Karma Discussion Derail: Player/staff faith issues

[Sunburned]

As requested by Reiloth.

My personal opinion on the change in the karma system, is that it's going to fall flat on its face. I wish it would work and we could find a balance but most players only see the good parts of their RP and staff isn't always there to watch, what was once blamed on staff not paying enough attention, shit luck, playtimes, the 'I don't play enough leaders' excuse etc will now have a very subjective list of guidelines which players will be arguing that they meet and a neglect of their karma will now be translated into them feeling unappreciated.

Longevity, I got that.
Good communication, I'm well above the average I think and don't miss needed reports to clan staff. That's two.
Ability to roleplay, I think I'm fun and interesting to most.. it's the reason I'm here after all. There's three.
Proven understanding of magick and its place in the game world, yup, staff has even given me props on this. Four.
Proven understandings of cultural and racial structures, no account notes about this but as I've played some cultural roles with no negative opinions from staff, despite even asking for them. Five.
Contributes to the game, I'd like to think so. I've done tribal crafts and helped with tons of bugs by bringing them into the light and then being used as a test dummy etc Also, I've received some kudos from players that I'm proud of and been involved in a lot of neat plots that encompassed tons of people. Let's call that six.
Leadership, wow, I've played a TON of leaders. Some very famous and well known. Seven. Bank.

Where's my sorc/mul, kthx.

This is what I feel/fear is going to happen and it's only going to further draw the line between staff and players. I'm also a negative person, can ya tell?

I think this is a pretty courageous - and excellent - point.

I firmly believe there are longstanding faith issues between players (namely long-term players) and staff that need to get worked out before a system like this will be succesful without raising animosity.  We have a line drawn in the sand, and on one side, you have a player that's invested 10 years in Armageddon, and on one side, you have a staffer.
   
Its entitlement vs. entitlement.
   
When staff make judgments that players disagree with, and players try to express that disagreement, we are judged by the belief that we are reacting simply because it is a knee-jerk reaction to suffering individual consequences, and that we have little actual interest in the policies of the game.
   
I believe this is the culture of distrust and assumption of selfishness that permeates the staff view of players. And when a long-term respected player takes a kick from the staff, either to their karma or whatever, the veteran Arm community being a group of friends, we begin to feel like we are all suffering an injustice. Every time a poor decision is upheld to maintain staff credence, it becomes a shared frustration because it is representative of every other time its happened.
   
Solutions won't be discussed on the GDB, because it is a place of battling rhetoric; there is the belief that we risk too much in speaking candidly, because experience has taught us that dissent is something that affects our IG opportunties. And when a player tries to make their case to staff, we cast our words beyond a veil - it is our word alone against any number of contributing staff members. We have no advocates and no alternatives. Its expected that you don't share your issue with fellow players, or discuss it on the GDB. The staff can speak as a unified voice, while the player must keep their complaint private.
   
And on the other side...
   
I've never been on staff, but I can't imagine how demanding and impatient players must seem.
   
When you're volunteering 20+ hours a week, doing work that's largely just holding ground to keep the game functional and populated, and your efforts remain largely unseen, its probably a heap of hot coals when players start insisting that you're not doing enough to make the world vibrant and active. And everytime players bitch when they get policed about exploiting something in the game for the 100th time, they don't realize that the staff saw the 99 other times and were patient enough to see if the player figured it out for themselves.
   
Players don't come from the view of status quo, because they simply have no idea how much work it takes to keep things running smoothly, and that staff don't want to spend their time docking karma or forcing storage.
   
I think that the relationship between staff and players needs to be more cooperative, and that its good to keep in mind that MUDing is a dying game form - when we lose a player, or staff, thats one person, with years of valuable experience, we're not getting back.

[Lizzie]

I think Sunburned's post is a bit overdramatic and chock full of hyperbole.

I -also- believe it has a rather healthy dose of truth in it.

Unfortunately - you'll not find many people agreeing with you here on the GDB, because if they agree with you, then they will be afraid to say so on the GDB, for those very reasons that they're agreeing with. And so, you'll find plenty of people who will say "No no, Sunburned! You are being unfair, ungrateful, insensitive, and uncaring about the staff! And the people who agree with you are also uncaring, unfair, insensitive, and ungrateful!"

