Armageddon Community should make a stronger effort to stop witch-hunting twinks.

[UnderSeven]

I just want to point out that I think this thread is only really serving to lower the enjoyment people get out of the game without itself being directly related to the game at all.  There is a lot of grey area, poorly defined arguements which will mean different things to different people and raise general dissatisfaction.  What is the problem with that you ask?  Well the point of Armageddon, to me, is to have a good time.  That is the only reason I login and play.  Therefore anything that increases my overall enjoyment I think of as good and anything that decreases it I think of as bad.  

I probably won't post in this thread again, so pointing out that I should probably leave this thread alone is already noted.  But my ultimate point is I think each and every individual should really look at this and think, is this making me happier or less happy and if it isn't making me happy why am I doing it?

This thread is full of bitterness and unhappiness and I don't think it's even grounded on any foundation.  Moe makes excellent points because if you are experiencing a building level of frustration or anger after reading a few posts, and the meaning of those arguements are not clearly defined than you're basically working yourself up over nothing.

Lets have fun and not worry so much stuff.

Don't worry.  Be happy.

Also, Moe, will you marry me?

[Marauder Moe]

Jobs which require interaction with other players fail miserably when there aren't enough players around.  I say it's fine that we have options to allow off-peakers and loners to make money.  Also, I doubt very many of them perform said jobs when there are PCs around to interact with.


Back on laundry again... OK, how about this: stop thinking of dirty clothes as a coded hindrance but rather as a coded tool.  This is generally how I see it.

Some people do indeed choose not to make heavy use of it and will simply dust themselves off and continue with their day (and I think this is perfectly fine).  I don't think it's a huge inconvenience to people, but I think removing it (or creating an option to be immune to it) could create a disconnect between the information people receive from the game and the realities of the world.

For others, it's a helpful reminder that Zalanthas is a dirty, sandy place.  It help them remember to take that into account with their actions, and immerse themselves in a world where people often do have to clean themselves up every single time they come inside.  Some take it even further and like being codedly marked as the dirty, smelly scum that they're trying to portray.

[Dakurus]

I will say, Staggerlee posted more along the lines of what I was imagining.
Merits of code authority
Merits of player roleplay authority

Situational examples/discuss/arguing can go on forever, because the situations are endless.

[Lizzie]

Heh I love the dirt code. It gives fancy people a built-in excuse to criticize unfancy people, and unfancy people a built-in excuse to criticize fancy people.

It also gives people a more believable reason to mine salt, gives a more tangeable result from it than just a few sids at a shop. It also performs as a money-sink, providing a reason to buy and use soap and cleaning solution. It also makes the soap-making skill useful for something other than just another pointless but interesting piece of fluff 8-byte game code packet floating around the internet. It gives Bynners, Kurac Fists, and Soldiers of all sorts, something to DO every Dzeda afternoon when it's time for cleaning your stuff, with results a roleplay-freak AND a code-junkie can enjoy.

It gives people a *code-supported* reason to interact and roleplay with each other. I think that's kinda the whole point of having a RPI hybrid mush/hack-n-slash.

[Marauder Moe]

This thread is full of bitterness and unhappiness and I don't think it's even grounded on any foundation.  Moe makes excellent points because if you are experiencing a building level of frustration or anger after reading a few posts, and the meaning of those arguements are not clearly defined than you're basically working yourself up over nothing.

Lets have fun and not worry so much stuff.

Don't worry.  Be happy.

Quite right!

I very much believe that the vast majority of complaints people have about the game (and many things in real life, actually) are all problems with perspective.  When you stand between the walls of code and roleplay emote, you believe they are opposites.  Rise above, and you will see that they are but two walls of the same house (along with the walls of Staff and Community).  Weakening one weakens the whole game.  Also realize that you are not alone in this house of Armageddon.  Some like the view from the east face, some like the view from the west.  They may argue about which is prettier, but let us all remember that we all agree that it is a beautiful and wonderful house.

Also, Moe, will you marry me?

