The Staff / Player Divide

[James de Monet]

There has been a fair bit of concern voiced lately that staff are not communicating with players, and that they refuse to solicit player input or take player impact into account.

I understand the concern.  I definitely understand that if a particular change impacted your Armageddon experience, or a cherished character/concept negatively, it could feel punitive or uncaring.  But I guess, from my perspective, this unidirectionality is not only somewhat expected, but sensible.  As I see it, it serves these purposes:

• It limits the amount of input staff have to sift through.  This is purely a pragmatic concern.  Looking at any of the hot change threads lately, one will see twenty different opinions about how a change should have been applied.  Staff probably have twenty more amongst themselves.  At some point, they need to filter out possible solutions so they can select one.  Removing the pbase from that equation does that in possibly the most effective way.
• Staff need to limit their exposure to echo chambers.  Threads in which only supporters or detractors of an idea air their opinions give rise to the vocal minority phenomenon that some have complained of directing change.  It distorts perspectives about what people really want.
• Staff need to remain DMs.  They have a desire to keep as much of the intrigue and ugly mechanics as possible out of site behind the dice screen until necessary or appropriate.  It helps us, the players, stay immersed in the story.
• Staff need room to be human.  That means failed experiments and making mistakes.  If they tell us everything they are doing when they start it, rather than when it's done and ready, they are going to have a much harder time sweeping things like this under the rug.  If you think that shouldn't be important, I would maybe guess that you don't know too many humans or leaders.
• Knowing what they know, staff have a perspective on the game that players (aside from legends) don't share.  They have more information about what necessitates changes, both existing impetuses, and future requirements.
• Finally, they are the sole proprietors of both the code base, and their own time.  They know what's possible, what's hard, what's easy, what's prone to cause errors or imbalances elsewhere in the game, etc.  Yes, there are some software people in the pbase, myself included.  But guessing what should be easy and knowing what is possible or prone to failure two different things.

Despite having said reasons to operate in ways that players have complained about, staff have done a number of things to bridge that divide:

• First, and I can't stress how huge this is: they have opened up membership on staff to applicants over and over again.  This isn't a matter of clubs or cronyism.  Anyone who wants to have ownership of the staff process and the decisions that get made is free to apply.
• They have frequently tried to take informally gathered player input to inform changes.
• They have when and where possible, attempted to formally solicit player input on certain issues.
• They have made concerted and repeated efforts, where not possible to incorporate player input, to work with players generally and individually to smooth over difficulties that arose from changes.
• They have assigned dedicated staff to every area, group, etc in the game.  If the transitional oversight was not sufficient to resolve conflicts due to change, clan/region staff have always been available and (in my experience) helpful.

And yet, despite reasonable motivation and notable attempts at deconfliction, players continue to rail against staff for changes they dislike.  I don't get it.  I mean, I understand the impulse.  I just don't see the justification, or the benefit.  Staff are all players, as they have said.  They aren't out to get us.  They have as many reasons as anyone else (or more!) to want to see the game rock.  Why denigrate their honest attempts to achieve that?  We get this game for free.  We get all their hard work for free.  I'm not even making an argument that we should be grateful for it.  That ship appears to have sailed.  But keep in mind that simply because something is free does not mean it is cheap.  And it is the way of humans to fail to appreciate things that they get for free.  I would really love to see more people fight that urge in themselves.  And there is a wage that staff hope for in return for their work, despite doing it for no money.  That wage is getting to experience your excitement, and getting to hear your appreciation.  Granted, neither of these things is compulsory.  You don't have to give them.  But rest assured, staff do need them.  Because if they don't get them, all that overflowing creative energy that made them want to be staff, that made them want to entertain you, will slowly dry up. They will burn out.  They will step down.  And all those things they were doing will falter or fall to the back burner as they turn their attention to covering each other's absences and fighting their own attrition.

And yeah, I get it, I probably sound like a fanboy, or an establismentarian.  But I guess I'm just asking, if not for the sake of being a positive influence, if not for the sake of the staff themselves, then maybe for your fellow players, please, please, play nice?  It doesn't thave to be all the time.  You don't have to say you love things you hate.  But maybe, just maybe, you could approach staff like friends who are doing you a favor instead of like a fascist regime who wants to regulate your ration of fun?