And then everyone who reads the thread will say "SEE? Sunburned is clearly in the minority, everyone who "gets it" is fair, sensitive, grateful, and caring to the staff, and wouldn't dream of making such outlandish assumptions!" And they'd assume that all the people who post to make sure everyone knows that they disagree with Sunburned, are the only people who "get it."

And there you'd be, Sunburned, on the soapbox, without much company, because the people who agree with you, are afraid to do so openly, for the exact reasons you say they are afraid to do so. And then there would be the rest of us who might agree, but are afraid to agree, and therefore will be passive-aggressive and say we might agree, or we might not, but that we still are grateful and caring and sensitive and fair...though we might feel the staff possibly maybe perhaps could consider thinking about doing things differently. With respect, of course.

In short:
People who are afraid to express dissention, will continue to be afraid, and they are the ones you won't hear from. And then the ones who flow with the status quo will reinforce the belief that the dissenters are wrong, since - if they were right, there would be more of them!

It's a vicious cycle. If you complain, you're branded a complainer. If you keep quiet, no one will know you have a complaint.

[Cutthroat]

I don't agree with the original point made in that thread at all. The list wasn't intended to be used by players to judge their own roleplay, it was to be used by staff to decide when karma was to be rewarded. Indeed, from the first paragraph of the staff announcement: " We have redesigned the process to outline a set of criteria that staff will use when awarding (and removing) karma from a player account." Thus, it's odd to say that the idea will "fall on its face" due to a chasm between players and staff, because the intended use for this new structure was clearly for staff purposes. The player part of the announcement was basically about the new ways karma would be spent, and how staff will attempt to distribute karma points in a more standardized manner than ever before.  Unfortunately some players decided to focus on what the documentation on karma says not to focus on - gaining karma, and staff's job surrounding it.

Anyway, whether that chasm exists is a whole other point. Yeah, it comes down to veteran jadedness and entitlement. Some veteran players genuinely go unnoticed, and they really deserve staff attention, as well as help getting it (and I'll take a moment here to remind vets they can ask Helpers for help with writing reports, etc.). But to speak candidly, others aren't as great players as they think they are. Not everyone can truly be the victim they claim to be if many other players feel they are treated fairly by staff. The truth of the matter is we get half of a story from players, and often on these forums we are allowed to complain as freely and as loudly as we want (although many of us refrain from doing so) and all staff can say is "use the request tool to talk about this with us" because anything more, and some players would start screaming about incivility or authoritarianism. And yes, this has happened around here enough times for me to categorize it so simply. It's basically a one-sided fight on the GDB, and the staff's perceived distance is often due to a desire to not air out potentially embarrassing (to the player or to the staff) details about an argument on the GDB. Occasionally staff throw caution to the wind and do that anyway, and the reactions are mixed, tending toward bad.

In an argument where every possible position is wrong, the only winning move is not to play. And once staff completely back out of participating in GDB discussions, some of us will complain about how behind-the-scenes they are.

It's not a question of how staff can improve, or how players can improve. It is, and always has been, a question of how we can meet each other in the middle. And we do that by being civil, by not airing out our personal dirty laundry on the GDB but by continuing reasonable discussion on on reasonable topics, even if it is dissenting. That's not how you just get staff's opinion on things - it's how you get people's opinion on things.

Edit: just to add, I don't think the thread this derailed from was getting bad at all. I think other topics have been more contentious in the past. These are just my general observations about arguments on the GDB.

[Delirium]

^ Wisdom.

[jstorrie]

I share Sunburned's concerns. While I have encountered players who just seem to complain about everything, and who falsely see injustice (to them!) around every corner, I also know of players who are dedicated, well-behaved vets yet they eat shit far too often because staffers dislike them personally.

I don't know if these issues will wreck the new karma system. I do think they should be discussed as frankly as is possible.

[ianmartin]

It occurs to me that anyone in the Karma hole will remain in the Karma hole anyway, so .....
Laissez les bons temps rouler elves, dwarves and pickpockets forever.  Who's with me?

