Talk:Organization of Gamers & Roleplaying Enthusiasts (3.5e Other)/Membership Handbook
From D&D Wiki
Weird Rule[edit]
"I will always praise in public and critique in private."
What? Think of how this would work if it was actually put into practice, and you should quickly see how horrible of an idea it is. You are obligated to praise the worst idea ever in public even though it's obviously bad. It's stuff like this that makes me and many other people leery of ever joining one of these organizations, even if we have common interests with the rest of the group. Surgo 13:17, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
- What this means is that you will properly criticize, and not publicly insult. It is a common part of many successful organizations, and only those who have a tenancy to be unduly rude and publicly discomforting have a problem abiding by it. You may be reading too much into it. If an idea is in need of critique - then give it, but if possible, give it in a proper setting - don't go tell someone "hey, that guys idea sucks" without bringing it up with that individual. It does not in any way mean you are obligated to "praise the worst idea ever." These groups of friendly players help boaster our community as a whole, and as such rules like the above are keystones for any successful organization. Hooper talk contribs email 13:30, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
- It doesn't say "properly criticize, and not publicly insult". It says "praise in public and critique in private". That means if you say anything at all in public, you are obligated to praise. If that's not the way it's supposed to work, it should say something completely different. Surgo 13:37, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
- It's not that I'm adverse to it, it's that I don't understand it. What I'm seeing is that the rules say one thing, and then you say something completely different. Shouldn't the rules and (supposedly) what it's actually supposed to be, be saying the same thing? Surgo 13:45, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
- Like I said earlier, you may be reading too much into it. The rule does not say that you have to praise or have to criticize, it just says where to do each form. So no, you don't have to praise an idea you don't like, but feel free to criticize it in the appropriate venue. Likewise, you can praise an idea you like in public, which is always a given. Hooper talk contribs email 13:50, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
- Okay, that makes a bit more sense, but one thing still bugs me: you can't criticize in public, then? Well, I guess if that's what everybody wants, I can hardly stop them of course, just looking for clarification here. Surgo 13:56, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
- Some things are shortened for brevity, and this rule still gets its main point across to most after that. However, if it was completely comprehensive, it would read something like this: Provide proper criticism in the proper setting warranted by the situation, in a way where the person receiving the criticism will not be adverse to hearing it and will be able to learn the most from it. Do not insult. Bolster confidence by praising in public settings. Every chapter may differ slightly, but mostly this means bring up Ogre business/grievances/criticism within your group, or if it specific to an individual, to that individual. This prevents disunion, and also puts the person/people in a position to truly learn from any criticism. Long long answer, I know. With the ogres, there shouldn't ever be a need to criticize outside your group, so the public should not be brought into any such talks. Basically just a simple rule of thumb to keep personality clashes or idea disunion from spilling into a public setting. Hooper talk contribs email
- Its a good rule Hooper. I knew what you meant when you posted it. Its good to use formal methods of avoiding offensive behaviors and habits. Oh be wise, what more can I say. --Jay Freedman 14:25, 1 September 2009 (MDT)