I'm just gettin' started, baby.   

[Comrade Canadia]

I think I'll retire my stand in this thread (for real this time) as I think I've done my best to clarify my admittedly inarticulate arguments. Also, pelase understand that I'm currently enjoying the game, and although I can get frustrated all to hell like any other player, I'm certainly not bitter. I just enjoy arguing. My goal in getting this argument going was to look at some aspects of the game which aren't often discussed and see what people thought about them, which I think succeeded as much as it can on the GDB.

Moe - I absolutely understand what you're arguing, and it's the best clarification of why this code is a good thing I've seen. I still think the way it has affected how we deal with clothes has been somewhat more negative than positive. It does remind us about how dirty Zalanthas is, but it also has us doing laundry in a fashion I find to be silly and unrealistic. It'd just make more sense for me ot keep cleaning clothes as a virtual (or occasionally acted out) activity, and place the onus on players to bring the world alive by emoting with their clothes. Tools for roleplay are wonderful thing and the reason why RPI muds rock so much, but they're not necessary in every case.

That said, I'm done! Anyone who wants last word on me go nuts.  

[Marauder Moe]

Moe - I absolutely understand what you're arguing, and it's the best clarification of why this code is a good thing I've seen. I still think the way it has affected how we deal with clothes has been somewhat more negative than positive. It does remind us about how dirty Zalanthas is, but it also has us doing laundry in a fashion I find to be silly and unrealistic.

Who is "us"?  Is it you?  Or is it other people?

If it's you, then emote doing it more realistically.

If it's other people, I think you should try not to worry so much about other people's activities, particularly ones like cleaning that have such little bearing on your own game experience.

It'd just make more sense for me ot keep cleaning clothes as a virtual (or occasionally acted out) activity, and place the onus on players to bring the world alive by emoting with their clothes.

Then that puts you in the first class of tool-user.  Like I said, it's not a big deal if you just want to clean your clothes without making it into a big event.  You really don't even have to emote if you don't want to (assuming you're out of sight).

Tools for roleplay are wonderful thing and the reason why RPI muds rock so much, but they're not necessary in every case.

What is necessary, then?  Why not strip down Arm into just an IRC chatroom?  On the other side, who's saying that every case does need coded tools?  We don't have tools for for PC pooping.  We don't have tools for shaving and grooming in general. 

Are you saying that coded tools are never necessary?  Or that one or more specific tools that we have should be taken away?  If the latter, then I think those should be addressed on a case-by-case basis rather than lumping them together into one big messy generality and throwing it at a philosophical debate.

[a strange shadow]

FWIW, I'm in Comrade and Staggerlee's camp.

They said everything I could hope to, though. I suggest reading their posts without the lens of "bitter player" over it - I don't think it's bitterness at all that fuels their debates, it's an enjoyment of the game (despite observations of its flaws), and a desire to see it grow even better.

Also, someone PLEASE edit the title of this thread. It makes me think dirty thoughts.

[Gimfalisette]

FWIW, I'm in Comrade and Staggerlee's camp.

Ditto, to the rest of what she said as well.

[Synthesis]

I don't see what the big deal is.  Personally, I find practicing skills to be enjoyable.  However, much of the game is coded in such a barebones fashion that you can get away with some pretty ridiculous shit and offer only a hand wave as justification for it.

The things that break my immersion have nothing to do with the "practicing skills" definition of twinking. Rather, it's the "doing unrealistic things" definition of twinking. It's the silly things like apartments that people can break into with virtual impunity, the fact that you can murder people in apartments without anybody ever finding out, the fact you can sneak into clan compounds and murder people in the barracks and sneak out without anyone ever finding out, the fact that someone can flee from you after failing a backstab on you and basically be invisible, even though you would've been chasing after them, the fact that someone can be three leagues away by the time you recover from a failed bash, the fact that someone can subdue you while you have weapons out and you're watching them, the fact that someone can charge through a fireball at you and keep swinging away like nothing happened, the fact that seven foot elves can sneak up on you across a flat, barren plain, and on, and on, and on....