[Nyr]

We're perfectly happy to talk to players that have issues with staff or those that feel that staff have issues with them.  However, we can't read minds, so players would have to initiate that contact through other mediums that we've previously established.  Just like the karma system (with its structure to assist staff in applying the same set of criteria to every player), the complaint system has been fine-tuned and worked on over a period of time.  That is the proper avenue to voice a complaint. Whinging, complaining, or posting choice bits of thoughtful (but negative, subjective, and possibly incorrect) insight on the GDB might be expressive, but since we've already outlined a process for this sort of thing, it will more than likely fall on deaf ears. 

Feel like staff have wronged you?  Put in a staff complaint.  These have to be resolved by Producers.  They cannot be replied to by anyone but a Producer.  (As mentioned above, the system has been fine-tuned to this point over a lengthy period of time--again, only Producers can respond.) You're essentially bringing your issue to the top echelons of the game.

Feel like staff have wronged your friend?  Get them to put in a staff complaint.  You are not privy to both sides of an issue.  You may think you understand the full story; perhaps you do.  It is more than likely that you do not have all of the details, however.

Finally, it is not "your word" against "any number of staff members."  It is what actually occurred on the record--granted, the interpreters of the record ultimately are staff members, but at some point, the volunteers that staff the game have to make decisions of authority.  About that record, though...why do you think we have moved to a request tool that is outside of e-mail?  There were a few reasons behind this, but the chief one is accountability.  For all intents and purposes, it is the truth from which decisions are based.  Why do you think we have added an ability for all Administrators to pull runlogs via a web tool?  Accessibility?  Yes--but another chief reason would be accountability and background.

Perhaps we're all corrupt, standing over you with our collective staff fly unzipped and raining down our negativity and karma docking and bans all over your happy roleplaying, communication (with staff and other players), and player conduct that just has had no fault that you can see (and since you can't see it, it must not be there). 

However, maybe--just maybe?--perhaps you did do something wrong.  And you know what?  The place to talk about that would be the request tool, through the proper channels.

[Reiloth]

I was about two steps away from backing off from Armageddon altogether based upon issues Sunburned has brought up. But I decided that I play Armageddon to have fun, not to fight uphill battles with Staff, which are basically just other people on the other side of a computer screen. And so, I decided to play roles that unfortunately involve Staff as little as possible.

I was recently denied a role which at the end of the day is fine in and of itself -- You can have a great application and someone else can have a better one, have better playtimes, or just fit what Staff are looking for at the end of the day. However -- I was explicitly informed that a major reason my application was denied was due to a recent GDB post I made, and how the Staff felt uncomfortable giving me the role based on my previous discontent with how they ran things, and that further discontent might be voiced based on their decisions for the role. I was informed that such discontent with Staff should be discussed behind closed doors via the Request tool, and I did not intent to, but did, undermine the Staff's efforts.

So basically -- What Lizzie said. If you have the balls to try to discuss Staff policy, or have an ounce of public malcontent, be prepared to make the sacrifice. Mine was deciding to play Armageddon interacting with Staff as little as possible, which is a shame.

[IntuitiveApathy]

I disagree with Majickal.

The karma system has always been a measure of trust the staff has for a particular player, and a measure of reward based on that earned trust.  Adhira made it clear in the original thread that the basis for the system won't change - it will remain about that trust.  The only change I can see is that staff will be expected to follow a more consistent system in detailing where that trust has been earned.  It appears to just be a matter of categorization more than anything.  Now, instead of guessing at what we can do to earn that trust, players can now point to one thing or another and look at ways to improve, because staff have basically said that these are the things that are important to us as staff to see in you the player, to allow you our trust.  Now, instead of people who have not gotten karma, or worse, have had karma taken away, can point to one thing or another and instead of trying to merely guess why the staff doesn't trust them, and likely make incorrect, and harmful assumptions in the process, might be able to see specifics as to why.  But since it's all still based on notion of the staff's trust for a player, and the basis of the system doesn't change, so I'm not sure why a player's interaction with that system would necessarily change suddenly for the worse, unless there's a misconception somewhere - either on the players' behalf, or on the behalf of staff, explaining the system to us.

