Implement an anarchy server

Preamble

I know I have proposed we have an anarchy gamemode on TotalFreedom many times before. I ask that people hear this out - I want to explain why it's a good idea in full, making sure to describe the problems anarchy would solve on TotalFreedom, and explaining a reasonable setup process with the resources we have. I also would like to address common concerns I have heard surrounding the idea of implementing an anarchy server.

Also, I get that many won't want to read this whole post. It is so long, in fact, that I had to split it into two separate posts. However, I ask that if you have an argument to make against this position, you read it in its entirety before making that argument to avoid redundancy and confusion.

I also ask that the opinions expressed in this thread be expressed with reason rather than an incomplete "yes" or "no" type response.

The problems

If you have played on the TotalFreedom game server recently, you're probably familiar with one of the biggest problems that the server has today: a lack of player interest. There have not been many people playing on the server recently, and the number of actual people playing on the server decreases to a staggering low if the inflation caused by always-online bots is factored out. Even when there are players on the server, it's painfully clear that many are still searching for a way to entertain themselves in-game. Another problem TotalFreedom has faced recently is a lack of tangible freedom on the server. Many aspects that have reduced freedom in the "Freedom" game mode came as reasonable changes, but the fact remains that much of the freedom that many came to this server for is now absent. As a result, TF has isolated the vast majority of its playerbase over the years.

Why anarchy is a good solution

Reason 1: TF's overall playerbase values the features anarchy has to offer

First off, TF had been catering to the anarchy playerbase for years before it went through more major changes that reduced freedom. This might not make sense to newer members of TF, but a while back, the game server was more "free" and was a spectacle of players constantly causing trouble that admins had to fix. I'm not saying this was a good thing in the current "semi-creative freedom" format, but in the context of anarchy, this type of behavior can generate interest in a way that is more contained than most think. Many of TF's older players found this player behavior entertaining, and even TF's admins used it as a way to find purpose on the server and connect over administrating the rambunctious players. I believe that anarchy would be a great fit for this community, and could even reignite many older members' interest in TotalFreedom. Players on the server would be able to enjoy the true freedom associated with anarchy, joining with other players to gather resources, build, and conquer the world rather than running around on the flatlands searching for something to do.

Reason 2: Marketing

TotalFreedom is sitting on a ridiculous amount of unrealized marketing potential that comes with the rich history and (almost) 12-year longevity that the server has. There is a Minecraft Forum thread from 2010 about TotalFreedom that states that it didn't have rules, nor administration that was typical of a Minecraft server. This thread is stating that in November, 2010, TF was an anarchy server. This means that present-day TotalFreedom is actually in a very advantageous situation in terms of its marketability.

Many here probably know of a very large anarchy server called 2B2T. 2B2T is one of the last sticklers of the old days in the Minecraft server scene. It has an impressive number of players on, and that number is still disproportionately small compared to their overall community due to the nature of having that many people in a single Minecraft world. 2B2T's claim to fame is that they're "the oldest anarchy server in Minecraft." The forum post explaining that TotalFreedom had no rules was actually made in November, 2010, pre-dating 2B2T by a month. TotalFreedom was the original anarchy server, and we should be marketing that fact to the anarchy community, including 2B2T's playerbase - a playerbase that is actively looking for something to do, since to even get into 2B2T, they have to wait in a queue for several hours. In the anarchy community, the age of something is incredibly important. If we took the effort to prove that 2B2T's claim that they are the oldest is wrong, we could easily cause a large stir in the anarchy community. We even have our own 2B2T style timeline of interesting and wacky events that have happened over the years on TF that could get outsiders interested enough to take a look at what's happening here. We would be able to retain interested players from this marketing strategy if we had a TotalFreedom anarchy server for them to play on.

Plan of action

1. Set up an anarchy server. While setting up a new server may seem like a daunting task to many, I would argue that it's actually not as difficult as many think. Anarchy is a rather simple gamemode when you think about it - it's just vanilla survival or creative, but set up so that users are free to play on the server without rules. Dealing with exploits and people crashing the server might seem like it'd be an issue, but I think the TotalFreedom community is ready to tackle the issue. TotalFreedom has been rather vulnerable to exploits and crashers on its own for years and our admins and developers have been prepared to deal with that type of situation.

