It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:52 am
Change font size

General Discussion

Farewell For Now

Discuss game issues here.

Moderator: Elder Staff

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:00 pm

Fulgrim wrote:We've decided not to open the floor for discussion regarding forum policy.


You seem to have completely missed my point again. I am not arguing with you about what your policy should be. Go ahead and have whatever moderation policy you wish, I really don't have a problem with it.

I'm telling you that it's a problem when you publish a moderation policy, and then your first act of moderation has nothing to do with anything mentioned in that policy. When there's a difference in what you SAY and what you DO, you lose my confidence.

I've said this three times now, at least, and I get the frustrating feeling that it's just not getting across.

Fulgrim wrote:We're perfectly capable of administrating this game, thank you very much.


Respectfully, this is not a particularly helpful thing to say to anyone, particularly somebody who has complaints. Plainly, you must realize, that if you had been administrating this game to my satisfaction, I would not be having this discussion with you - nor would all of those people who have complained in the past, for whatever reason.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Fulgrim » Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:08 pm

Mostly because I don't agree with you. I didn't say the reason for the action was related to the policy. It was within my power to lock the thread for a reason of my own understanding, which was then forwarded to the rest of the team, who agreed with my decision.

Discussion was had and it was decided that it wasn't far out of line, and that is where staff has come to.

Despite your saying "it has nothing to do with the policy, and you're acting outside the lines", 1) We are that line.

2) I already addressed all questions and concerns that player had in mind, and made it public knowledge, with accompanying information to make contact if anything else wasn't made clear.

3) You seem to think "if it's not in black and white, we're not allowed to do it, or at least it'd be unprofessional to do otherwise".

I just work here, man. I'm a volunteer. I don't think anyone here is dissatisfied with my actions as much as you are, least of all the person involved in the incident being brought up. Though you would know for sure, wouldn't you?
(Morgoth):
I had a part in everything.
Twice I destroyed the light and twice I failed.
I left ruin behind me when I returned.
But I also carried ruin with me.
She, the mistress of her own lust.
User avatar
Fulgrim
Roleplay Admin
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:14 pm

You're missing the point. You're busy trying to explain to me why what you did wasn't really that bad, and why the hell am I so up in arms about it when no goats got murdered and no babies were thrown into the fire?

This discussion is not about you. It's about staff and staff policy as a whole.

What you don't realize is that this is a pattern. Staff says X, staff does Y. Would you like a list of all the instances in which this has happened? Would you like, for example, to reopen that giant can of worms about special apps and staff allowing them even though it was explicitly said this wasn't allowed? I can name several other instances.

What you fail to appreciate is that this is not a criticism of your policy. This is a criticism of the fact that the staff is still displaying a regrettable level of instability, shooting from the hip, and adhocism.

All of which ultimately means that I, as a player, cannot trust you to do what you say, or to hold yourselves accountable to any policy that you have committed yourselves to. Yes, it's unprofessional. No, it doesn't inspire confidence. It's really that simple.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Fulgrim » Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:17 pm

I think this conversation is over. If anyone else has anything to chime in and say, please keep it to the topic of Rivean's farewell, or start a new thread regarding any of the separate aspects of the discussion therein.

Keep in mind we will be watching.
(Morgoth):
I had a part in everything.
Twice I destroyed the light and twice I failed.
I left ruin behind me when I returned.
But I also carried ruin with me.
She, the mistress of her own lust.
User avatar
Fulgrim
Roleplay Admin
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Cola » Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:14 pm

First I believe when we sign on for alpha testing we sign on for policy reversals, insecurity, back-peddling, and glaring errors.

Second, if staff could administer the game just fine without player testing and input, there would be no need for an alpha test.

Both sides here are bringing unrealistic expectations to the table.

Players need to tolerate a high level of staff experimentation and mistakes. Staff need to recognize the whole point of an alpha test is to see how real players react to their designs and decisions, because staff cannot administer the game successfully without that help.
There is currently 1 soul braving the world all alone.
Cola
Forum Hobbit
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:14 am

Cola wrote:Players need to tolerate a high level of staff experimentation and mistakes. Staff need to recognize the whole point of an alpha test is to see how real players react to their designs and decisions, because staff cannot administer the game successfully without that help.


