Policy Discussion: 2011

[Saellyn]

... So in the situation he was RPing one thing but codedly doing another thing, basically?

[Nyr]

Roleplaying something diametrically opposite to coded skill pursuit, yes.  Cognitive dissonance is fine in many roles; roleplaying it is very difficult.  In some very specific instances, this can get you into weird situations in the virtual world.

[Nyr]

Finally, musashi, this was resolved in a staff complaint about 10 months ago.  You stated your opinions then.  I already knew how you felt about the matter before you detailed your post that pretty much restated that complaint.  Other staffers have been and were involved in the whole situation from start to finish.  I see you still don't agree with the situation, and probably won't ever agree that this was appropriate.  At some point, you'll need to let go.  Recognize that sometimes, your character will not have a happy ending.  This is shown in three of the top four rules for the game.

[musashi]

Send in a request containing each one, and I'll show you the story you're missing behind each one.  I'll post it publicly here if it is deemed old enough.  They can chime in here if they'd like, too.

I'll ask them. If they say it's alright I'll put their name in a request and send it to you.

But you don't have to show me, personally, the story behind each one. I already told you I'll take your word for it that there were extenuating circumstances in every case. I wasn't being sarcastic when I wrote that. Seriously, I'm taking your word for it.

But the other people might appreciate it if you shared your side of things with them on their particular situation. Whether it's handled privately or if they want to throw it up on the GDB, that's between you and them; I just wanted to make you aware that I am not the only player, as you said.

I'm sure all of our milage varies. I'm sure we all had unique circumstances. But the one common denominator was that our PC's had been around for a bit, had become fairly powerful, and then been railroaded into storage.

Again, I'll take your word for it that it's correlation and not causation.

You can't even speak to your own experience without bitterness or with any objectivity.  You brought up the situation, not me.  You have had this chip on your shoulder for almost a year.  I'm sorry you've taken it personally, but there's nothing else to discuss about it.  It's documented objectively how I put it, and we went over this about a year ago.

Nyr, seriously ... I am not bitter. I apologized to you via email for the snarkier things that I said to/about you during our correspondence back when this was all fresh. I was frustrated and angry at the time. My bad. I'm not anymore.

You did have a few options open to you as we brought the world to life around you; forced storage was not the only one available.

To be fair, you did tell me up front that even if my character managed to get out of the situation alive and with the goal he wanted (ie not being a magicker anymore) that he was still going to be stored. The choices were: Become [IC thing I'll leave out] and store. Stop the transformation and become mundane and store, or suicide.

As one of your immediate responses to us being involved was for you to max out a new spell in a few hours, we did make a determination that it would be more difficult for you to proceed in a manner that would be to your immediate liking (i.e., not death, or not storage).

It's not as if I immediately spamcast his new spell till it maxed out. He trained it via a daily schedule that staff knew about and gave the go ahead for.

It increased quickly because I was in between college semesters, with a lot of hours in a day to play.

Now that I think about it, that spell got taken back down from mon to wek by you when you had to fix something code-wise. I asked then if I was training it too fast. You told me not to worry about it.

In the end, you didn't even get force-stored, you suicided your PC, which was understandable given the events at the time.

I asked if I could suicide given the situation, and you told me that was alright, yes. But that's kind of a semantic point when the end result is the same.

It was a tragic scenario and overall, great roleplay--for the whole.  What brought up the virtual response?  Your roleplay and your coded pursuits did not match each other, and the virtual world reacted accordingly.  This doesn't mean you roleplayed badly, it just means that there were greater consequences to your actions than you expected.  I'm sorry you disagree with how the virtual world reacted, but it's not exactly your place to determine that.

I can't even come up with a slightly analogous scenario for this because of how specific your situation was.  You were hardly railroaded, though; you had choices.

It was a good run, and I enjoyed it despite getting upset at the end. I'm over it. Really.

The whole reason that we are even talking about this again, is because you said this was an incorrect understanding.

As I understand it, staff might, for whatever reason, make a plot for the player that results in their character being forced stored for whatever justification they feel like giving.