2. Marketing begins. I have a couple ideas for how we could start marketing ourselves using the "original anarchy server" statement. One way to start would be contacting an established member of the anarchy community. For example, a super chat on one of FitMC's livestreams showing him the original TotalFreedom anarchy post would be likely to catch his attention, as well as the attention of his followers. Another way to market ourselves would be to spread the word that TotalFreedom is the original anarchy server in social media communities where anarchy players gather, like 2B2T or related subreddits and discords. A third way would be to create our own promotional video material about TF's history. It'd also be important to market to TF's historical community through our own platforms - many would be interested in seeing the return of real freedom on the TotalFreedom game server. Spreading the word of TF's originality in the anarchy space is key.

3. Revisions and adaptation occur. If our community grows as a result of the anarchy server, we will be able to better respond to feedback and make changes, and learn about how the community builds on itself and attracts interest. Using this information, TF will be able to adapt to the growing playerbase and move forward in a continual process of growth rather than being stagnant like TF is now. Additionally, since TF is more flexible than larger servers, we would be able to experiment with server software that makes it possible for more players to be on one world at once.

Common concerns

"Anarchy would isolate the current TF playerbase"

I believe anarchy would actually serve the current playerbase very well. For one, an anarchy server doesn't mean that the Freedom server would just be terminated; players would still have the option to stick with the Freedom gamemode. For two, a big reason much of the current playerbase is still here is to be with the community. Anarchy could bring back some of the old TF community, and this would breathe life back into TF's current community. While many newer players might be more interested in the "creative" aspects offered by the Freedom gamemode than the "freedom" aspects offered by anarchy, the playerbase would still be able to choose between the two. Some have also expressed concerns about potential spillover from the anarchy server to the freedom server - but I believe this is easily preventable with the staff team we have that is already capable of dealing with that issue, as well as having the anarchy server be disconnected from the freedom server network/bungee-wise if needed.

"The anarchy server wouldn't be good for the reputation of TF or Atlas Media"

I don't think this would be true. While implementing anarchy could bring in the "wild west," or a community of people with potential to do any number of damages to TF/Atlas, that community and its reputation have already been on TotalFreedom for years. A very large amount of behavior that'd be considered "foul" or "harmful" used to exist on TotalFreedom as commonplace years ago, and as a result of that, the remaining community from that era continues to demonstrate that behavior today. I would argue that Anarchy actually improves TF's reputation, as it places the responsibility of this behavior on the players that did it rather than TotalFreedom itself. TotalFreedom would actually be able to avoid a lot of the drama and attention that goes to this type of "foul" behavior if it were simply the responsibility of the players that did it, and the affected players expected that type of behavior anyway.

"Anarchy isn't plausible with our current development team"

I don't think this is true. Setting up an anarchy server simply means setting up vanilla survival, but with the intent to have no concrete rules. It can be done with some brief permission setup (which doesn't really require developer level knowledge) and possibly some anti-cheat plugins and patches. While it is true that the anarchy community is excellent at finding harmful bugs and exploits, TF has been dealing with the same issues for years and features an admin and dev team that actually specializes in resolving these bugs.

"The anarchy community expects old builds and chunks to be present"

I don't think it really matters much that the actual anarchy world would be a fresh start at first. TotalFreedom still has a rich history and a community to back it up, and the community that is attracted from marketing TotalFreedom as well as the current community would easily be able to make the anarchy world interesting. As the community grows, home-grown events and community building would naturally occur, making our world interesting on its own.

"TotalFreedom would not be unique as an anarchy server"

If TF decides to set up an anarchy server, it has the potential to be unique in the anarchy scene in many ways. First of all, TF is the original. We were an anarchy server before anyone else was, and I believe that fact alone is able to attract an enormous amount of attention. Second, we are able to run the latest version of Minecraft with no problems. This is something that many other servers in the anarchy scene have been struggling with. Thirdly, we have the flexibility to be able to set up server software that could allow TF to support more players online than any other anarchy server. Projects like MultiPaper could be implemented on the TF anarchy server to accommodate a large number of players. Another possibility I have discussed with upper management on TotalFreedom is implementing a semi-cracked system. In this system, premium players would retain their username, but cracked players would have randomized usernames so that cracked mode would still be an option, but not something that ruins the experience.