It appears that players will still be entitled to request karma reviews, and account notes.  They will be able to see where the staff views them not only in the general sense of trust, but now in the varied categories specifically spelled out to all.  If anything, I feel that many people will view the system as being more transparent, especially upon receiving the results of a review.

However, Majickal seems to be suggesting that players will feel slighted based on the sense of entitlement that Sunburned mentioned.  Majickal says he is a pessimist - in fact, on this notion of entitlement and human nature, I'm also a pessimist - the way I see it, if a player who is looking to earn the trust of staff has been left skeptical because of neglect or conflict, the new system is not going to suddenly change that.  They will continue to feel slighted, until the staff decides they want to trust them again.  That attitude is encapsulated in what X-D said in the other thread - "I'll believe it when I see it."  The player may have valid arguments, or they might not.  But the fact is that the whole karma system is based on that simple notion of trust.   Human nature being what it is, once trust is violated or lost, it is not so easily regained.  I think that's an important point that people who feel entitled to play or what whatever they would like in this, the staff's sandbox, and with staff being human beings as well, should keep in mind.  A veteran player may feel entitled to the rewards of the karma system because of the contributions he or she has made to the game over their playing career, whether that is playing a great, memorable character, or having a hand in shaping a clan, or leading other players in the game or out of it.  However, a veteran player, being a human being, can still make mistakes, or fall to temptation or what have you, resulting in a loss of the trust of staff.  So while they may still feel entitled to karma options based on other criteria, if the staff do not trust them any longer, the staff is saying that they reserve the right to remove the rewards based on that trust, despite what might otherwise be a stellar player history.  In other words, it seems the player's sense of entitlement is not as important to the staff as maintaining the integrity of the game world as they see they need to - to allow only those they trust character options that they feel require a measure of that trust.  To be very honest, I feel this integrity is what makes the game it is today, and one major reason why I continue to play, 10+ years on.

At the same time, that's not to say that people should just take total unfairness lying down.  At least now with the new system, a player, and certainly staff, can point to a specific aspect of the player-staff trust relationship to make their point, rather than trying to grasp at the vague notion of trust in general.  Perhaps in that way, more of these types of player-staff rifts can be resolved, and perhaps in the end we can reach the opposite conclusion that Majickal envisions, where the players' trust of staff is bettered.  So in this sense, I'm actually an optimist, and remain hopeful.

[Bacon]

So, in the end, no matter what is posted on how karma should be awarded..or not, all it takes is a single staffer not liking you or your play for whatever reason to see you stuck in the karma limbo for all time.

I don't think this was intended as snarky myself but I see as a reasonable point. I believe most players biggest concern regarding karma is personal favoritism of a staffer or prejudice of a staff member in regards to karma. I don't think this system addresses this issue. Although I do see it as a positive step in regards to improving the karma system. Having been with the game for a long time, I know that there are players I may have pissed off out of the game, that got on staff and hold a grudge against me. Or other players who were buddies with someone that gets on staff and get nothing but positive attention in regards to karma, etc. What will be put in place to address/reduce the likelyhood of this happening?
Perhaps there should be a policy in place regarding cycling through which staffers make the decisions regarding karma for each player in turn? I don't know exactly but it is a concern that many players have regarding karma and with the purpose of improving the karma system and player/staff relations in mind, should be given thought to addressing other than: "We're flawless staff and don't do that, we swear." being given as the answer. No snark at all intended but I think it's something that needs to be given thought and discussed in regards to a "karma" system for any game run by human beings.


Edit: And a karma option for extra bacon would be good too.   Also, not sure which thread this one really belongs in so I'll put it in both.

[Nyr]

So basically -- What Lizzie said. If you have the balls to try to discuss Staff policy, or have an ounce of public malcontent, be prepared to make the sacrifice.

When you start out from a very extreme, negative, and opinionated public position, yes, you should be prepared to make the sacrifice.  It has nothing to do with balls and everything to do with tact.