And, because the iron curtain was brought into the discussion, and because I happened to take one the other day, here's a picture of a piece of the Berlin Wall.



(Perhaps not ironically, the inscription around the pool reads, "A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand".  Seems apropos here.)

There, I've said my piece.  (Albeit one I've probably said before, and one I'm likely to say again, because staff aren't terribly likely to say it for themselves, but it is what it is.)

[Saellyn]

I'm sitting here with James. I just don't get why you guys are so against everything that staff has ever done.

Yes, Sorcerer as a class was revamped. The game is probably better for it in some ways. Sure, you don't see that super-powerful monsterhouse slamming everybody into the dirt, but now most of your enemies "are" at least somewhat reachable. A fully powered Sorcerer was barely conceivable as legitimate competition for the playerbase, it was something for Templars and their retinue of soldiers to deal with.


With the banking thing, sure you get taxed. You lose a percentage of your money. Maybe now you have to ask your friends for help to pay for stuff. That's what friends are for, right?

[wizturbo]

As my goofy post in the other thread tried to say in a lighthearted way, I think the staff are doing a good job with the changes they are choosing to make to the game as a whole.  Some of the changes hurt a bit, but if you read all the discussions, you do get a sense of why they were done and it's hard to argue with the logic of them.  And frankly, with as much emotional investment in this game as people have, you're never going to please everyone.  

In my opinion, the staff just needs to focus a bit more on PR (or change management, if you want to get really technical) to write/revise communications, and anticipate player concerns or anxieties and address them in the communications up front.  

Look at the Tuluk closure.  That was a major change, the biggest change I've ever seen in Armageddon, and considering how controversial it was, it was amazing at how well it was taken by the player base.  I don't think that's a coincidence or luck, I think it's because all of the staff clearly put a lot of work into the communications of the announcement, with an FAQ, very well thought out posts, and plans to help transition affected players as smoothly as possible.

Honestly, it's like baking a great cake, and forgetting the frosting, if you don't wrap up these kinds of things nicely in an announcement.  If you read all 14 pages of the most recent banking thread, you'll see a lot of really great, well thought out reasons for how this was done, why, and what might be coming in the future.  If that was packaged up at the beginning with the announcement, I think we'd have seen significantly reduced whiners (myself included) and all the appreciative and excited posts would've shined through more than they did.

Sure, it's kinda lame to wordsmith an announcement, but that can be outsourced!  Find someone who likes doing that kind of thing, and get them to write it.  It's not like we're releasing things of this caliber so often that it'd be a massive time sink for them, whereas it might be a real burden on the person who just spent 50 hours working on a project and is eager to get it out the door and into player's hands.  In fact, you could probably recruit a player to do this for you, if you're willing to loop them in on the release ahead of time...or even a small group of players, beta-testers for the communications, so to speak.

[LauraMars]

I'm sitting here with James. I just don't get why you guys are so against everything that staff has ever done.

Let's not be hyperbolic.  I don't think that sweeping statements about players OR staff will serve a discussion well.

[Fathi]

I'll add one more thing to your list, JDM: often times soliciting player opinion would be a step that isn't always necessary because chances are someone on staff will come up with the same potential objections. The staffing team is what, 15-16 people sometimes? (I haven't been keeping close track of who's active or what's going on since I'm on a break right now but I know it's been that high in recent times.)

I can't envision that many scenarios where Staffer A will propose an idea and players could come up with more potential consequences than staffers B through N. Has it happened in the past? Undoubtedly. People miss stuff. And I'm sure not all staff contribute equally to all discussions about stuff. But I think most of the time those concerns would be raised by other staff.

Back when I was a builder for Arm2 years ago, there were whole pages of discussion about potential consequences of gameplay changes. Stuff that most people would consider relatively minor. And it wasn't that people were viciously arguing one way or the other, it was often just a discussion of "hey, players might bring up that X would affect Y and are we cool with that?"

