ACS Question

cashto · Post by **cashto** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 2:47 am

I had the same discussion with Klt a few days back, except about the Cadet II material.

The insistance on not making the material public has always struck me as hording of information. There's some knowledge out there that you can't get unless you join some special club. Now, I'm sure neither Cadet nor ACS are indoctrination cults /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" /> , but there's still something distastefully kabbalistic about the whole deal.

Maybe it's just my autodidactic temperment. I've always prefered self-study over any other form of learning. And sure, I've downloaded TEK and the tree explorer and poked around a bit as a solo comm, but it's not the same if you can't read other people's thoughts and discoveries.

I suspect this attitude makes the community more insular, not less. Too often good questions are answered with "take cadet" when a link would have been a much more helpful response.

Sure, you can't make anyone read the material. But you can't make anyone take Cadet or ACS either. I suspect the same people who take ACS would have been just as enthusiastic about reading the material if it were all online. But I guarantee it doesn't work in reverse -- not everyone eager to read the material would want to be a part of ACS (or Cadet).

Like McB said, you can still have ACS and Cadet, and make the material public. If there's value in those two programs outside of just the material., i.e., the one-on-one instruction and tutoring.

quackdamnyou · Post by **quackdamnyou** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:24 am

cashto wrote:QUOTE (cashto @ Dec 5 2007, 06:47 PM) Like McB said, you can still have ACS and Cadet, and make the material public. If there's value in those two programs outside of just the material., i.e., the one-on-one instruction and tutoring.

Well, a large portion of both programs IS being made public. A big part of it is the huge effort required to make the material look good and keep it up to date, and make sure it makes sense in the context of public consumption.

Also, don't neglect the importance of process! Simply showing that you are able to follow instructions sufficiently to apply and graduate speaks to one's dedication and intelligence.

Clay_Pigeon · Post by **Clay_Pigeon** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:58 am

This comes up every time I release new material to the public. People quote the same arguments. They always fail to convince me, and I respond in the same way (or find new reasons). I just spent 40 minutes writing a detailed reply, only to realize that I wrote this same reply when this issue came up 12 weeks ago. That's way too much work. After all, in the end, the only people I really owe anything to (by way of explanations) are the admins. So from now on, this will be my default response to all inquiries will be as follows

NO!

/tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

Bard · Post by **Bard** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:16 am

Clay_Pigeon wrote:QUOTE (Clay_Pigeon @ Dec 5 2007, 09:58 PM) NO!
/tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

Rock on, dancing man.

Rock on.

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:13 am

Cashto

In the past others had to learn through different approaches to the way things are done now:

1) Write down the sum total of everything we think is important including a detailed description of events, settings, people, place, time, circumstances so you can read them when you wish but the community assumed you did and basically God help you if you haven't

2) Write a big generic bunch of stuff that is based mostly on views/opionions of the game, hopefully illustrated with more examples then jargon but generally the former beats out the later

3) Ask you to be our bitch until through repeated pounding you slowly "get it" bit by bit

Each approach has been taken in the past and if you don't think number three was the accepted way to learn ask those who where here from the time Microsoft invented the game until the start of some kind of organized wiki type reading taken up by those with a big heart.

The first attempts of number two i.e. just give them the basics and a few important details and it's all good.... ahhh it was found this wasn't all good since a bucket load of info wasn't readily availible and the sum effects of the efforts put forth to results was less then stellar

Afterwards there was a massive amount of data gathered and put into some kind of logical order. However like most things with large amounts of data made availible there where some turds floating in the punch bowl of knowledge. Also it now became a living document and had to constantly be watched and updated.

The approach was kind of there it is, have at it, and after awhile if you have questions we'll answer them for you but they had better be pretty specific. Think of drinking from a fire hose with someone willing to pull your face out of the stream of knowledge that is attempting to both drown and behead you.

