Poaching of players should be banned

[elvenbee]

reaffirm that what I'm doing is right for our particular group, just not right for everyone.

this is never going to go away, just the way it is ... i've been playing for 5+ years, in the top 50 on my original world, founded a fellowship on all 8 worlds, and when i started was in a fellowship that bounced from 2nd to 3rd, and have seen it all, which is a main reason we started this fellowship lol..., these guys that poach (not all buta lot) also make alt accounts (vs a 2nd city to help) then they drop those in fellowships not to help but to jam them up and take a spot that could have gone to a real player .. if you are being motivated by fear of loss and a need for external gratification to measure your self worth, the game is playing you lol i have no problems with players that moe around or get busy and have to cut back or quit etc etc,(a bit shell shocked of the several that have succumbed to mortality lately) i just have an old school view of making something for myself is better than trying to tear down or steal from others

This, sometimes players outgrow an FS and don't always realize it. Recruitment/head hunting (it is not poaching, just because you don't like it) is a part of life. Recently, an AM reached out to me asking if I wanted to join their FS. I politely said nope, I'm happy where I'm at but if that changes, I'll let you know. Well, later that day I saw a member leave our FS and they went to that FS. No hard feelings, wish them well because THEIR needs changed and they no longer align with ours.

Now, if someone is rude or constantly messaging FS members despite being repeatedly asked to stop, that is harassment and it needs to be reported.

But again, just because you don't like recruitment/head hunting does not mean it is poaching.

 

[Pheryll]

(it is not poaching, just because you don't like it)

I actually thought the original phrasing of poaching was a tease hinting that the better performing members of a fellowship were an "endangered species," as so many were leaving.

 

[crackie]

Is [MOD EDIT] Name removed or [MOD EDIT] Name removed weak and lazy emotionally to develop players from scratch or is it more of the case of why would they have to because they run one of the top college football and college basketball programs in the country respectively, so the blue chip recruits want to play for their programs based on their reputations alone? They not only get to pick from the cream of the crop, but get to be super picky about it and even DENY excellent players into their program for things like poor body language.

Oy vey, mods. They are names of college coaches of Alabama football and UCONN women's basketball, not Elvenar players.

 

[Yogi Dave]

I always thought of poaching as a time-honored tradition and have always treated a poach request as an honor. I reply to the poacher with a thanks for desiring me to join their FS and decline the invitation. If they look like they would be a good fit for my FS and we have an opening, I'll counter offer them to join us. That usually starts a few messages of banter. I may record their name and when we do have an opening, send a poach message to them. Ah, the games we play in the games we play. There is even an FS that poached a few players from my FS and we poached a few from them. No biggy.

Happy players can not be poached.

This is the best comment. While I do agree with that it's not entirely true. You could be happy in your FS, but when someone out of the blue ask if you would like to join their FS it may be that you've outgrown your FS and just havn't really noticed. If the other FS has benefits you would like, it could be time to move on. And thanks to the poacher, you lifted your head and looked around. Maybe you will join them or begin looking for a better FS that fits your play style.

 

[Tehya1]

Oy vey, mods. They are names of college coaches of Alabama football and UCONN women's basketball, not Elvenar players.

lmao!

 

[mucksterme]

i never liked poaching
hard boiled fine, sunny side great, scrambled sure with hot sauce, but poached? ugh

 

[Ashrem]

we have rule against no poachign in our disciption

Poaching literally means taking something which it is against the law to take. Fellowships don't own their members, and we can't make rules which apply to someone who hasn't agreed to them. Unless you're the king of all Elvenar, no one can poach from you.

 

[Pheryll]

Poaching literally means taking something which it is against the law to take. Fellowships don't own their members, and we can't make rules which apply to someone who hasn't agreed to them. Unless you're the king of all Elvenar, no one can poach from you.

The analogy seems to be falling apart here. It is difficult to make the argument that protected species have agreed to their legal status, and it is difficult to maintain that nations and states that make laws regarding protecting animals are declaring themselves king of the world. I understand that you are saying that a fellowship is not a nation, but I think in the end the point needed to be made is animals are not people, and thus depart from considering how poaching applies to animals as if it could give understanding on how to treat people.

 

[Deleted User - 849411552]

I'm not sure why we are getting hung up on one particular definition of "poaching". I think we all know what the OP meant. Language evolves using metaphors, typically with a humorous intent. If the metaphor is popular enough, eventually the metaphorical usage can become a recognized meaning.

Dictionaries have a hard time keeping up with our evolving language, but Merriam-Webster now lists the definition used here as 2c :
"to attract (someone, such as an employee or customer) away from a competitor". Not even a mention of stealing.

 

[Deleted User - 849411552]

However, there is certainly a connotation of "stealing" in the usage of "poaching" versus "recruitment". But if the OP had used the word "recruitment" in the title there would have been a loss in the meaning they were trying to convey.