So I think it's more than there are extenuating circumstances, but they don't have to be that the player did anything wrong. It happens when staff decides it's going to happen.

I was replying to this question

I guess what I want to know is, if the character is played strictly to their biography, are they going to get stored when that last magickal skill hits "master" level, or are/will there be some extenuating circumstance that forces it because the player did something -really- bad that they shouldn't have done?

Meaning, is it level of power that forces storage, or a major break in the character that isn't supported ICly?

I was saying that it's neither A or B. Staff will not store you just for being powerful. But you also don't have to have done anything wrong either. It's an extenuating circumstances kind of thing that might result from a plot, and we don't get to decide how the virtual world reacts, so this kind of thing happens when staff decides it should happen. I mean isn't that ... basically what you just said?

[Nyr]

You'll have to forgive me: usually, when people talk to me about situations in which they feel staff have wronged them in the past, they aren't bringing them back up because they have changed their mind over time on them, or have let things go, or have new perspective on the scenario, etc.  I actually didn't read your e-mailed review of the situation until just now when you mentioned it (it was apparently sent earlier this week).  We use the request tool for a lot more now so there's less of a need to check e-mails for direct e-mail contact.  I appreciate the e-mail.  So with all that said, I'm sorry for attributing your posts here to butthurt! 

[Marauder Moe]

Everyone's happy again.

[Zoltan]

I'm sure all of our milage varies. I'm sure we all had unique circumstances. But the one common denominator was that our PC's had been around for a bit, had become fairly powerful, and then been railroaded into storage.

Again, I'll take your word for it that it's correlation and not causation.

Your original assertion is false. The only correlation here is "if you play a character for a long time, they may be codedly/politically powerful," not "powerful characters get force-stored". The fact that you're airing out these anonymous people's dirty laundry on the GDB implies some belligerence. All of this could have been stated plainly enough through the request tool, and it wouldn't have led to any details of your magicking character being posted. Don't pull a Glen Beck-ish "I'm just asking questions" sort of thing on Nyr. I have no reason to doubt that you aren't actually butthurt over what happened, but the nature, wording and leaning of these posts are passive-aggressive.

It all smacks of this staff vs. players crap that gets my goat sometimes when I speak to other players. It's not some vast conspiracy. The staff administrate the game and try to maintain some semblance of gameworld integrity. Sometimes concepts and plotlines can't work out due to that. And that's not even going into rule-breakers and the like. (Er, this paragraph isn't directed at you, Musashi, just venting.)

[Akaramu]

I'd just like to say one thing regarding forced storage: When it happens, does it really dramatically improve the situation for the playerbase overall? Has the force stored person caused harm to the game in a way that could not be resolved in any other way?

To elaborate and to build on the core point I see in Musashi's posts - I also have the impression that it is possible to have a character force stored without really having done anything wrong. That is what players disagree with so strongly.

Lacking a better example, let's pick up the situation described in Nyr's and Musashi's posts. An elementalist becomes horribly codedly powerful despite their background describing opposite goals. Was any serious harm done to the game or to other players? Was the stored character causing a significant extra workload for staff? I don't need an answer on these, I'm just putting the questions out there. Maybe this was the case, but the reasons were not explained clearly enough to the force stored PC's player? I also had a PC force stored years ago and quit for a year+ afterwards because staff did not tell me the true reason why it had to happen - I was only told 'We can see you don't enjoy this role', which was not true. I did enjoy the role, though not so much the interactions with the PC superior above me. I would not have emoragequit for a year if I had known the true reason behind the storage - which made a lot of sense.

Unlike some other games, we have a mature and intelligent community here. I believe that any player would accept forced storage without resentment if they were told that their character's continued existence would have been a serious threat to the game overall, to staff time or to the fun of uninvolved (not contributing to the problematic behavior) players. If none of these are true, then I don't understand why forced storage is ever necessary.

[musashi]

Zoltan ... if you ever compare me to Glenn Beck again ... I will come to your house. And I will cut you.  

Nyr, thanks.