[Bacon]

Sure, if you have issues with the staff one can file a complaint which would be reviewed by a producer. But, what is there in place to prevent say: A particular producer and staff member from backing each other to do pretty much whatever they want to? Say, Staffer A gets complaints about them, and producer A always takes those complaints against that staffer when they come up. Producer A always sides in with them preventing anything from being done to fix the issue. More and more unhappy players are created from the issue of Staffer A and Producer A being friends. What steps are in place to prevent/reduce the likelyhood of this happening other than: "Submit another complaint which will likely go to the same people and be dealt with in exactly the same way resulting in no improvement." Thoughts? Ideas?

I intend no bashing of the staff or anything. Just adding to the discussion in the hopes of helping address the issue for players. (perceived only or not)  

The point is, whether or not there is an issue, there should be a thorough system in place to help with the possible perceptions regarding these things. Players shouldn't feel fearful about expressing such concerns and staff shouldn't feel abused/slighted by them being expressed. This also contributes to more divide and lack of trust between players and staff.

[Nyr]

I believe most players biggest concern regarding karma is personal favoritism of a staffer or prejudice of a staff member in regards to karma. I don't think this system addresses this issue. Although I do see it as a positive step in regards to improving the karma system. Having been with the game for a long time, I know that there are players I may have pissed off out of the game, that got on staff and hold a grudge against me. Or other players who were buddies with someone that gets on staff and get nothing but positive attention in regards to karma, etc. What will be put in place to address/reduce the likelyhood of this happening?

Our own professionalism to actually police this sort of thing, which has been in place for quite some time and is continually reviewed/revamped with new staff rules, procedures, and what not.  I know that's not transparent and isn't something that players will ever see, but it is there.  Staff that pick favorites (whether it be clans or players) get spanked.  Staff that have prejudices against a player get spanked.  Just like I don't tell everyone on the GDB when I've docked someone's karma, Adhira, Nessalin, and Morgenes don't make GDB posts saying "I spanked Nyr today for doing this."  Some things (including this) are going to be behind the scenes, and you're just going to have to accept that you won't know the details.  With regards to favoritism and prejudice, if all staff seem to generally enjoy a player's contributions to the game and the community, perhaps it is not favoritism, but the system working properly.  If all staff seem to generally have issues over and over with the same player in different settings, perhaps it is not prejudice, but the player causing issues.

[Nyr]

Sure, if you have issues with the staff one can file a complaint which would be reviewed by a producer. But, what is there in place to prevent say: A particular producer and staff member from backing each other to do pretty much whatever they want to? Say, Staffer A gets complaints about them, and producer A always takes those complaints against that staffer when they come up. Producer A always sides in with them preventing anything from being done to fix the issue. More and more unhappy players are created from the issue of Staffer A and Producer A being friends. What steps are in place to prevent/reduce the likelyhood of this happening other than: "Submit another complaint which will likely go to the same people and be dealt with in exactly the same way resulting in no improvement." Thoughts? Ideas?

Thoughts:  This is why we have three producers.

Ideas:  Maybe it would be a good idea to give staff (and other players, if applicable) the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming conspiracies to screw you over.

[boog]

I guess I'm not too worried either way, because despite me being a decent roleplayer, in my own opinion, and keeping the staff informed of what I'm doing, I'm still gonna have like, 1 karma. But I'm alright with that, since this game isn't a "be a bad ass twink and kill everyone/thing else in sight with my karma enhanced stats" medium for me.

Hopefully this'll work out. Maybe it won't. We'll see. Either way, it's nice to see an attempt at change.

[Kryos]

In regards to the meta-idea of the post:  staff and player trust, I have to say the new approach is adding to the communication level, so why could it be bad?

Cool Story:  I try in earnest to role play, acknowledging and building around my disposition towards gaming(bartle type: achiever, that can be hard to fit in on Arm).  I have said and done some stupid things, and fought what I thought were noble(though loosing) battles through discourse with the staff. Yet despite all that, because I am not trying to meta-game or pull the wool over their eyes, instead, honestly express my opinion and try and bring more depths and experience to the game I've gotten some karma.  And that's what its all about in the end:  earnestly trying to be a part of the in-game world.