"We already tried anarchy and it didn't work"

Other than when the server originally ran an anarchy mode, TF has made no real attempt to try out an anarchy server. The somewhat recent "anarchy" event that we had was temporary, delayed by a significant amount of time, and wasn't even true anarchy in the first place. There were oddly still rules present in the "anarchy" event, and the entire thing also wasn't in the typical anarchy format, as it discouraged server growth by kicking players off permanently when they died. Those factors make it obvious why the event flopped.

Closing thoughts

An important thing to remember when considering an anarchy gamemode is the potential risk, and the return on investment. At worst, we try to set up an anarchy server and it fails. This isn't a good outcome, but we wouldn't actually "lose" anything except for the honestly not very significant amount of time we'd need to put into setup. Frankly, the freedom gamemode is failing already as is, and in my eyes, the playerbase desperately needs something more interesting. However, if we are able to see success through an anarchy server, the potential return on investment is huge. With TotalFreedom's history and marketing potential, it is possible that it could become a popular and interesting server.

Quote from wild1145

Quote from DrPeePee

but set up so that users are free to play on the server without rules

And this is where the suggestion has and always does fall apart.

We don't launch a game-mode on the network that doesn't conform to the community guidelines, "No Rules" will simply not fly.

I mentioned this above, but there are a few reasons why a server with no rules shouldn't be a problem with TotalFreedom/Atlas:

• The server could be disconnected from the Bungee network and work just as well.
• Anarchy means the responsibility for any bad behavior as a result of "no rules" doesn't fall on TF/Atlas.
• TF is, and always has been associated with some extremely toxic behavior anyway, but often, TF staff are responsible. In Anarchy, this behavior is more expected and doesn't really "damage" the reputation of the server itself.

I get there are community guidelines here, but that doesn't mean they have to apply to Anarchy. Either way, the reputational risk level would be the same as it is now, as long as Freedom is running.

Quote from wild1145

Quote from DrPeePee

I mentioned this above, but there are a few reasons why a server with no rules shouldn't be a problem with TotalFreedom/Atlas:

• The server could be disconnected from the Bungee network and work just as well.
• Anarchy means the responsibility for any bad behavior as a result of "no rules" doesn't fall on TF/Atlas.
• TF is, and always has been associated with some extremely toxic behavior anyway, but often, TF staff are responsible. In Anarchy, this behavior is more expected and doesn't really "damage" the reputation of the server itself.

And none of it makes any differences. The reality is the rest of the servers on the network will be judged by the actions in that server, and from my own moral and ethical view, I wouldn't want people spouting some of the shit I suspect would be spouted.

Anything with TF's branding is required (And it's non negotiable) to follow the community guidelines. They're fairly loose as it is and for a game-mode like anarchy not a lot would necessarily need to apply, but some rules would apply either way.

I'm not willing to run servers under the TF or any other branding that would have no rules and no accountability of the players.

If it's really a requirement for servers to follow these community guidelines, and it's really against your morals to facilitate a place where breaking the guidelines is a normal occurrence, the Freedom server and a good portion of the discord should probably be shut down. I'm not even talking about rulebreakers that get banned, either. I'm talking about things that are actively noticed and ignored by TF staff: people discussing sexual content in front of children, jokes about rape and suicide, and promotion of illegal use of drugs/alcohol. I could spend hours digging up examples of this, but that would be a waste of my time. I'm not saying there's no enforcement of community guidelines at all, but the degree to which they are enforced on Freedom and the network we have now isn't enough to be making the argument that no enforcement at all would be any worse.

Quote from Tizz

But no, you keep going with your suspiciously specific idea of anarchy for TF, which reminds me of another place... I wonder which is it... oh right, that's how Eso works! Are you sure you don't have hidden intentions with us...?

Even if you haven't:

Do you seriously think I'm some sort of secret esotalk double-agent? Since you haven't noticed, I hate that forum because it's a platform for the owner, John, to socially engineer children.

Quote from Tizz

How is this any different from now in practice?

Because many of the people who tend to be involved in behavior that risks TF's reputation are staff (or had been staff at the time.) Rather than being in a situation where we continually embarrass ourselves with staff-related incidents, any "toxic" behavior on anarchy is the sole responsibility of players. Not to say there wouldn't be admins to help manage and upkeep anarchy, but in the context of anarchy, the behavior is expected.