I imagine a lot of threads would go like this:

Adhira: Hello! We are thinking of introducing X and would like some feedback.
Player 1: Have you thought of Y?
Adhira: Yes we discussed that.
Player 2: But what about Z?
Adhira: Yes we discussed that.
Player 3: IT WILL COMPLETELY BREAK ABC AND D.
Adhira: Yes we discussed that.
Player 4: This change is great!
Player 5: This change is terrible!

Which looks to me a lot like the threads that happen after changes have already been made.

I am all for more transparency and open communication between players and staff, as my years of GDB whining will attest, but this is an area where I feel like the current decision making process wouldn't be much improved by asking for player input beforehand.

[Lizzie]

I'm not a fan of every change that's been made, but I agree with James that the playerbase doesn't need to be consulted, and that the staff shouldn't feel obligated to consult us.

There are a lot of changes this game has gone through that I don't like. But my liking or not liking a change should have no bearing on what the staff chooses to do. And my liking or not liking a change has no bearing on any expectation I should have of being consulted. I'm not a staff member, they should not feel obligated to consult with me, or any other non-staff-member player, unless they're needing test subjects to play around with a code change. I -have- been consulted on that in the past, and was tickled pink (as in - very happy) that they did so.

But no, the membership at large doesn't "deserve" to be consulted about much, and it could end up being counter-productive, if instead of actually making necessary changes, they spent all their time listening to the debates back and forth, and the game comes to a standstill as a result.

[wizturbo]

I agree with Fathi, staff don't need to solicit player input on most things.  They're players themselves, after all.   But, I think sharing some of the depth of the discussion that went into a project when it's announced would go a long way in making people feel less opposed to change.  

Most people's natural reaction to change is "OMG BAD!" unless it's directly helping them, and even then, they might mistake something that's helping them for something that's hurting them and complain anyway.

For example, this whole banking thing seems like it was very well thought out behind the scenes, and frankly there was plenty of player input about it on other threads, but when the project was revealed all we saw was:

Banking will now incur fees for withdrawals.

This fee is dependent on the size of the account.  Small enough withdrawals/accounts will instead be subject to a minimum transaction fee for withdrawals (as that would be greater).

The natural reaction to seeing this change is to start thinking about what negative and positive effects it will have on your own personal play.  A really thoughtful person might be able to step back and start considering other people's play too.  Sure enough, some people are going to view this change as negative.  They're going to start drawing conclusions based on very limited information, and before you know it, a largely positive change might be framed as a negative one and the GDB posting starts.  Nyr and other staff members did a good job explaining things on the thread that was spawned from this, but I can't help but think all of it could've been avoided to begin with by sharing some of the thinking that went into it up front, and talking about how it's part of greater changes that are coming down the line.

This really only needs to be done for potentially controversial subjects.  I don't think anyone is going to have a negative reaction to 90% of the new stuff being added to the game, or other minor updates.

[Majikal]

I'm not a fan of every change that's been made, but I agree with James that the playerbase doesn't need to be consulted, and that the staff shouldn't feel obligated to consult us.

Staff have a better view of the world, the players, the code, and the tendencies of some players than you'll ever have just playing the game from a pc perspective. I doubt big code changes like this are taken lightly or tossed in willy-nilly. If they make a code change and it's not having the desired effect, it'll be tweaked or changed, or removed entirely. I believe this anyway.

While I would enjoy seeing a staff thread discussing a change and polling potential ideas they're working on, I don't lose sleep over there not being one. If staff want input they can ask. I don't think they need to though and I don't think it hurts the game if they don't.

[Asanadas]

I doubt you're going to find many people willing to "challenge" this on this forum. The frustrations that players hold are (by rules) required to be kept secret from the non-staff population. Else they risk forums bans and force-storage of their character as punishment.

As well, expressing frustrations and disagreeing with decisions will prevent a player from securing leadership roles in rolecalls, as well as other negatives in further staff interaction.

On the other side of the equation, players have no readily-available method of rejection of a staffer's policies other than writing a character on the other side of the game world with the intention of avoiding falling into their circle of influence. Since this is not an option with banks -- there is only one bank, and any attempt by PCs would unquestionably be squashed by staff's animation of a "realistic world response" -- the vocal disagreement is near the height of what could be expected.