Are you trying to meta-game win?  Are you in it purely to roll up the mul sorc and terrorize the populace, or do you take the time to try and paint a beautiful picture with the tools you have?  Maybe if you find yourself 'in a hole', you should make a few heuristics ala http://www.amazon.com/What-Color-Your-Parachute-Career-Changers/dp/1580085415.   Knowing what you are, what you want, and where you're coming from can be a powerful tool.

I'm not saying the system is perfect (I've started some 'can we change the karma system' threads before).  But I am saying if you're really trying to be a part of the community, the 'man' isn't going to come down on you.

[Kalai]

So basically -- What Lizzie said. If you have the balls to try to discuss Staff policy, or have an ounce of public malcontent, be prepared to make the sacrifice.

When you start out from a very extreme, negative, and opinionated public position, yes, you should be prepared to make the sacrifice.  It has nothing to do with balls and everything to do with tact.

Hmm - this has helped me decide that Reiloth may be a good candidate for the role of Socrates. Sunburned should also audition.

(Sorry Nyr, I haven't worked out a part for you yet. You're probably busy with other roles anyway. Your post just helped me decide on the casting.)

[Reiloth]

So basically -- What Lizzie said. If you have the balls to try to discuss Staff policy, or have an ounce of public malcontent, be prepared to make the sacrifice.

When you start out from a very extreme, negative, and opinionated public position, yes, you should be prepared to make the sacrifice.  It has nothing to do with balls and everything to do with tact.

We both like talking in black and whites to each other, Nyr, but like I said -- I have made that choice, and I don't really want to engage Staff in a seemingly endless uphill battle. I'll stop myself here, as I knew I could most likely only make one post before it became an obvious back and forth that requires little more public discussion.

[Riev]

It also doesn't help that the majority of us are used to living in a democratic state, where we not only have the right, but the duty, to question leadership.

However, on Arm, most of the "leadership" questioning boils down to Allanaki or Tuluki politics.

I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a politician, and when I say things, they are plain as day. I don't feel its a fair statement to say that anyone is assuming conspiracies, but more voicing opinions.

Perhaps when staff look at players voicing themselves in a public forum, they don't assume we're all out to say "FUCK THE STAFF ROW ROW FIGHT DA POWAH". There's a feeling of belittlement enough as it is. Nes pa?

[Clavis]

Not a bash on anyone in the staff, an expression of my often blunt, and untactful opinion. As a player of the game their are other players I trust to rp, and make it enjoyable even in the most extreme conditions pk, or attempted pk. Others I think are ignorant shits that need to learn some aspects of roleplaying, and get off their high horse. Just as I think some staff are jackasses and need to go out and get laid or something. Still I'll put my opinion in and maybe hash it out with the staff member or not. If it's not oh well he can go jump off a cliff and I'll continue to play. I'll try not to deal with him/her and if I feel slighted I'll send in one of my colorful complaints and be done with it.

Theirs really no sense in beating a dead dog anymore, say what you have to, let them say what you have to then go out and buy each other a beer or something. Maybe in a drunken stupor you'll suddenly realize that you as player/staff, and them as player/staff both have your heads up your ass. I know mine goes there at times, and has when dealing with a staff member before. Do I hold it against them no, I realize that his/her head and mine where located somewhere they shouldn't be. Sometimes the faults  mine and sometimes it isn't.

Yes I think I'm rather good at staying in character and doing stuff that they would do other times I want to beat myself for some ignorant thing I've done and that one ignorant thing might be what the staff see. Hopefully it isn't what ruins there trust I don't think their that petty or viscous towards someone. Though sometimes yeah it seems that way, if a player has a problem and puts in a staff complaint to one staff then I hope that another deals with it, if the player doesn't feel it's been handled correctly.

quick summary: say what you have to say then get over it, and go back to playing or staffing. If your not getting karma send in a request say hey wtf I've been rp'n my ass off and I'm not getting any karma. If the answer is you suck, do better. If it's your an ass deal with it, then go back to playing. Though hopefully the answer will be more descriptive, then mine. They usually are, and remember assumption begins with three letters ass. everyone got one got one and some forget to wash em.