I sincerely hope that the code in 2.arm is robust enough to prevent such silliness.  If you attack someone in an apartment and don't kill or incapacitate them within a few strikes, guards should come in and break it up.  If you're in an apartment building and fail any sneak or hide check versus a guard, you should get crim-flagged for it, even if you're a resident.  It should be virtually impossible to hide from someone who you were just within knife-range of if they are still actively pursuing you.  If you have weapons out, it should take a half-giant or a bona fide ninja to put you in the type of incapacitated state that subdue represents.  If you take a fireball to the face, it should put you on the ground, writhing in agony...and the last thing you should be thinking is whether or not you can get a solid enough hit on that 'gicker to reel him.  If you're on a flat, barren plain, sneaking shouldn't even be possible.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

So, code forces you to clean your clothes but not RP out the cleaning. So what? Would forced emotes make it better? I mean, like, you could not enter a command without a command emote attached?

Because I don't think I'd mind that sorta requirement, but realistically, I also don't think it's that important. If they don't emote, then they don't. Set an example and move on. It's hard to judge what RP is and what Twinking is. You could say a college student cramming for his exam is twinking ... but that's RP too, isn't it, because he's got a goal.

[Ghost]

FWIW, I'm in Comrade and Staggerlee's camp.

Ditto

me three

[Ampere]

I don't see what the big deal is.  Personally, I find practicing skills to be enjoyable.  However, much of the game is coded in such a barebones fashion that you can get away with some pretty ridiculous shit and offer only a hand wave as justification for it.

The things that break my immersion have nothing to do with the "practicing skills" definition of twinking. Rather, it's the "doing unrealistic things" definition of twinking. It's the silly things like apartments that people can break into with virtual impunity, the fact that you can murder people in apartments without anybody ever finding out, the fact you can sneak into clan compounds and murder people in the barracks and sneak out without anyone ever finding out, the fact that someone can flee from you after failing a backstab on you and basically be invisible, even though you would've been chasing after them, the fact that someone can be three leagues away by the time you recover from a failed bash, the fact that someone can subdue you while you have weapons out and you're watching them, the fact that someone can charge through a fireball at you and keep swinging away like nothing happened, the fact that seven foot elves can sneak up on you across a flat, barren plain, and on, and on, and on....

I sincerely hope that the code in 2.arm is robust enough to prevent such silliness.  If you attack someone in an apartment and don't kill or incapacitate them within a few strikes, guards should come in and break it up.  If you're in an apartment building and fail any sneak or hide check versus a guard, you should get crim-flagged for it, even if you're a resident.  It should be virtually impossible to hide from someone who you were just within knife-range of if they are still actively pursuing you.  If you have weapons out, it should take a half-giant or a bona fide ninja to put you in the type of incapacitated state that subdue represents.  If you take a fireball to the face, it should put you on the ground, writhing in agony...and the last thing you should be thinking is whether or not you can get a solid enough hit on that 'gicker to reel him.  If you're on a flat, barren plain, sneaking shouldn't even be possible.

These are all awesome suggestions --- and fall under the category of mediator.  The fact that this sort of behaviour isn't penalized has ground my lens to this deplorable perspective --- code has the final say.  There are three routes as I see it, the first is to code all of the above, the second is to penalize those who take advantage of the code at the cost of the story, and the third would be to ACTIVELY reward those who show some f**king respect to the god of the plausible.  Something here is broken, that much is obvious.

[Salt Merchant]

which is often deemed undesirable by members of the community.

This should read "often deemed undesirable by -some- members of the community".

Some people enjoy the achievement and exploration aspects of the game along with the social aspects. So long as they stay within the bounds of realism, I don't see what the problem is.

Without the code backing, there'd be no sense of achievement. No sense of having survived difficult odds out in the harsh environment. No sense of having wrenched a living from the land. No thrill at realizing those scrabs that have always kicked your ass are about to have the table turned on them.

All there would be is flowery emotes, quickly forgotten.