Not to mention, there has hardly been any decision I can see from my time here that has been decidedly changed by player input. It seems to me that the staff sells the idea so well to themselves on the IDB, they aren't going to take GDB detractors seriously. Indeed, it's gotten so tangible that this thread has been made.

Is there anything the playerbase could do right now to rescind this bank-tax script? Absolutely not. That's the reason why there is a divide.

The concept that "staff are players too" is a joke, to me, for reasons I can't type here due to the forum's rules.

[Nergal]

If it was a rule to keep frustrations secret from the non-staff population, we'd have to delete a whole lot of threads, ban a large amount of regular posters and force-store a bunch of PCs because that would mean we haven't quite scoured the GDB well enough and gotten rid of all that inconvenient dissent. We aren't looking to be blamed or insulted, but we aren't looking for sycophancy. Polite behavior, constructive criticism, and a willingness to share opinions as well as listen to a counter-argument are generally appreciated on this, or almost any, forum.

Also, there are no policies of a single staffer. Multiple staffers are often involved in major decisions, and there was plenty of discussion staff-side over this idea and many others that have been or are soon to be implemented. Not everyone specifically agreed with this idea, and some proposed alternate things to try, which may even make it into the game someday. Of course, there is a single set of staff policies that apply to all staff, regarding how staffing should be done.

While I can personally appreciate the desire for players to make their impact on the world, the nature of a change this broad is that it will not be practical for any single PC or group of PCs to affect. The fact that a few players benefit from the broken economy, while others don't, can make it hard to solicit ideas from the playerbase (although this particular idea has come up on the GDB before, as well as other proposals to change the banking structure). Lastly, the fact that the banking structure was largely an OOC convenience for easily keeping your money safe and for "teleporting" your money to other banks safely creates a duty for staff to make sure it operates with some IC consequence, like other things in the game do.

I can understand the temptation to have a knee-jerk reaction when something you're used to changes, but all we have ever asked for is your patience, support, and suggestions, and all of that gets used staff-side when discussions for changes take place.

[Ath]

So much I want to say here, but I will say thank you first.  Secondly, I play quite often, I try to play daily if I can, but it often doesn't work out that way.

Read the rules... you're all welcome to complain, as long as it is by the rules.  Most of those rules are common sense as to why there are written that way.  I rarely read the GDB to be honest, with exception of the Non-Arm Discussion stuff.

[Clearsighted]

I don't know. Staff/Player communication seems better these days, than it was 4, 8 or 12 years ago.

It's a bit more professional, I guess. But I wouldn't call it a divide. In many ways, staff is a lot nicer than they've been in the past. It might be, ten years ago, they were more likely to be buddy-buddy, more likely to be accused of favoritism or holding a grudge, or else tell you to get fucked/randomly screw with you.

But just from personal experience, tonally, staff seems more polite and considerate across the board, as a broad, generalized statement. It doesn't apply to everyone at every time, but just as a very vague measure, like the sea level.

In the old days, they might have been more casual, more willing to go out on a limb, but I like things more standardized.

I came back because I thought the staffing culture was more pleasant to be around/more open to big changes (closing Tuluk), so I suppose, take that as you will.

Interestingly enough, I've never censored myself on this forum and never once felt as if I was punished for it, even when staff vehemently disagreed with my viewpoint. I think some people self-censor themselves too much, and in their mind, it builds up and up as if they're being muzzled. If you feel strongly about something, and it has to do with the game, then just speak up. Some staff are likely to agree. Some are likely to disagree. At least it starts a conversation.

[Asanadas]

_______________________________________________________________________________________

True, there is no rule against expressing that a frustration is present. However, the situation involved and its intricacies are, by the nature of the game, barred from public discussion. This goes without saying that it transcends the banking issue.

There is a perceived lack of accountability of the staff to the playerbase, where a player may feel that their argument was dishonorably picked apart and subverted by staff members on the other side of the fence; that the actual events were not expressed honestly; that the decision made was built on mistruths due to the affected members framing the scenario to others of the group. Of course, the player involved in the argument is incapable of partaking in this dialogue, if they feel courageous enough to submit the dialogue in the first place.