This is absolutely true. I also have to commend staff for having reversed many policy decisions after taking feedback from the playerbase.

Unfortunately, the problem is that getting this feedback and having these policy reversals is like having your teeth pulled, and even when staff reverse decisions, it seems to come after hours of arguing and very vocal disgruntlement.

All of which makes the atmosphere more toxic for staff and players alike, which leads inevitably to situations like this one, where the staff starts to get throbbing migraines at the very mention of the word 'feedback' and players like myself get tired of seeing decisions made that will require yet another round of acrimonious hassling back and forth before they're reversed.

The solution, to my mind, is simple - we must be able to discuss things without this persistently aggravating tone to our debate.

And the only way we're going to get there is if staff stop instinctively defending their ideas and policies as if they were their first born children, and look forward to feedback from the community. For as long as your first instinct is to fight criticism and welcome support, this will always remain an acrimonious process.

And for as long as emotions are invested in ideas, their relative strengths and weaknesses will ALWAYS be distorted from what ought to be realistic.

I think staff need to sit down and think about how to make this community function better as a device for generating feedback. I do not believe that moderation rules and vigorous enforcement is the right direction to go in - in fact, it is the exact opposite. You are further creating a divide between two groups of people, whereas the ultimate solution to these problems is for everyone to be able to discuss these things as an 'us'. At very best, it reduces negativity by silencing the expression of it, rather than addressing the root causes - and thereby creating more negativity and antagonism between staff and players. Considering that this is probably the least toxic administration we've had to date, that's a tragedy.

I think Alcarin might be a good choice if you were looking to someone to try and foster a healthier way for the community to function.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Fulgrim » Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:21 am

I was thinking for awhile about how to reply to Rivean and Cola here, but besides these two, how many of you think adopting our own policies and adhering to them as best suits or style of administrating is a decision bad for the game?

Tl;Dr: How seriously should I be taking someone who time and time again has vigorously, emphatically and repeatedly outlined, in walls of text, just how cruddy a job we're making of it, and then turning around and saying, "but that's not your fault, you poor thing"?
(Morgoth):
I had a part in everything.
Twice I destroyed the light and twice I failed.
I left ruin behind me when I returned.
But I also carried ruin with me.
She, the mistress of her own lust.
User avatar
Fulgrim
Roleplay Admin
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:44 am

Fulgrim wrote:I was thinking for awhile about how to reply to Rivean and Cola here, but besides these two, how many of you think adopting our own policies and adhering to them as best suits or style of administrating is a decision bad for the game?


I don't really think this is a matter of subjective opinion. Staff have made decisions in the past, after feedback they have gone back on them. Assuming that they went back on those decisions because they realized they were bad decisions (and not, for example, simply to make someone happy, and quit complaining), this shows that feedback has been necessary. It's not a subjective thing, it's simply a fact. Will staff need feedback in the future? Maybe, maybe not (probably yes), but clearly 'adopting our own policies and adhering to them as best suits or style of administrating' without feedback would have been a bad idea.

Fulgrim wrote:How seriously should I be taking someone who time and time again has vigorously, emphatically and repeatedly outlined, in walls of text, just how cruddy a job we're making of it, and then turning around and saying, "but that's not your fault, you poor thing"?


The answer to this question would depend on whether or not this player is right. Now plainly, we can disagree over how to decide this, but that's besides the point. The point is that any given player pointing out that you've done a 'cruddy job' via walls of text does not mean that the player is wrong and can safely be ignored.

A more practical response to this question is, going back to my last post, we shouldn't NEED to have walls of text. We shouldn't NEED to have to repeat things over and over again, and argue about them for hours. We should be able to sit down, like adults, and say, 'What do you think of this?' and then the response should be given the consideration it's due, dispassionately, rationally, and objectively.

And then if required, changes should be made. Feedback should not be like a trip to the dentist. I should not have to write a wall of text because pointing out simple flaws should be easy.

You should not have to read walls of texts because you should be able to recognize simple flaws when they're pointed out to you.

There needs to not be an atmosphere of persecution. And idea generators need to be able to divorce their egos from their ideas.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Cola » Fri Sep 19, 2014 7:21 am

Fulgrim wrote:I was thinking for awhile about how to reply to Rivean and Cola here, but besides these two, how many of you think adopting our own policies and adhering to them as best suits or style of administrating is a decision bad for the game?