For example, our fellowship does not "poach" from other fellowships in the sense that we send individual members invitational PMs. However, we do "recruit" by advertising on this forum, by our fellowship description that is tailored to the type of player we are looking for, and I currently have an invitational message in my city name. I also hope that our behavior within the gaming world speaks for itself.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

However, there is certainly a connotation of "stealing" in the usage of "poaching" versus "recruitment". But if the OP had used the word "recruitment" in the title there would have been a loss in the meaning they were trying to convey.

For example, our fellowship does not "poach" from other fellowships in the sense that we send individual members invitational PMs. However, we do "recruit" by advertising on this forum, by our fellowship description that is tailored to the type of player we are looking for, and I currently have an invitational message in my city name. I also hope that our behavior within the gaming world speaks for itself.

How about we do what the corporate world does and call it headhunting, as that is more accurate? You are trying to recruit from an active fellowship that has an active Archmage, and you don't care if it screws over that fellowship if you talk their member into joining you?

 

[Tehya1]

Wow. Headhunting, recruiting, poaching . . .its a GAME! People play to have fun and unwind! People who are having fun in a fs will not leave that fs even when approached by another fs. People who are not having fun will leave regardless of whether or not they have been invited elsewhere either to pursue a different fs or quit the game entirely.

Wth is the question in this thread now? The question was "should we ban poaching?" I think we have answered that question. The majority of players said no. Has this thread become an exercise in semantics, or is there still something that we need to work out here?

*cranky Tehya going back to her dark corner by the fan*

 

[Ashrem]

I'm not sure why we are getting hung up on one particular definition of "poaching". I think we all know what the OP meant. Language evolves using metaphors, typically with a humorous intent. If the metaphor is popular enough, eventually the metaphorical usage can become a recognized meaning.

Dictionaries have a hard time keeping up with our evolving language, but Merriam-Webster now lists the definition used here as 2c :
"to attract (someone, such as an employee or customer) away from a competitor". Not even a mention of stealing.

I don't think we're hung up at all on the specific word. The OP (regardless of the particular term chosen) is making a claim to ownership of the members of their fellowship. They explicitly said they want anyone who contacts members of their group for recruiting to be banned for doing so. They don't have the right, or the ability to enforce, any such claim. They don't have any right control who contacts anyone in their fellowship. They don't have any right to stop someone from trying to lure their members away. They don't have any right to come here and try to convince the rest of us that we should support the development team implementing tools or rules to give them those rights. The idea is self centered and the sort of dangerous thinking which leads to Fellowships imploding.

 

[Ashrem]

The analogy seems to be falling apart here. It is difficult to make the argument that protected species have agreed to their legal status, and it is difficult to maintain that nations and states that make laws regarding protecting animals are declaring themselves king of the world. I understand that you are saying that a fellowship is not a nation, but I think in the end the point needed to be made is animals are not people, and thus depart from considering how poaching applies to animals as if it could give understanding on how to treat people.

I don't think there's any falling apart at all. As a starter, I suspect that concept is rooted in the notion that people are not animals, which I have rejected since childhood. Animals may or may not be people, but all people are animals. The OP spcifically said they want players banned for attempting to send recruiting messages to their members.

private email solicitation of players that are already in an existing fellowship should not be accepted and any player that does this should be banned.

How is that not treating their members as animals they own which are not capable of making their own decision to block other people who's messages they don't want?

 

[Iyapo]

They don't have any right to come here and try to convince the rest of us

They have every right to come here and try to convince us. We have every right to giggle.

 

[Pheryll]

How is that not treating their members as animals they own which are not capable of making their own decision to block other people who's messages they don't want?

Shows you understand that there is a separate ethical treatment for humans than there is for animals. If fellowships were collections of house pets, then the ethics of the discussion would be different than for humans.

 

[Tehya1]

How is that not treating their members as animals they own which are not capable of making their own decision

Have ya met my cats? lol The only time that they don't make their own decisions is when I force my will on them. Then I pay dearly.

So maybe a better term for poaching is cats.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Wow. Headhunting, recruiting, poaching . . .its a GAME! People play to have fun and unwind!

And I am sure you know some people to whom every game is a competition and they MUST win, even if it is something that does not really work that way. So as long as this game has a 1st place for highest individual ranking points or highest fellowship ranking points or the most tournament points, there will be players who have to be in that #1 spot, and if they are an Archmage, they will do whatever it takes to get the highest ranking people into their fellowship. And then there are the ones who MUST be First in all the FAs or the highest scoring in the Spire, and those AMs will go after the players who will help with that.

 

[Ashrem]

Shows you understand that there is a separate ethical treatment for humans than there is for animals. If fellowships were collections of house pets, then the ethics of the discussion would be different than for humans.

I do understand it. I don't agree with it entirely. I'm not so objective as to not be aware I am part of the human tribe, and so under the best of circumstances I am going to treat humans differently from other animals. Making game rules which allow us to punish people for communicating with other players is ridiculous even if the punishment were minor, let alone banning them from the game.

 

[Ashrem]

Have ya met my cats? lol The only time that they don't make their own decisions is when I force my will on them. Then I pay dearly.

Exactly. This proposal wants to give less freedom to their fellowship partners than you do to your cat.