I was recently forum banned by a particular staffer (despite claims that moderation of the GDB had been passed onto the helpers) where I jokingly used a snippet of his dialogue in a request I had submitted as a farcical response to a post. This was "baiting staff", and I was told to cool off. It was a seven day ban, and I was told I could submit an appeal, which I did. On day five of the ban, I followed up with a frustrated comment on the ban appeal due to the fact that the ban was almost expired at that point, compounded by the fact that I needed access to my clan forum due to an upcoming RPT. The response I received shortly after was from the same staff member who banned me, stating along the lines that due to my tone, this was denied.

No harm done, right? Just wait the next two days out?

15 minutes afterwards, I received a message from my storyteller stating I had a choice between storage, and an arbitrary destruction of my character's IC accomplishments over real-life months directly due to my forum ban appeal that was just denied.

Will I get forum banned again for baiting by recounting this incident of perceived injustice to my efforts in this game from the side of staff? I'd say it's likely, from my past experiences pointing to it. Am I one of the only people playing this game willing to post this on the GDB with that in mind? Of course. Am I the only one harboring a frustration such as this? Hardly.

Recently, the USA staffers got together for some beach research, which, in my opinion, isn't necessarily bad given Armageddon's history of personal meetings. However, any psychologically-inclined person will admit that there is a bias on the judgement of someone else's actions when they are a friend vs. a simple co-worker (and I'm giving the Arm staff some credit here with the term co-worker based on their guidelines). With all that in mind, am I wrong in assuming that personal biases apply to staff in favor of an actual friend, opposed to a complaint from a random stranger on the internet? Am I wrong in assuming that staff members will favor the depiction of events from the recounting of their friend (who was actually there, mind) vs. the events from a random stranger on the internet who was there, when the two parties' descriptions don't match up? It's basic human chemistry, by all means.

That is why there is a divide between players and staff. The staff are only allowing themselves to be completely truthful to each other, not players; subverting that trust of truthfulness, any biases or mistruths are more willingly accepted. Without the player involved given more than a single complaint to voice their grievances (and keep in mind, submitting clarification complaints or follow-up deconstructions of a response has been compared to "Being told No by daddy, and then running crying to momma" by a staff member on the GDB, and more-over heavily discouraged), there is no earnest capacity by the wronged player to actually voice their frustration.

How would you feel, if someone in authority wronged you, and you were only able to express your issue by filling out one submission form and giving it to the same institution employing the person who wronged you? Furthermore, that form would be taken to the accused party where they have full access to the complaint, a friendly relationship with the arbitrator of the complaint, and a voice which outweighs you in credibility and value? Continuing on, any disagreement with the resolution of your submitted form (whether by suspicion of misunderstanding by the authority, or the voiced belief is intentionally mis-framing the situation to avoid punishment) is shamed as childish, uncalled for, and a waste of time.

There are guidelines in the United States against the system I've outlined -- the outline of my experience with Staff Complaints during my time with this game. The laws are put in-place to ensure accountability, and prevent corruption; two things proven by history to be lacking in systems where this is not kept in check.

I have been told before that, although this may be my reality, it is not reality. Well, despite how much I hate to say it, this is my reality in my experience with a select few members of staff.

What can I do, except stifle these complaints and continue, or leave the game altogether? I will never be able to appeal to the playerbase for accountability, because the authority ensures you that they are all accountable to one another; as an aside, and needless to mention, I'll be censored and banned if I do try. How many players over the course of over a decade have been driven away, or had their experience with this game tainted by this perception? Am I the only one? Again, doubtful; but those who have decided to keep playing have learned it's easier to just choke back the fire in their stomachs. And those who have left, can no longer speak for themselves here.

This is the problem I would recommend the playerbase addresses, although Nenyuk bank taxes might be viewed as a more serious and pressing issue than the one I've described. The void between players and staff is visibly negligible and rarely seen -- even denied by some, declared improved by others  -- because there is no tangible benefit for the player if he wishes to engage it. Am I making a mistake by posting this, and having an open Karma Check request at the same time? Well.... You tell me.