There's already a lot of pressure on independents to join clans and be reined in. Do we really want to tighten things up further this way?

[Ampere]

which is often deemed undesirable by members of the community.

This should read often deemed undesirable by -some- members of the community.

Some people enjoy the achievement and exploration aspects of the game along with the social aspects. So long as they stay within the bounds of realism, I don't see what the problem is.

There's already a lot of pressure on independents to join clans and be reined in. Do we really want to tighten things up further this way?

Mhmm?  You do realize that your edit was rendundant, and the sentence in question already meant that?

[jhunter]

I don't see what the big deal is.  Personally, I find practicing skills to be enjoyable.  However, much of the game is coded in such a barebones fashion that you can get away with some pretty ridiculous shit and offer only a hand wave as justification for it.

The things that break my immersion have nothing to do with the "practicing skills" definition of twinking. Rather, it's the "doing unrealistic things" definition of twinking. It's the silly things like apartments that people can break into with virtual impunity, the fact that you can murder people in apartments without anybody ever finding out, the fact you can sneak into clan compounds and murder people in the barracks and sneak out without anyone ever finding out, the fact that someone can flee from you after failing a backstab on you and basically be invisible, even though you would've been chasing after them, the fact that someone can be three leagues away by the time you recover from a failed bash, the fact that someone can subdue you while you have weapons out and you're watching them, the fact that someone can charge through a fireball at you and keep swinging away like nothing happened, the fact that seven foot elves can sneak up on you across a flat, barren plain, and on, and on, and on....

I sincerely hope that the code in 2.arm is robust enough to prevent such silliness.  If you attack someone in an apartment and don't kill or incapacitate them within a few strikes, guards should come in and break it up.  If you're in an apartment building and fail any sneak or hide check versus a guard, you should get crim-flagged for it, even if you're a resident.  It should be virtually impossible to hide from someone who you were just within knife-range of if they are still actively pursuing you.  If you have weapons out, it should take a half-giant or a bona fide ninja to put you in the type of incapacitated state that subdue represents.  If you take a fireball to the face, it should put you on the ground, writhing in agony...and the last thing you should be thinking is whether or not you can get a solid enough hit on that 'gicker to reel him.  If you're on a flat, barren plain, sneaking shouldn't even be possible.

These are all awesome suggestions --- and fall under the category of mediator.  The fact that this sort of behaviour isn't penalized has ground my lens to this deplorable perspective --- code has the final say.  There are three routes as I see it, the first is to code all of the above, the second is to penalize those who take advantage of the code at the cost of the story, and the third would be to ACTIVELY reward those who show some f**king respect to the god of the plausible.  Something here is broken, that much is obvious.

I agree with most of this except for being crim flagged for failing a sneak in an apartment building if you are a resident. Sneaking is also merely blending in to your surroundings, there is a such thing as hiding in plain sight. A guard might notice you when you're trying not to be noticed but it doesn't mean that the guard -knows- that is the case. Especially if you live in the building anyway.
I would agree more with a -chance- in front of very intelligent or suspicious guards that being the case, but it would be unrealistic to turn them all into perfect mind-readers or have them all suffer from extreme paranoia. That's making the situation suck just as bad but in the opposite direction.

And the "flat, barren plain" thing, well that should be truly rare areas that likely folks wouldn't be spending much time on anyway. Like the Salt Flats in the current game...and that's about it.

[Salt Merchant]

Mhmm?  You do realize that your edit was rendundant, and the sentence in question already meant that?

I've found it's necessary to make things really, really clear on this board to avoid misinterpretation. Even then, you get replies from people who obviously haven't read past the first sentence.

[Salt Merchant]

The notion of "player roleplay authority over code" summons up nightmarish visions.

A perfect example of the problem this creates is the roleplaying of wounds. The code lets you heal quickly from near-death. Many have chosen to roleplay out being wounded instead. The difficulty here is a lack of consistency in just what means being wounded. I've seen everything from the "sleep and I'm alright" approach up to the "I've lost a body organ and will never be the same" approach. With attendant OOC debates and snipings on the GDB. This is what ruins the immersion for me; the sense that no matter what I do, someone will be bitching about it, if only to themselves.