So it morphed into: This needs to be handled in sections with nice peeps who will keep you from drowning, AND who are also tasked with maintaing the data flow. Im guessing that they never dreamed keeping it all working was such a massive endeavour.

All they asked was you gave it a little of effort reading, asking, and playing during which time they'd support you. This proved to "time consuming" and "hard to stick with" for the trainees

So they split it out still further into make you into sectioned basically the present form:
1) upon completion they wont annoy the @#(! out of everyone asking types of questions like what is a nan (basic wiki info),
2) after three weeks of having material arranged for you, AND having people willing to be at your beck and call to answer questions for you all to make them someone who has a chance of being useful in game (cadet I)
3) if they're one of the bright eyed eager bunch, they get another dose of info after they had time to put what they learned into practice. Again getting their questions answered and, I believe, getting real time mentoring in a game setting. All so they can become; most likely to be useful after some time practicing what they learned (cadet II)
4) after they've become usefully and have demostrated it to the community then they can be trained in the art of commanding with people willing to answer their every question along the way all the while being actively helped, watched over, and having someone hold thier hand while they play all in hopes of making them into a decent comm. (ACS)

They only ask you attempt to do the lessons they are teaching, stick with it, and don't be a $#@!tard while doing said things This has proved pretty hard for some of those selected for the course.

Im here to tell you point blank, just reading how to comm is a bit like just reading how to $#@!. You've got to not only read about it but also do it repeatedily to get better, oh and you really got to like it since no one is going to make it easy for you to do it whenever you want.

So really man save all the intellectual discussions about whether it is the bestest way to do things because so help me if you make those who are putting forth this massive effort quit in frustration I'll use method three on you until you either learn or quit.

MrChaos

edit: fixed sentence structure

Psychosis · Post by **Psychosis** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:22 am

Mr. Kltplzyxm wrote:QUOTE (Mr. Kltplzyxm @ Dec 5 2007, 05:09 PM) Secondly, ACS is advantageous to be in as a student. You get a hider to which you can learn from your mistakes without ruining your reputation.

this also works the other way, if you have a really bad rep, and you take ACS and honestly try to improve (and not blow your hider) maybe when your done with ACS and graduate, people may not hate you so much

guitarism · Post by **guitarism** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:21 am

Or we find out who you are anyway and hate you more because you've been wasting our time by not actually learning anything.

quackdamnyou · Post by **quackdamnyou** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:24 am

MrChaos wrote:QUOTE (MrChaos @ Dec 5 2007, 10:13 PM) Im here to tell you point blank, just reading how to comm is a bit like just reading how to $#@!. You've got to not only read about it but also do it repeatedily to get better, oh and you really got to like it since no one is going to make it easy for you to do it whenever you want.

QFT (to the rants stickie I go!)

cashto · Post by **cashto** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:59 am

Thanks for the lengthy response, MrChaos.

The issue is not whether ACS and Cadet II have value. The issue is why the curriculae of both programs are not available for independent study.

I do not believe that making the material public would diminish all these other benefits that you mentioned of the ACS and CDT II programs. To say otherwise indicates to me a lack of confidence in the mentorship aspect of those programs.

Psychosis · Post by **Psychosis** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:04 am

cashto wrote:QUOTE (cashto @ Dec 6 2007, 02:59 AM) Thanks for the lengthy response, MrChaos.

The issue is not whether ACS and Cadet II have value. The issue is why the curriculae of both programs are not available for independent study.

I do not believe that making the material public would diminish all these other benefits that you mentioned of the ACS and CDT II programs. To say otherwise indicates to me a lack of confidence in the mentorship aspect of those programs.

with the CDT program's I am torn about releasing it to the general public, Although it may seem fascist we do want to force people to take the CDT program, for reasons of having them go through our structured learning process.

on ACS, no. knowledge is power, and to distribute this info would be like putting fully automatic rifles with starfish rounds, no safties, and hair triggers into the hands of kindergarten kids on the playground after telling them they are playing "war"