Tl;Dr: How seriously should I be taking someone who time and time again has vigorously, emphatically and repeatedly outlined, in walls of text, just how cruddy a job we're making of it, and then turning around and saying, "but that's not your fault, you poor thing"?


Rivean is right about staff taking criticism too personally, and being argumentative. I made a statement, but Fulgrim reworded that statement in a way I would not have and then attributed it to me. This is a classic 'strawman' fallacy. It's inappropriate and doesn't contribute to deeper understanding or developing consensus or fostering new and better ideas.

Rivean volunteered to help staff with their alpha test. He made a sincere, heartfelt, and time-consuming effort. He put a lot of careful thought into his feedback. He decided at this time that he is no longer helping much, and will bow out for now. Staff response to that SHOULD be: "Sincere thanks Rivean, for all the hard work you put into making SOI's future better." And leave it at that.

(Even if-- especially if-- Rivean got a bit frustrated and preachy about it-- player/testers can burn out too.)
There is currently 1 soul braving the world all alone.
Cola
Forum Hobbit
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby MrDvAnt » Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:30 am

I hate to even chime in, because I know it's pointless, but I feel the need to point out, in a non-inflammatory manner, that it's difficult to play the straw-man card when your entire argument is based on a logical fallacy to begin.

The erroneous assumption is that play-testers are in place to help refine administrative policies through their opinions, feelings, wants and desires.

The function of alpha is to play-test the code. Not the admins.
As players, our feedback is valued to help refine the code, the crafts, the progs, layout of maps, etc. We aren't here to pick and choose our favorite admins, critique administration choices, etc.

People keep expressing this "we" and "our" sentiment without seeming to consider whether or not their opinions on certain policy implementation is welcome. It doesn't matter how "constructive" criticism is in any situation if that criticism is being offered on something without solicitation or on a subject not up for debate.
MrDvAnt
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 12:55 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Cola » Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:48 am

MrDvAnt wrote:I hate to even chime in, because I know it's pointless, but I feel the need to point out, in a non-inflammatory manner, that it's difficult to play the straw-man card when your entire argument is based on a logical fallacy to begin.

The erroneous assumption is that play-testers are in place to help refine administrative policies through their opinions, feelings, wants and desires.



Do you really mean to do this? Do you really mean to appoint yourself staff spokesperson on this? Because if you are correct then I really misunderstood what I'm doing here. I read a lot of staff invitations to submit suggestions beyond code glitches. Were those invitations insincere? Did I misunderstand them?
There is currently 1 soul braving the world all alone.
Cola
Forum Hobbit
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby MrDvAnt » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:13 am

Cola wrote:
MrDvAnt wrote:I hate to even chime in, because I know it's pointless, but I feel the need to point out, in a non-inflammatory manner, that it's difficult to play the straw-man card when your entire argument is based on a logical fallacy to begin.

The erroneous assumption is that play-testers are in place to help refine administrative policies through their opinions, feelings, wants and desires.



Do you really mean to do this? Do you really mean to appoint yourself staff spokesperson on this? Because if you are correct then I really misunderstood what I'm doing here. I read a lot of staff invitations to submit suggestions beyond code glitches. Were those invitations insincere? Did I misunderstand them?


I'm not appointing myself anything. I'm stating my opinions, just as you are. I can diagram my reasoning if you like.

Thread posted with new forum guidelines -> Question posted -->
Thread locked --> Locker of thread states discussion not necessary == Criticism not requested, subject not up for debate.

That one is a pretty simple demonstration of 1 + 2 = 3.

As for the rest, "I read a lot of staff invitations to submit suggestions beyond code glitches.", the key word is suggestions. Not angry denunciation. Not finger pointing. Not accusations of incompetence. Telling people they suck at their job isn't a suggestion or any kind of constructive. If you state you opinion, they are free to disagree with it. All I see are accusations that staff are too thin-skinned or defensive, without any acknowledgment that perhaps players shouldn't expect their suggestions or demands to be implemented just because they are welcome to state them.

Also, I was making a general statement. How many Beta of large software titles have you participated in, in which they asked for feedback on their company policies? I stand by my statement that a play-tester's job is to help refine code, not policy.