Oh and faith I would put more faith if I didn't have to ask for notes if I'm doing something wrong, I want to know before that so I can  correct it or bitch at you.

[Talia]

I keep starting to make a response to any number of things in this thread, and then I pretty much feel like, "Eh, fuck it, what's the point." So I don't 

Threads like this don't help with the issue of player-staff trust (which is a two-way thing) at all. That's not to say there shouldn't be conversation about this topic, because there should; but there are ways to say things that make it more likely that someone will listen to you, and ways to say things that make it less likely. This thread is full of less-likely. No one likes to be yelled at, no one wants to hang out with people who make a habit of bitching and nagging and whining, and as polite and well-intentioned as the initial post is there's been quite a bit of degeneration into that kind of negativity. The rationale that's often given, and has been given here: "I shouldn't have to modify my tone or words in order for you to listen," is all well and good, but it's just not a practice that works in the real world.

Also it's a little deliciously ironic that a karma system change which sprang from staff's listening to the feedback of players over many years (about supporting casual play, making for more flexibility in guilds and subguilds, limiting magickers, making karma more transparent and fair, etc etc) has now spawned a thread about how much players don't trust staff because staff don't listen.

[Intrepid]

I'm not going to say much on this subject, because...well, frankly, I don't want to be attached to it in any way.  However, my lack of attachment seems to be giving some players the personal license to speak in my name, so I'll make this short and sweet:

I have no problems with the staff.  I have spoken my mind to the staff in the past, even to the point of having had some colorful arguments with Sanvean back on Isca.  If I ever have a problem with the staff, this is not the place I would take it to; that would be the complaints section on the request tool.  My silence on here is not a fear of reprisal.  Please stop trying to speak for me because I'm being silent.  I'm silent because I don't share the same opinion as you.  Please respect my difference of opinion and stop using the royal "We" for the entire playerbase in threads like this.

I'm having a blast playing Arm, incidentally.  The new changes are cool, and I look forward to seeing the karma system evolve.

[Armaddict]

I'm pretty tired, so this may be rather scattered.  Forgive me in advance.

Relations between staff and players, in my opinion, is best described in a workplace setting.  Staff, particularly those in charge of clans or in oversight positions (which is most of them), represent the equivalent of a project manager, while as the roles of players are a bit more spread out:
KARMA - A member of several past projects who has been granted, through experience, the larger roles within projects with less oversight.  They have the power to mess with projects more, they have more weight to swing around, because even when they -do- mess with the project itself, it's been shown to be beneficial to the project in some way.  They have a good business relationship with various project managers and are time tested.
SPECIAL APPLICATION - Less time tested, but with positive experience in the past that lets project managers feel fairly comfortable with giving them more to bite than they've previously chewed.  They are, however, more closely watched in their involvement with projects to see how they use that bigger chunk than they've previously had.
SPONSORED ROLE - These are things such as nobles or GMH family members.  They -require- coordination with project managers, it is a tight knit relationship in which interaction with project managers is a requirement not only for the player, but for the project manager.  It requires involvement for their role in the project.

Now, the reason I use the above viewpoint is more for an explanation of staff actions than player actions.  Players often feel disgruntled about not being able to receive one of the above places in the project and having to settle for their default grunt position in the project.  However, with the workplace analogy, it's easy to forget that you may not have the rapport with project managers yet.  Particularly in the place of the sponsored role, there are FEW project managers who want to hire someone onto their team in a broad impact role where constant interaction with managers is a must with someone who has a history of brow beating, arguing, and essentially an all around -bad- work relationship.

Staff, players need to realize, have a lot of things on their plate.  They have a lot of things they want to do in this volunteer job they perform.  Sometimes, they give the benefit of the doubt, but as a general rule, no project manager with other goals and duties wants to enter into a high-maintainence, stressed work relationship.  Such is why it's important to not be such in your first few sponsored roles and special applications, because generally speaking, they are the stepping stones to KARMA due to proving yourself a valuable member of the same team in the workplace.  In more simple terms?  It's not a personal judgment.  It's not a personal relationship.  Treat it as what it is, which is an agreement to work towards common goals with your project manager.  If those goals are constantly being muddied and postponed and tossed out due to a bad relationship, you won't find other relationships forthcoming.