Quote from Tizz

People are actually pissed when the server's unplayable because of crippling exploits, and we're more happy in preventing them from happening than having a cat and mouse game with exploiters.

So you're saying we're completely and totally sound at preventing exploits now? I beg to differ. But our server still is stable. Any server, even if that server is anarchy, can be stable if the development team is able to patch exploits and respond to bug-related issues on the server. There's always some degree of "cat and mouse" to it, but I'd say TotalFreedom has a strong enough "cat" to have a stable anarchy server.

Quote from Tizz

Which can be interpreted in a number of ways.

The message of the forum post is clear. It states that there were no administrators, nor "rules, whitelists, and restrictions" that were seen as "the usual red tape" for a Minecraft server at the time. No rules, restrictions, or administrators means that it was an anarchy server by definition.

Quote from Tizz

Only if we keep enforcing the basic rules that prevent arseholes from making everything unplayable and repulsive in less than a hour. This isn't 2010 anymore, unfortunately.

Unless you're talking about directly crashing or severely lagging the server, (both of which can be dealt with via patches,) a lot of the qualities that others might see as "repulsive" and "unplayable" are seen by the anarchy community as a challenge that makes the game more fun. For example, the spawn might get blown up and covered with lavacasts. This isn't standard for Minecraft, but in the anarchy community, it's part of the challenge. If you're talking about people being drawn away from the server because of offensive content, I think that those playing anarchy understand that there are no rules and people act accordingly.

Quote from Allink

Historically, people have found exploits, crashed/lagged the server once, and then reported it to the admins. This wouldn't happen and as such would impede the developer team's ability to find and patch these exploits. As the developer team currently has no access to logs, it'd be made even harder to find that shit. Currently we have to rely on player reports to patch shit, which isn't ideal.

That's what's historically happened throughout the time you've been here. There was definitely a time on TotalFreedom when the more vicious exploiters were feeling less nice and would wreck the server repeatedly, so much that it sometimes led to all-day downtime. I am not saying that the anarchy needs to be creative anarchy. (like Kaboom.) The lack of creative mode would throw a serious bone in people's ability to find exploits, and a lot of the things that have been found working in survival have been covered in Paper at some point. The result would likely be something with more chaos, but retain the same stability standard. The no access to logs thing is a problem, but that's a separate issue that honestly should just be resolved under the common sense reasoning that devs should have log access if they are expected to do a reasonable amount of work. That shouldn't be an optional thing and I think everyone here but one person would agree with you there.

Quote from Allink

I don't particularly enjoy the notion of the cat and mouse game of exploiters VS. developers the Scissors and TFM team currently enjoy being amplified 10x by an Anarchy community.

Again, I really think that if we ran a survival anarchy server, that'd dampen any sort of "amplification" of exploit discovery and usage that'd come with an anarchy community.

Quote from Allink

Unless you want to alienate most, if not all, of the current and past community, and by extension admin community, please, go ahead and implement this gamemode.

I agree! We should implement anarchy unless we want to alienate most of our current and past community. Over time, they've come here for "freedom," and that's what we should be trying to give them.

Quote from Allink

Anarchy players would inevitably start to seep into the regular Freedom gamemode, and as such most likely modify our existing community to something akin to ours and cause at least some amount of player loss. It's a bit similar to how a few people from Freedom went to Skyblock, if my memory of other people's accounts is to be believed, scared off the small community that was slowly but surely growing there and effectively destroyed the Skyblock gamemode's popularity.

I don't think the Skyblock gamemode failed because people from freedom started playing there. It was pretty obvious to me that it flopped because it's a duplicate of every other Skyblock server, but without a large community of players, and without any unique features at all. If there was any semblance of an actual community growing there, I seriously doubt it'd be additional players that scared them off. If I genuinely asked someone here why I should play the TF skyblock server over another one, they probably wouldn't have anything to say at this point. That isn't the case for Anarchy at all, and comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges.

Quote from Allink

I believe the Anarchy gamemode being implemented and it becoming successful would end up destroying TotalFreedom as we know it currently.

You know what? Good. The TotalFreedom as we know it currently isn't anything of significance. It's obvious nobody actually cares about the server, and it's long overdue for some serious improvements and changes.