Edited when I noticed you asked four questions and I didn't necessarily address them. Warning: This may be a bit tongue-in-cheek:

1. No.
2. No.
3. Not in a position to know/not to my knowledge.
4. Possibly.
MrDvAnt
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 12:55 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:38 am

MrDvAnt wrote:As for the rest, "I read a lot of staff invitations to submit suggestions beyond code glitches.", the key word is suggestions. Not angry denunciation. Not finger pointing. Not accusations of incompetence. Telling people they suck at their job isn't a suggestion or any kind of constructive.


You are making the mistake of taking Fulgrim's word for it verbatim, perhaps because nobody bothered to argue with him about it (in my case because I don't think it's worth arguing about) but the criticism HAS been constructive. It has outlined specific problems, outlined WHY the issues are problematic, and often has provided solutions to problems. Please go back to the original post on this thread to see exactly what is being spoken of. You are making, respectfully, the same mistake you most often do when you involve yourselves in these things and take up some sort of position - you haven't read what you're talking about.


MrDvAnt wrote:All I see are accusations that staff are too thin-skinned or defensive, without any acknowledgment that perhaps players shouldn't expect their suggestions or demands to be implemented just because they are welcome to state them.


Not to be contrary, but you seem to be pulling this out of thin air. Please refer me to any part of this thread where any such entitlement has been expressed or even hinted at. The expression of grievances or complaints is not an expectation of anything, or a statement of entitlement. It is simply an expression of grievances.

As for the rest of your post, you seem to be of the opinion that the admins create the game and the players play it and that the former group should never be subject to criticism by the latter group, or that the latter group should have no expectation other than to be given the opportunity to play the game.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how muds (and RPIs in particular) work.

This is not a software company developing and releasing a product (incidentally, you will not find any professional software company with this sort of customer relations lasting very long - but I don't hold the staff up to 'professional standards', it was you who made that comparison).

This is more akin to a large tabletop game being administered to by a bunch of DMs. It is by its very nature a collaborative effort made by the administrators AND the players.

To expect that people who will invest hours of their time and creative energy into a project should do so subject to the whims of a class of persons who should be (according to you) above criticism is, frankly, absurd.

More to the point, this sort of attitude doesn't even ATTEMPT to make some sort of bridge between the administration and the players of a mud. It implicitly suggests that there are very very hard lines between THEM and US (whichever side of the fence you happen to be on) and that those lines ought not to be crossed.

I don't know what sort of mud you intend to create with an idea like that, but if a 'reduction of hostility/toxicity' is your aim (as many admins have stated), then I can virtually guarantee you that such a policy will bring about the exact opposite result.
Last edited by Rivean on Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby likui » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:43 am

The major problem I'm seeing here is a lack of communication between play testers and game designers and back and forth postings on forums is not the ideal means for such. As a part-time play tester of euro-style board games over the last ten years I can attest to the HUGE amount of discourse required for troubleshooting flaws when they are spotted and exchanging posts on the forums (or submitting tickets or discussing in the GL) is sometimes an inadequate method for resolving more complex issues. Fortunately, the game designer and players reside in the same town, so we simply meet, playtest, and discuss the various flaws and suggest improvements in person.

Obviously, we do not have the luxury of discussing these issues in person, so I would suggest scheduling a conference between players and admins via Twitter chat or a webinar service with optional audio. In two hours we could exchange ten times the amount of ideas (and hopefully resolve a few issues) compared to what we are trying to do on the forums.
Last edited by likui on Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:48 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
likui
Honored Dwarf
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 7:34 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Holmes » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:44 am

If it's any consolation, Rivean, unless things have changed drastically since I stepped away, there's no real agreement up above either. :)
User avatar
Holmes
Elf Recruit
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:22 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby tehkory » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:54 am

MrDvAnt wrote:I stand by my statement that a play-tester's job is to help refine code, not policy.

Head Staff have publicly stated that the policies of the MUD itself are in an alpha state. How you can tell is that the moderation policy is three days old and the MUD itself four or more.

And it seems obvious to me that there's going to be correlation between note following your own policies on the forums and not following your own policies in the game. Like I've said before, Staff need to be fettered by their own rules and their own vision.