No consensus has ever been reached. This is what happens when players try to rule over the code. And it adds an additional impediment to new players in that they can't see the invisible rules the player base has imposed on itself.

The code base is not, and will never be, a perfect moderator. But the code base, backed by the staff preventing the worse abuses, works far better for me than the sort of "player moderator" system I've seen on MUSHes. Gah, just the thought of having to go through that and the interruption in IC play it represents curdles my gut. Even more so the potential for OOC arguments breaking out in-game and the volleys of player complaints that would fly back and forth.

Just no thanks. That is all.

[HTX]

A perfect example of the problem this creates is the roleplaying of wounds. The code lets you heal quickly from near-death.

Tell me about it. This brings back memories of one of my characters been yelled at by his Sergeant because I was hesitant to "sleep off" fairly grievous wounds after a large-scale battle, because it just felt wrong to me. That, among other things which the code unrealistically didn't cover at the end of the battle, left me pretty pissed off IRL (though I don't blame the Sergeant in question) and 'disconnected'/jarred from the game which was a shame because the rest of the RPT was absolutely incredible.

The current state of the game (a mixture of code and staff intervention in very extreme cases) seems all right to me so far, though as mentioned above there are certain situations where even more code could, IMO, improve things. I've never had any of these "anti-twink" coded measures really affect me in recent memory so there's no complaints here.

[RogueGunslinger]

FWIW, I'm in Comrade and Staggerlee's camp.

Ditto

me three

I'm with this side of reasoning. 

[LoD]

RPI MUSH  ------- <level of authority held by code> ------- HACK and SLASH
                                        <-- ^ -->

I don't ever want to find Armageddon at either end of this spectrum, yet some people seem to expect that a sea of individuals comprised of varied ages, varied RP backgrounds, varied tastes, varied hours to play, varied access to play, and varied opinions on game philosophy will eventually agree on where the " ^ " should be positioned for the optimal RP experience.

The simple answer is that will never happen.  Armageddon has been, and always will be, in a state of flux between these two extremes based on what the current team of Staff members decides to implement, experiment with, or try -- partially based on whim, partially based on internal discussion, and partially based on player discussion.

I find many of the suggestions for increasing RP potential by lessening the authority held by code to be "pie-in-the-sky" illusions that don't bring solutions, only different problems.  It's easy to espouse the benefits and superiority of a theoretical system, but I'm not convinced that the proposed line of thinking will provide us with any more enjoyable of an environment when considering the "whole" of the player base.

Off peak players, fluctuating distribution of player resources, the relative size of the game world, the historical blend of code and RP, and many other factors directly contribute to the sustained balance between code-generated results and player-generated results.  Many of the suggestions seem to be aimed at increasing an individual enjoyment based on an individual belief of what Armageddon should be rather than taking what everyone enjoys and trying to find a compromise.

Personally, I find the hard-coded aspects of the game a refreshing and necessary part of the experience, allowing me to follow a variety of paths and options when pursuing my character's and my personal goals.  I enjoy exploring and experimenting with the code, and feel rewarded when I make discoveries, achieve milestones, or have coded success.  Likewise, I enjoy interacting and playing with other people, and feel rewarded when I contribute to a good scene, am able to persuade someone based purely on my own RP, or have success with something that cannot be achieved through code alone.  There have been times when my success has hinged upon purely coded support, and other times when it's hinged upon purely RP support.  It's the compromise of the two, and the allowances that come with that compromise, that have always provided me with the greatest level of enjoyment over the years.

I, for one, hope that balance always stays.

-LoD

[staggerlee]

RPI MUSH  ------- <level of authority held by code> ------- HACK and SLASH
                                       <-- ^ -->

I don't ever want to find Armageddon at either end of this spectrum, yet some people seem to expect that a sea of individuals comprised of varied ages, varied RP backgrounds, varied tastes, varied hours to play, varied access to play, and varied opinions on game philosophy will eventually agree on where the " ^ " should be positioned for the optimal RP experience.