If there was some passive-aggressive leanings in there as Zoltan suggested, it was probably because in the back of my head I was going "... What the f&#k is this dude's problem? I mailed him a few days ago about this!" Knowing you hadn't read it, yeah ... I can see why you jumped on me.

As for sending in a request with the names of the other folks. I'll PM them and tell them if they want to talk about it with you they should drop you a request and reference this thread as the reason. Or they can just post here if they're following it. Edit: Actually maybe not ... since that might stretch out the already somewhat looooong derail. The request tool's probably best.

[Synthesis]

Look, over there!

> hide

[Spice Spice Baby]

For what it's worth, any new players who are wondering, force storage is not actually as common as this thread might suggest.

It's possible to play your PC for RL years, amass plenty of wealth and power, and not get stored.

Or maybe I've just been lucky a time or two--or I got myself killed off before anyone could suggest storing. 

[Nyr]

but the nature, wording and leaning of these posts are passive-aggressive.

I went back to review why I'd think it was passive aggressive and I have to agree:  it wasn't really spelled out that well.  It did look to be passive aggressive.

As I understand it, staff might, for whatever reason, make a plot for the player that results in their character being forced stored for whatever justification they feel like giving.

I'll take your word for it.

These tend to make us on staff go "someone seems butthurt." 

Anyway, there are 4 to 6 players out there that believe they were railroaded into storage because...they've been around for a while and became fairly powerful...that's not why they were stored.  You're pointing out a singular common denominator that you have seen (they were around for a while and become powerful).  I can name several other reasons people have gotten force stored over the past 3-4 years:

templar role, inactive:  stored
noble role, inactive: stored
GMH role, inactive:  stored
T-noble role, kanking commoners and not reporting it in staff reports:  stored
tribal role, going against documentation after warnings:  stored
delf role, going against documentation after warnings:  stored
templar role, red robe, somewhat inactive, discussed with player and eventually went towards storage:  stored
noble role, promoted past certain point (with their understanding in advance):  stored
GMH role, being generally douchey to staff and annoying to deal with:  stored
magicker role, not reporting to staff after warnings, PKing high-profile folks without reports:  stored

These are just roles I know about from working around or working directly with them in which the storage was ultimately decided by staff hands, not those of the player.  This doesn't include absolutely ridiculous situations.

I'd just like to say one thing regarding forced storage: When it happens, does it really dramatically improve the situation for the playerbase overall?

In all of the above cases, I can unequivocally say "yes," but in some of the cases, it matters also how it affects staff.

Lacking a better example, let's pick up the situation described in Nyr's and Musashi's posts.

Actually, that points out something by itself.  Why can't you find a better example than a very specific instance regarding magick and the gameworld?

[valeria]

Lacking a better example, let's pick up the situation described in Nyr's and Musashi's posts. An elementalist becomes horribly codedly powerful despite their background describing opposite goals. Was any serious harm done to the game or to other players? Was the stored character causing a significant extra workload for staff?

I wasn't involved in this situation in any way.  But from what I understand from the back and forth, it wasn't about the PC's coded power, etc, even though the problem has been phrased in that way.  It was that X-thing would have happened ICly, and the staff was trying to enforce the game world on the player.  And then the character suicided, because the player felt they were going to be force-stored.  (I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem like the actual storage ever did happen.)  And it seems like there may have been misunderstandings on both sides.  But overall, I'm all for the staff enforcing IC consequences on characters, whether they're codedly powerful or not.  When the staff does stop enforcing IC 'reality' on players it DOES hurt the game and other players.  Speaking as a player.

Maybe this was the case, but the reasons were not explained clearly enough to the force stored PC's player? I also had a PC force stored years ago and quit for a year+ afterwards because staff did not tell me the true reason why it had to happen - I was only told 'We can see you don't enjoy this role', which was not true. ...