I also think a lock-heavy Administration style inhibits any willingness to provide general feedback as time goes on. There's no lack of understanding as to why Fulgrim does what he does. It's a disagreement that is the best thing for the game. I don't need to hear his reasons again. It's the twofold facts that it inhibits feedback and is utterly unlike the proposed rules that is concerning. Fulgrim's a good guy. I know that. I don't need to bring that emotional feeling into my objective reading that, however correct, the only rules for locking the thread was the "do what I want" clause.

Hilariously, locking it only caused questions about policy to pop up in other threads entirely, making it utterly ineffective in keeping discussion where it belongs.
tehkory
Master Ent
 
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:21 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby someguy » Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:58 am

Rivean wrote:Unfortunately, the problem is that getting this feedback and having these policy reversals is like having your teeth pulled, and even when staff reverse decisions, it seems to come after hours of arguing and very vocal disgruntlement.


Because you are quick to accept the ideas and opinions of others yourself, eh? When people disagree, they tend to take a while to be convinced to change their minds. However, staff has done that repeatedly after being convinced they were wrong.

Rivean wrote:All of which makes the atmosphere more toxic for staff and players alike, which leads inevitably to situations like this one, where the staff starts to get throbbing migraines at the very mention of the word 'feedback' and players like myself get tired of seeing decisions made that will require yet another round of acrimonious hassling back and forth before they're reversed.


Or it could be that players spend hours posting rants the staff is willing to reply to because if they ignore them they are no longer listening to feedback. It's a catch 22, and it takes two to argue.

Rivean wrote:The solution, to my mind, is simple - we must be able to discuss things without this persistently aggravating tone to our debate

It's an internet forum, bro.

Rivean wrote:And for as long as emotions are invested in ideas, their relative strengths and weaknesses will ALWAYS be distorted from what ought to be realistic.

As the ultimate arbitrator of what is good and right in mudland with the pure logic of a computer machine, I'm sure you haven't invested emotion in any decision ever made.

Rivean wrote:I think staff need to sit down and think about how to make this community function better as a device for generating feedback. I do not believe that moderation rules and vigorous enforcement is the right direction to go in - in fact, it is the exact opposite. You are further creating a divide between two groups of people, whereas the ultimate solution to these problems is for everyone to be able to discuss these things as an 'us'. At very best, it reduces negativity by silencing the expression of it, rather than addressing the root causes - and thereby creating more negativity and antagonism between staff and players. Considering that this is probably the least toxic administration we've had to date, that's a tragedy.

Staff has been discussing stuff. You said that they do it for ages of hassling and hours of disagreement.

Rivean wrote:A more practical response to this question is, going back to my last post, we shouldn't NEED to have walls of text. We shouldn't NEED to have to repeat things over and over again, and argue about them for hours. We should be able to sit down, like adults, and say, 'What do you think of this?' and then the response should be given the consideration it's due, dispassionately, rationally, and objectively.

Again, I'm sure that your opinions are all very rational and none of the staff's decisions have been because, as I said earlier, you are clearly the big decider here abouts.

Rivean wrote:You should not have to read walls of texts because you should be able to recognize simple flaws when they're pointed out to you.

You posts walls of text. Repeatedly. Often with little information on hand before making a decision.

Rivean wrote:What you fail to appreciate is that this is not a criticism of your policy. This is a criticism of the fact that the staff is still displaying a regrettable level of instability, shooting from the hip, and adhocism.

Probably. It's a new MUD run by volunteers not a corporation with decades of decision making behind and policy it.

Rivean wrote:What you don't realize is that this is a pattern. Staff says X, staff does Y. Would you like a list of all the instances in which this has happened? Would you like, for example, to reopen that giant can of worms about special apps and staff allowing them even though it was explicitly said this wasn't allowed? I can name several other instances.

Considering how much worse it could be, I'd say it was a step in the right direction if these are the best examples you can come up with.

Rivean wrote:All of which ultimately means that I, as a player, cannot trust you to do what you say, or to hold yourselves accountable to any policy that you have committed yourselves to. Yes, it's unprofessional. No, it doesn't inspire confidence. It's really that simple.


Not to be personally insulting or anything, buy you, as a player in the gameworld, do very little. You as a forum poster, however, post a lot. Sometimes it is valid, most of the time it's got a kernel of truth buried in it, and sometimes it's based on that's like just your opinion, man, prettied up in a bunch of rhetoric.