The simple answer is that will never happen.  Armageddon has been, and always will be, in a state of flux between these two extremes based on what the current team of Staff members decides to implement, experiment with, or try -- partially based on whim, partially based on internal discussion, and partially based on player discussion.

I find many of the suggestions for increasing RP potential by lessening the authority held by code to be "pie-in-the-sky" illusions that don't bring solutions, only different problems.  It's easy to espouse the benefits and superiority of a theoretical system, but I'm not convinced that the proposed line of thinking will provide us with any more enjoyable of an environment when considering the "whole" of the player base.

Off peak players, fluctuating distribution of player resources, the relative size of the game world, the historical blend of code and RP, and many other factors directly contribute to the sustained balance between code-generated results and player-generated results.  Many of the suggestions seem to be aimed at increasing an individual enjoyment based on an individual belief of what Armageddon should be rather than taking what everyone enjoys and trying to find a compromise.

Personally, I find the hard-coded aspects of the game a refreshing and necessary part of the experience, allowing me to follow a variety of paths and options when pursuing my character's and my personal goals.  I enjoy exploring and experimenting with the code, and feel rewarded when I make discoveries, achieve milestones, or have coded success.  Likewise, I enjoy interacting and playing with other people, and feel rewarded when I contribute to a good scene, am able to persuade someone based purely on my own RP, or have success with something that cannot be achieved through code alone.  There have been times when my success has hinged upon purely coded support, and other times when it's hinged upon purely RP support.  It's the compromise of the two, and the allowances that come with that compromise, that have always provided me with the greatest level of enjoyment over the years.

I, for one, hope that balance always stays.

-LoD

I understand what you're saying, and that the root of it is that you like the MUD. I've heard a similar sentiment expressed by others in this thread, with varying levels of snarkiness.
Where you're losing me is, why does that mean concerned individuals can't critique the game's structures or propose changes? If the game is constantly in a state of flux, as you assert, than isn't it possible to push it in a direction that you find favorable?

I'm not saying that I, or anyone else in this thread, has done a very good job of wooing the staff and convincing them of our wisdom. But what does "I like the MUD and all its silly blessings and flaws" add to a critical discussion about its content and structure?

I know you've got a right to express your views, I'm just singling you out because you're the most eloquent of a series of people to express that sentiment.
There's a lot of hostility to change on these forums sometimes. As good as the game can be, it'd be a shame if it missed opportunities to grow and evolve. There's a lot more room for dialogue and cooperation on the part of the player base. Sure nobody is going to "win," but we could at least be working toward something positive.

I don't think this is as simple as "more or less" code, though a vocal minority seems intent on conflating the two. It's a shame that the nuances of the discussion were lost in the bickering and nay saying.

which is often deemed undesirable by members of the community.

This should read "often deemed undesirable by -some- members of the community".

Some people enjoy the achievement and exploration aspects of the game along with the social aspects. So long as they stay within the bounds of realism, I don't see what the problem is.

Without the code backing, there'd be no sense of achievement. No sense of having survived difficult odds out in the harsh environment. No sense of having wrenched a living from the land. No thrill at realizing those scrabs that have always kicked your ass are about to have the table turned on them.

All there would be is flowery emotes, quickly forgotten.

There's already a lot of pressure on independents to join clans and be reined in. Do we really want to tighten things up further this way?

You quoted half of a sentence, took it out of context, and used it to horribly misrepresent my argument. Please don't do that.

[Thunkkin]

I can't say it as well as LoD and Salt Merchant, but I agree.

[jhunter]

RPI MUSH  ------- <level of authority held by code> ------- HACK and SLASH
                                       <-- ^ -->

I don't ever want to find Armageddon at either end of this spectrum, yet some people seem to expect that a sea of individuals comprised of varied ages, varied RP backgrounds, varied tastes, varied hours to play, varied access to play, and varied opinions on game philosophy will eventually agree on where the " ^ " should be positioned for the optimal RP experience.

