Go back
Is RHP undemocratic!??

Is RHP undemocratic!??

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Were we asked if we minded losing our recs, jeez........

Vote Up
Vote Down

Of course it's undemocratic. It never pretended to be democratic.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
Of course it's undemocratic. It never pretended to be democratic.
Are you following me?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
Were we asked if we minded losing our recs, jeez........
The sad fact is, even if they had a vote, you as a non-sub wouldn't be involved.
Take heart in the fact that others were refused the democratic process, and you were not.


🙂

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Vladamir no1
Are you following me?
No, just reading the forums and replying to some foolish posts, and most of those happen to be from you at the moment.


For a corporate entity RHP has got to be a world leader in customer consultation.

One of Russ's great strengths is that he puts new innovations and changes up fou discussion and often a vote. Yet he normally always makes a good judgement call on what to do, and where to draw the line under the debate.

He is not afraid to take hard decisions. Game monderators for example and the banning of Ironman, Exy et al.
He gives opportunity for users to test beta update trials.
Votes are offered on avariety of subjects that affect the site and the players who use it.

As a non-sub you have more influence here than a minority shareholder would in a many companies.

Your voice may be ignored but it is heard.


Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by invigorate
For a corporate entity RHP has got to be a world leader in customer consultation.

One of Russ's great strengths is that he puts new innovations and changes up fou discussion and often a vote. Yet he normally always makes a good judgement call on what to do, and where to draw the line under the debate.

He is not afraid to take hard decisions. Game mo ...[text shortened]... a minority shareholder would in a many companies.

Your voice may be ignored but it is heard.
Excellent post.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
Of course it's undemocratic. It never pretended to be democratic.
Yes they do. I got something in my messages about voting for a new rule or something. If that isn't trying to be democratic, then I don't know what is.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by invigorate
For a corporate entity RHP has got to be a world leader in customer consultation.

One of Russ's great strengths is that he puts new innovations and changes up fou discussion and often a vote. Yet he normally always makes a good judgement call on what to do, and where to draw the line under the debate.

He is not afraid to take hard decisions. Game mo ...[text shortened]... a minority shareholder would in a many companies.

Your voice may be ignored but it is heard.
I agree, but have to say he was wrong on the rec reset. It was inevitable it would make the perceived problem worse.

Vote Up
Vote Down

I'm not sure. I think we should vote on it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by slappy115
Yes they do. I got something in my messages about voting for a new rule or something. If that isn't trying to be democratic, then I don't know what is.
Just because they do some opinion polls, it doesn't mean they are democratic (or trying to be so). It just means they try to listen to their customers.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
Just because they do some opinion polls, it doesn't mean they are democratic (or trying to be so). It just means they try to listen to their customers.
The thing is, Russ generally listens to people here and cares about what they think.

Recently, I believe, he's got incredibly frustrated by the state of the boards, which he considers is driving people away. The boards have always been a major selling point of RHP.

He's taken quick action because something he has invested a great deal in is being (in his view) destroyed from within.

Unfortunately, I don't believe the rec reset will help. The problem lies with a small number of people, who produce a very high number of posts (unhealthily high, in fact) and who are trying to sow the seeds of discontent. Often successfully.

Call it trolling, or flaming, or whatever. The result is a world away from the (often witty, generally good natured) banter of months and years gone by.

Shame. The correct action (in my view) would have been to limit the total number of posts; although it should never have come to that.

Don't people have lives to be getting on with?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dottewell
The thing is, Russ generally listens to people here and cares about what they think.

Recently, I believe, he's got incredibly frustrated by the state of the boards, which he considers is driving people away. The boards have always been a major selling point of RHP.

He's taken quick action because something he has invested a great deal in is being (in ...[text shortened]... lthough it should never have come to that.

Don't people have lives to be getting on with?
I personally think a direct statement that there was going to be no change, would've sent out the right message. Then at least the rec page could've been given a chance, and any change could've happened when the system had a proper trial (at current conditions).

edit. am i a troll ?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
edit. am i a troll ?
Not at all.

It's a question of respect; you respect the site, and want to see it thrive. There are others who not only can't say the same, but USE your respect for the site to annoy you, and provoke a response.