Rivean wrote:Respectfully, this is not a particularly helpful thing to say to anyone, particularly somebody who has complaints. Plainly, you must realize, that if you had been administrating this game to my satisfaction, I would not be having this discussion with you - nor would all of those people who have complained in the past, for whatever reason.

If you care enough to continue posting, either you're a glutton for punishment or you realize the situation is not that bad and the capability for the staff to change exists...a staff that was asking for volunteers a couple of months ago...where were you then?

Rivean wrote:I don't really think this is a matter of subjective opinion. Staff have made decisions in the past, after feedback they have gone back on them. Assuming that they went back on those decisions because they realized they were bad decisions (and not, for example, simply to make someone happy, and quit complaining), this shows that feedback has been necessary. It's not a subjective thing, it's simply a fact. Will staff need feedback in the future? Maybe, maybe not (probably yes), but clearly 'adopting our own policies and adhering to them as best suits or style of administrating' without feedback would have been a bad idea.


Opinions are, by the nature of the word, subjective. Staff have gone back on decisions. That is a fact. You are giving them feedback now. They're replying to it.

Rivean wrote:The point is that any given player pointing out that you've done a 'cruddy job' via walls of text does not mean that the player is wrong and can safely be ignored.

It depends on the player. Most of them are idiots.

Rivean wrote:A more practical response to this question is, going back to my last post, we shouldn't NEED to have walls of text. We shouldn't NEED to have to repeat things over and over again, and argue about them for hours. We should be able to sit down, like adults, and say, 'What do you think of this?' and then the response should be given the consideration it's due, dispassionately, rationally, and objectively.

Send me a postcard from this Utopia you build.

Rivean wrote:I don't know what sort of mud you intend to create with an idea like that, but if a 'reduction of hostility/toxicity' is your aim (as many admins have stated), then I can virtually guarantee you that such a policy will bring about the exact opposite result.

Honestly, this seems like a metaargument about policy instead of a complaint about a specific policy at this point. I'm a little shaky as to what we're complaining about. I think it was the player forum thread in response to the board policy? The boards have become more boring since that was made, so I'm going to assume that the policy is working.
someguy
Forum Hobbit
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 2:05 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:00 am

likui wrote:Stuff


I absolutely agree that what we've been doing so far in terms of communication has been patently not helpful. I do think things need to change in some way for this to be fixed, and I've made some suggestions above in that vein.

MrDvAnt wrote:Stuff


Having given this another think, I find myself disagreeing with your position even more. I'm a player (or was anyway) in this game. You are an administrator (or are for the sake of this argument). There are things that I feel are negatively affecting my experience, or policies that you have implemented are having a detrimental affect on my experience - I should not bring this up? How do you envision this working out in practice, how should this situation be dealt with?

Holmes wrote:Stuff


That's not particularly encouraging. Why don't you guys let me run this thing for a couple of months? It's usually a good idea to get people who are critical of you to see if they can do a better job.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby MrDvAnt » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:05 am

tehkory wrote:
MrDvAnt wrote:I stand by my statement that a play-tester's job is to help refine code, not policy.

Head Staff have publicly stated that the policies of the MUD itself are in an alpha state. How you can tell is that the moderation policy is three days old and the MUD itself four or more.



Yes. You're very close here. The incorrect assumption is that those policies that are in alpha are a collaboration. The only real effect a player should expect to have on policy is when their poor behavior forces new rules to be made to prevent such behavior. You don't go to work at your hourly, where you volunteer your time in exchange for money, and expect to be able to change the company policies just because they don't suit you.

Edited because apparently my fingers utilize autocomplete when I type. No idea how I typed "shoulder" instead of "should".
Last edited by MrDvAnt on Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
MrDvAnt
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 12:55 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:06 am

someguy wrote:[General disapproval of everything Rivean]


I'm not sure exactly what the point of your post was. Could you please try and distill your personal dislike for me and tell us what your point is, exactly?
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby EltanimRas » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:18 am

someguy wrote:
Rivean wrote:I don't know what sort of mud you intend to create with an idea like that, but if a 'reduction of hostility/toxicity' is your aim (as many admins have stated), then I can virtually guarantee you that such a policy will bring about the exact opposite result.

Honestly, this seems like a metaargument about policy instead of a complaint about a specific policy at this point.