The simple answer is that will never happen.  Armageddon has been, and always will be, in a state of flux between these two extremes based on what the current team of Staff members decides to implement, experiment with, or try -- partially based on whim, partially based on internal discussion, and partially based on player discussion.

I find many of the suggestions for increasing RP potential by lessening the authority held by code to be "pie-in-the-sky" illusions that don't bring solutions, only different problems.  It's easy to espouse the benefits and superiority of a theoretical system, but I'm not convinced that the proposed line of thinking will provide us with any more enjoyable of an environment when considering the "whole" of the player base.

rd
Personally, I find the hard-coded aspects of the game a refreshing and necessary part of the experience, allowing me to follow a variety of paths and options when pursuing my character's and my personal goals.  I enjoy exploring and experimenting with the code, and feel rewarded when I make discoveries, achieve milestones, or have coded success.  Likewise, I enjoy interacting and playing with other people, and feel rewarded when I contribute to a good scene, am able to persuade someone based purely on my own RP, or have success with something that cannot be achieved through code alone.  There have been times when my success has hinged upon purely coded support, and other times when it's hinged upon purely RP support.  It's the compromise of the two, and the allowances that come with that compromise, that have always provided me with the greatest level of enjoyment over the years.

I, for one, hope that balance always stays.

-LoD

I agree. For me personally the changes are starting to overbalance toward the overcoding direction and have been the last couple years. Some people will disagree but it is starting to turn me away from the game and harm my enjoyment of it after all these years. I thought the balance was nearly perfect a few years ago.

[LoD]

I understand what you're saying, and that the root of it is that you like the MUD. I've heard a similar sentiment expressed by others in this thread, with varying levels of snarkiness. Where you're losing me is, why does that mean concerned individuals can't critique the game's structures or propose changes? If the game is constantly in a state of flux, as you assert, than isn't it possible to push it in a direction that you find favorable?

I intended to convey a dual message; one message being that I enjoyed the current state and why, and the second message being that I (and you, and everyone else) are only one part of a complex composition that has admittedly different tastes, expectations, wants and wishes.  It's certainly possible, and extremely natural, for you to push the agenda that most positively impacts your subset of wants and needs -- it's what most of us do, myself included.

However, we need to be cognizant that pushing the game in one direction requires it to give in another area, at least if you are approaching the issues without much thought to compromise.

Both sides of the fence could benefit from giving a little and understanding that catering to both sides is not only helpful, but, ultimately, necessary, and that the most successful solution will be one that compromises between the two rather than attempting to pursue one ideal over the other.  That's the point I was trying to make -- criticisms, suggestions, and ideas spawning too far to the left or right are too easy to discard or ignore.

It isn't that people shouldn't express opinions, or shouldn't push their agenda, but that it would be optimal if they would consider both sides of the coin, or tailor their suggestions to take the opposite viewpoint into account and express why they feel both sides of the coin win as a result.

I'd like to see less, "I want..." and more "We could really benefit from...".  Some people seem to think the benefit is obvious, but ideas might be more readily discussed and accepted if they were presented in a way that made it obvious to both sides what would be gained and lost.

Player A might suggest, "I think we should do away with coded resource gathering, such as obsidian mines, because it requires absolutely no interaction with other players and isn't supporting my idea of optimal RP."

Player B might suggest, "I think we should keep coded resource gathering exactly the way it is."

Player C might suggest a compromise, "I would like to see more benefits granted to players who interact while gathering hard-coded resources to promote RP, conflict, and interaction.  Perhaps solo players could still be allowed to mine obsidian for small chunks, but the most valuable pieces required a team effort of 2-3 players that might lead to interesting arrangements, RP scenes, and increased interaction."

I didn't mean the finality in my tone to be associated with my likes/dislikes as much as with my belief that one-sided suggestions just won't find much purchase in a serious discussion about such a personal and touchy subject as this.

-LoD