I didn't do it specifically to catch you in a lie, I did it to simply see what conversation there was surrounding your work, relay any concerns being said, etc. and then I found out that you happened to be exaggerating and misrepresenting the situation because I look at the chat and I see the entire team, including defiant, talking about how we can make your dream a reality and make it so that other creators can do the same and benefit from the work as well so that the mod as a whole can benefit from new systems to increase the modding capability of mb2 even further.
They care, you just seem to have unrealistic expectations of timespans that these things can happen in on a volunteer project where people have real jobs and obligations. If this was an actual game, where people were paid, yeah this stuff could definitely happen a lot faster. It just simply isnt the reality for this project though. Things will always be slower than we like because of the environment we live in.
First and foremost, Mace, I find your response emblematic of the very issues that 2cwldys and others have raised regarding the development team’s approach to contributors and the broader culture of this project. While you attempt to frame your arguments as a balanced perspective on the challenges of volunteer development, your points consistently deflect from the core grievances being expressed and reveal a pattern of double standards and self-serving rhetoric.
1. “Volunteer Work Excuse” as a Deflection Tactic
You repeatedly emphasize the volunteer nature of this project, using it as a shield to deflect valid criticisms. While it is true that coordinating a team of volunteers presents unique challenges, this fact does not absolve the team—especially senior members like yourself—from addressing issues of transparency, respect, and fairness. The volunteer status of the team does not justify sidelining contributors, ignoring their input, or retaining creative control over their work without proper communication.
Moreover, this “volunteer excuse” is hypocritical when juxtaposed with your expectations for contributors. You demand professionalism, effort, and commitment from people who are also volunteering their time. If the developers are allowed to lean on their real-life commitments to justify delays or inaction, why are contributors like 2cwldys not afforded the same understanding when he expresses frustration with the team’s inefficiency and lack of support? You cannot have it both ways.
2. Misrepresentation of the Team’s Efforts
You claim that the team has been actively discussing ways to integrate 2cwldys’s work and improve the modding capabilities of the game. However, if these discussions were truly genuine and productive, why would 2cwldys feel the need to voice such strong dissatisfaction in the first place? Actions speak louder than words, and the lack of tangible progress or meaningful communication undermines your argument.
Your insistence that the team is working hard behind the scenes comes off as damage control rather than an honest acknowledgment of the issues at hand. If the team genuinely values contributors, it would take proactive steps to ensure they feel heard and respected. Instead, the consistent theme here is contributors being left in the dark, their work controlled by gatekeepers, and their frustrations dismissed.
3. Retention of Creative Control
One of the most troubling aspects of this discussion is the development team’ss insistence on retaining control over contributed content, even when it goes against the creator’s wishes. This practice is not only disrespectful but also deeply discouraging to current and potential contributors. When someone invests their time and energy into creating something, they deserve autonomy and recognition for their efforts.
Your justification for this practice—that’s it’s for the “greater good” of the project—rings hollow. By sidelining creators in favor of some nebulous idea of cohesion, you alienate the very people who could bring fresh ideas and energy to the project. If the team’s goal is truly to foster a thriving modding community, it should be empowering contributors, not micromanaging them.
4. Time Zone and Communication Issues
Bringing up a message received at 2:48 AM as an example of communication challenges is, frankly, a weak argument. Time zones are a logistical hurdle in any global project, but they are not an excuse for poor communication practices. If the team values its contributors, it should establish clear and consistent communication channels that accommodate different time zones. Blaming time zones for misunderstandings only highlights a lack of proper planning and coordination.
5. Minimizing Legitimate Grievances
Your response consistently downplays the frustrations expressed by 2cwldys and others, framing them as a misunderstanding of how volunteer projects work. This is both patronizing and dismissive. Contributors are not ignorant of the challenges inherent in such projects—they are frustrated by the unnecessary obstacles created by the development team’s internal politics and bureaucracy.
The assertion that 2cwldys has “unrealistic expectations” is particularly disingenuous. The expectations he’s expressed—fair treatment, respect for their work, and clear communication—are entirely reasonable. By framing these demands as unrealistic, you shift the blame onto contributors instead of addressing the systemic issues within the team.
6. Contradictions in Your Argumentation
Throughout your response, you present yourself as someone who values contributors and wants to improve the project, yet your actions and policies suggest otherwise. For example:
• You claim to support creativity and innovation, but the team’s rigid control over content stifles these very qualities.
• You emphasize the importance of teamwork, yet contributors like 2cwldys are excluded and undervalued.
• You acknowledge the need for better modding capabilities, yet little progress has been made on this front.
These contradictions undermine your credibility and suggest that your words are more about maintaining appearances than enacting real change.
7. The Broader Implications
Finally, your handling of this situation has broader implications for the future of the project. If contributors feel undervalued and stifled, they will stop contributing. This will lead to stagnation and a decline in community engagement. The development team must recognize that its survival depends on fostering a supportive and inclusive environment for all contributors, not just those who conform to its rigid structure.
Conclusion
Mace, your response is emblematic of a development team that has lost sight of its core purpose: to create a thriving, collaborative community. Instead of addressing valid concerns with humility and a willingness to change, you have resorted to deflection, misrepresentation, and an over-reliance on the “volunteer work” excuse. This approach is not sustainable and will only serve to alienate contributors further.
If the team truly wants to move forward, it must:
1. Establish clear guidelines and expectations for contributors, ensuring transparency and fairness.
2. Respect the autonomy of creators and their right to control their own work.
3. Foster open and consistent communication, with mechanisms for addressing grievances constructively.
4. Take concrete actions to support contributors, rather than relying on empty promises and rhetoric.
Until these changes are made, the frustrations expressed by contributors like 2cwldys will remain valid, and the development team will continue to face criticism for its handling of the project.