Yes, it's a meta-argument about policy. More specifically, it's a meta-argument about the relationship between published policy and admin discretion, especially when said published policy makes no mention of discretionary exceptions.
User avatar
EltanimRas
Master Ent
 
Posts: 609
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 5:52 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Rivean » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:20 am

EltanimRas wrote:Yes, it's a meta-argument about policy. More specifically, it's a meta-argument about the relationship between published policy and admin discretion, especially when said published policy makes no mention of discretionary exceptions.


That WAS the argument anyway. Now we seem to be having, with compliments to Messrs Fulgrim and MrDvant, an argument about when players should voice their dissatisfaction with policy, if ever, and at what point, if any, there ought to be some expectation of change. I believe the current position on those questions is 'none' and 'never' respectively.

ETA: There's also a long rant in there by someguy about how much I suck, but that's not news to anyone so we're letting that one slip by uncontested.
User avatar
Rivean
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:53 am

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby tehkory » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:23 am

MrDvAnt wrote:
tehkory wrote:
MrDvAnt wrote:I stand by my statement that a play-tester's job is to help refine code, not policy.

Head Staff have publicly stated that the policies of the MUD itself are in an alpha state. How you can tell is that the moderation policy is three days old and the MUD itself four or more.



Yes. You're very close here. The incorrect assumption is that those policies that are in alpha are a collaboration. The only real effect a player shoulder expect to have on policy is when their poor behavior forces new rules to be made to prevent such behavior. You don't go to work at your hourly, where you volunteer your time in exchange for money, and expect to be able to change the company policies just because they don't suit you.


Again, you reach outside of the realm of what applies to make a poor analogy. These are nonsequitors. Playing an RPI is not professional game development. Playing an RPI is not going to work. It does not follow that it is anything like your conclusions because it is nothing like any of your beginnings. This is about the lessons learned from otherMUDs, and how rules mean nothing if Staff don't have the ability to follow them.

Every and anon it seems I must say; SoI needs standards, because Icarus will bow out. Frigga will quit. Fulgrim will resign. Tomorrow we will have different Staff. We need Staff to set example for the MUD's future, or we're setting ourselves up for mistakes and abuses.
tehkory
Master Ent
 
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:21 pm

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Hawkwind » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:28 am

The longer this goes on the faster you will drive away both players and staff. Same with the other threads, attitudes need to change from the players, staff are doing their utmost to create a welcoming, engaging game for us. Yeah, there have been mistakes but now is the time for them, do not rip the admin apart for something pointless.

Seriously Riv, if you are going go go. Or do not. Just end the cancerous posts.
JESUS CHRIST, THE HELIUM!
PS4 Handle - Roadhawkes
Tags Taken: Eru I, Mavinero I.
User avatar
Hawkwind
Honored Elf
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 8:46 am
Location: Volga Matushka

Re: Farewell For Now

Postby Taurgalas » Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:30 am

To Holmes: Actually, I think it has. I mean there's still argument, still tossed ideas and a lot of discussion, but we tend to be (mostly) in synch. There's a lot more collaberation, ideas and effort division, responsibility and recognition within our small group.

I think, however, a huge key term is small group. We are. We're volunteers with school, work and families. We don't just dedicate a couple hours a day. We dedicate days. It's slow going because we're only a few. Everyone wants, nobody is satisfied and nothing is good enough. We know it's rough and it has and will take a lot of work, but instant adjustments no matter how clear it is to one player, are reprehensible to another five and have significant impact on existing systems and/or systems halfway finished.

And all of that is outside of policy decisions. I understand the desire to have things exactly how you want them, but try TRY to sometimes cut us a little slack? We can't do it all. We can't please everyone. Some days (most, actually) we count ourselves lucky if we can please anyone. At all. We aren't in it for money, or even thanks, but it would be nice for our players to try to sometimes afford us the understanding we try to afford them. Nobody has said don't ask things of us or don't make suggestions or even criticisms. All we ask is for a little politeness and respect. On both sides.
[Petition:***] Why is there a pretty pink pony with doe eyes and a party-balloon cutie mark in the group?

*** orc player name edited out for his/her own protection.
User avatar
Taurgalas
Master Ent
 
Posts: 660
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 1:07 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

cron

Connect

FacebookTwitter

Login

Who is online

Amazing people browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Login