I have noticed a huge, huge improvement in player/staff communication lately.  And I'm only talking about within the last year.  About a year ago, I was extremely frustrated with staff, because I was getting told 'no' on some things I wanted to do and from my perspective it looked like it was an OOC 'no.'  Come to find out later, it really was an IC no and because other events were happening elsewhere in the game world that were in opposition to what I was wanting to do, and so on.  It just wasn't clear to me that it was X House telling me 'we won't support you in this' instead of the STAFF telling me 'we won't support you in this,' which makes all the difference in the world.  I have NOT noticed that much lately.  All of my communications lately have been very straight forward.  I think probably in a response to better efforts on both sides, after that thread between players and a bunch of staff (especially Talia, I miss Talia  ) about better communication.

[Nyr]

As someone who's just been force-stored, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies....

This doesn't include absolutely ridiculous situations.

[Synthesis]

snark

+1

Nothing to see here.  Move along folks, move along.

[Nyr]

As someone who's just been force-stored, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies....

This doesn't include absolutely ridiculous situations.

I agree.  It's pretty ridiculous that I was stored. Let's get that resolved, eh?

Check your e-mail, and don't be a douche.  Thanks!

[Barzalene]

Um, is this a derail?

[Akaramu]

Lacking a better example, let's pick up the situation described in Nyr's and Musashi's posts.

Actually, that points out something by itself.  Why can't you find a better example than a very specific instance regarding magick and the gameworld?

I was lacking a better example because I didn't want to invent something, and didn't want to refer to other specific situations that had not already been brought up on the GDB. That one seemed like the best example because it had been brought up for discussion already. I'd rather not decide by myself whether or not anything else is okay for public discussion or not.

Yeah, I agree that player staff communication has improved a lot over the last few years. The request tool played an important part in it.

Anyway, I didn't mean to be negative or anything, just felt like voicing my thoughts on the matter. I'm currently enjoying the game very much, am having positive experiences with staff and don't have any real grudges, so now that I brought my thoughts to the table I'll just get back to playing.  

[Morgenes]

As someone who's just been force-stored, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies....

For the record, your storage had nothing to do with the power level of your character and you know that well.  You were even told up front that it was a temporary storage pending an answer from you.

We are not (all) evil heartless bastards.  We are trying to run a smooth game.  When something is not right and we have nothing to go on, we will store someone to get an answer so that the wrong doesn't continue without explanation.

[Kalai]

It's a derail because now I'm trying to ponder ridiculous and hopefully amusing reasons to force-store someone.

...

I doubt any of them would actually make sense. 

[Dresan]

We are not (all) evil heartless bastards.  We are trying to run a smooth game.  When something is not right and we have nothing to go on, we will store someone to get an answer so that the wrong doesn't continue without explanation.

See i knew there was a some small reason that made me think that you were the staff member that least deserved a kick to the nuts, dare i say, perhaps i even liked you a bit once upon a time. I just couldn't remember after all these years.  

Another cookie is in the mail, expect it in 2-3 weeks.

Stale as always though.  

[Morgenes]

nom nom nom nom nom...cookies.

Oh...to keep this topical...I agree with all our current policies.

[Nyr]

Um, is this a derail?

Technically, I'd call this whole thread a repeat derail.  It happens every few months.  I'll lock it after a day or so once the Zoidberg wears off.

I was lacking a better example because I didn't want to invent something, and didn't want to refer to other specific situations that had not already been brought up on the GDB. That one seemed like the best example because it had been brought up for discussion already. I'd rather not decide by myself whether or not anything else is okay for public discussion or not.

It's not a very good example, though, given that it is a unique situation (by definition, unique situations have no comparison).  I listed a whole plethora of reasons people have gotten their roles force-stored.  Yes:  because of one unique situation and maybe one or two other different (but to each other, incomparable) situations over the past 20 years (or however long we've had the storage ability), there is a infinitesimal chance you will be stored without doing anything wrong (or against the expectations of the role you've taken).

Live in fear!

[Zoltan]

Zoltan ... if you ever compare me to Glenn Beck again ... I will come to your house. And I will cut you.  

Yeah, looking back, perhaps I was a little extreme. 

[Saellyn]

So now my question is this

Is it a staff policy to let Zoidberg decide when to lock threads?