Looking at this any other way, I think, is detrimental to the player.  Do not make yourself a source of stress, or you'll be one of those unfortunate things dropped as stress inducing.  We all know stress is bad.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That being said, I've been playing this game for about thirteen years now, with some breaks involved.  I've had -long- periods of time where I was, I'm fairly sure, a stress inducer.  I've had periods of time where I passionately butted heads, and where I was utterly convinced -I- was right, and -staff- was wrong, and I wanted to fight for it.  In the past, I've done that in a multitude of ways, most of them recognizable as poor ways of handling it at best, at this point.

So.  More in line with the actual topic...player/staff faith issues.  Much like Reiloth said, I learned to start steering clear of staff unless it was necessary and pertinent.  In the broad sense...they run the game, and run it well, and I have no lack of faith in their ability to do that.  Armageddon Staff has always excelled at maintaining business relationships with its players, and trying to push things out of that realm rarely goes well.  So instead, go with the flow, avoid causing problems, and you're good.

However, the problem comes in where personal judgments come into play, and not purely business ones.  I'm somewhat hesitant when it comes to karma reviews, when it comes to 'being watched' to be judged on my significance to the game.  The post from Adhira about Karma adjustments with requests for account notes makes me uneasy, because those were previously where I looked to find guidance on improvement, and now must worry that staff that do not have any relationship with me will take a look over those earlier years (I never made the mistake of trying to dodge bad notes by making a new account..it seemed untrustworthy) and wonder...'How the fuck does this guy have karma?'  In the case that you are merely a non-troublemaker, you rarely find yourself splurged with positive feedback...as you're purposely staying out of the way and purposely staying out of trouble.  You're trying not to be high-maintainence.

Now, that may seem like a ramble, but the point is this:  There are quite a few very good roleplayers who contribute on the small scale who are that exact relationship archtype, the non-troublemaker.  Whether they have bad history, or just have always been that way...I, personally, do not have faith in staff or players alike to make what actually comes down to a personal judgment of the PLAYER or STAFF MEMBER's character, because that is not the business relationship that is emphasized in the game.  In a sense, I have qualms that people will be overlooked where they should not due to lack of consistent documentation of their strengths.  I have qualms that bad histories will be even harder to combat.  I have qualms that bad events will continue to obscure and hide good events since they are more regularly documented.

Granted.  None of this changes anything from old karma system to new, but this is a derail thread about lack of faith.  First and foremost, the first part of this post and what I'd like other players to see.  It's easy to get blinded by personal investment in this game, to feel 'cheated out of things' and react poorly.  You have got to remember that you're building your resume for your next project team, which is part of the whole project team that is this game.

I hope some bit of this or another makes sense to both sides.  In a sense, I'm pretty meh on the whole thing.  As stated...I just try and stay out of the way for the most part.

[Reiloth]

Intrepid -- I wasn't aware we were speaking on your behalf. Many players are totally content with current Staff, their policy, and the 'way things are going', vets included. And that's totally cool.

[jstorrie]

Also it's a little deliciously ironic that a karma system change which sprang from staff's listening to the feedback of players over many years (about supporting casual play, making for more flexibility in guilds and subguilds, limiting magickers, making karma more transparent and fair, etc etc) has now spawned a thread about how much players don't trust staff because staff don't listen.

I don't think that's what this thread is about. It seems to me more like some players feel like their ability to play the game (and specifics related to that, such as karma levels and likelihood of getting special/sponsored applications approved) is hampered by bad blood between them and individual staffers.

If I had that particular problem myself I would deal with it through private channels, as Nyr suggested above, and likewise I have suggested to players who have let off steam in my presence that they do the same. That being said, none of the fellow players who mention their problems to me ever seem to get them resolved, regardless of their communications with staff. Even as an uninvolved third party these situations bum me out, since I like most of Arm's players and I also like most of Arm's staff and hence I don't want them hostile to each other.

Anyway, if I had a constructive solution to offer I'd offer it here. But I don't. Dunno.