. It's aimed towards Russian speakers, but is open to anyone who fulfills the shared code of conduct explained on ORBIS' Charter page. Anyone who breaks or abuses these expectations will be expelled and put on an open blacklist.

It is not meant for ORBIS to interfere in the regular operation of its members. Exemption to the "no shooting" rule is made for members whose Orgs go to war with each other.

Roy asked for feedback on this project plan, and specifically for any issues that might cause conflict with PACT's exclusive membership guidelines. No one had any problems to report. The Administrator stressed that these projects are best discussed prior to launching them, not for our seal of approval but so that we can find potential issues in private before they might appear publicly.


Open Discussion

General Rules of Engagement
The discussion on ORBIS led to a general conversation on rules of engagement. The question was posed: "What do you do if someone is on a collision course and forces you to shoot them?"

The 19th Corporation shared their approach for buffer zones around their convoys. For example, forming a 2 km perimeter around their vessels and warning any ships that enter this area that they are in danger. Ignoring these messages and persistence in approaching their ships would result in defensive actions. All of this would require good documentation (screenshots, streaming video, etc.) to prove that the proper steps were taken.

Discussion continued, and was summarized by saying that we fortunately don't have to figure this out alone. It's an issue that will affect many players and many Organizations throughout the community. Eventually an acceptable answer will present itself, or at the very least we'll all be in the grey together. For now, it's best to approach on a case-by-case basis. Sharing information between Signatories will allow us to compare notes and sort out how different individuals/Orgs are behaving.

Transition: AHomelessWalrus

AHomelessWalrus announced that he will shortly be transitioning to Imperium. Thus, he will no longer be serving on the PACT Summit Council. Contact information was provided for the ACES Executive Councilor, who is likely to be standing in from now on.

Next Summit

The Administrator reminded everyone that the next Summit is scheduled for Saturday, 16 April at 1300 UTC.

Meeting closed at 1400 UTC.