TL;DR: To keep the body in good health is a duty, otherwise we shall not be able to keep our mind strong and clear.

[Malifaxis]

Asanadas said:

A bunch of crap.

First off, I would like to start by saying that I am one of the few players who has probably pissed and every single staff Salad possible. I have committed grievous sins and said foul things. I have broken plotlines, I have acted suddenly and with anger to the detriment of the game, and I have been banned under GDP by both Nyr and the Nessalin.

So I think I can count myself as somewhat  of an authority on how staff act and react to things.

The last thing the staff like to do with their days is look for reasons to ban you or store you. They have a helluva lot more to do, and the time that they take to do a ban maybe neglegible but it also distract them from whatever it is that they actually want to be working on or thinking about. Finding a new reason to come down like a hammer on a player fits into their day in about the same way that live blender fits into your anus, its just something that they prefer to avoid.

Staff, by and large, have very thick skins. I have seen the amount of abuse they can take without provoking a reaction... I've seen it first hand because I can be kind of an abusive asshole at times when I feel I have been treated unjustly.

Whatever this joke/quote thing was you did must have had some pretty serious impact, and likely hit them personally instead of just a player to staff comment meant in humor.   I have no doubt believing that due to the way I've seen you treat other people on these very boards. truth be told you are one of three people whose posts I take joy in just scrolling past... And yet here I am responding to this in hopes that you will try to say the things you say in to a mirror.

There  is also this particular quote of  yours:

Again, doubtful; but those who have decided to keep playing have learned it's easier to just choke back the fire in their stomachs. And those who have left, can no longer speak for themselves here.

Artfully worded.  Very martyrtastic in conjunction some of your other phrases.

I know how to act quiet and when to burn logic and come out with the nasty bits all clean and presentable. 

Presentation.

[Majikal]

Sort of a derail, but my summarized experience with staff:
I've gone up the karma tree, had it stripped, climbed again, had it stripped. I've been banned more than once and have hardly rolled over and done as I was told in more than a few occasions. Me and Malifaxis probably went down some similar roads in our long time with Armageddon as I've seen the dude get pretty emotional. I've been forgiven, I've always been forgiven, staff have always worked with me except in those times when I was pounding away at my keyboard in frustration expecting them to award me for bitching. After my track record, I was still given a sponsored roll with game-breaking code advantages... if any staff member I've ever offended held a grudge for one of my angry and emotional e-mails they'd have squashed that out with a quickness.

I posted that nyr was a dick on the boards, albeit jokingly, but I did it. I was a prick and got prick responses for being a prick. At the time I was furious, looking back, I deserved the ban he gave me.

Nyr's still one of the top dog's in immortal-land and nyr delivered me back my karma after a pretty big error on my part conflicting with the game world, I made a decision in the heat of the moment for a coded gain that didn't fit with the gameworld whatsoever. My bad judgement and emotional response in defense (which was flimsy as hell) to my judgement cost me the karma I'd acquired over years of playing, the same immortal that called me out on the piss-poor play granted me my karma back later on.

Hell.. Nyr even made me a fucking Helper. 

They're not out to get you...

[Asanadas]

Whatever this joke/quote thing was you did must have had some pretty serious impact, and likely hit them personally instead of just a player to staff comment meant in humor.

This post and this post. So serious an impact, they remain unedited and undeleted.

I would express why I chose those words in my posts, but it would be against the rules of this forum, and you would not care because you do not hold value in anything else I've expressed.

[Eurynomos]

There is no Player and Staff divide beyond the illusion of one, fabricated by the history of our experiences together. We are on the Player's side, because we are also Players. We are on the Staff's side, because we are also Staff. We dance the line between both worlds, because we choose to make the game a better place to play in, and a better place to Staff over. We actively encourage each other not to dwell on GDB drama. We pick up the slack when other Staffers have duties that call to them IRL -- Family, friends, merry-making, kids, wives, husbands, and other hobbies. We achieve great goals that we set for ourselves -- And we admit when we make mistakes. After all, we're only human.

Humans love continuity. We desire to see a connection between the past, the present, and the future. We like to remember how things were, because it gives us context for who we are. I say this, because when you look at the continuity of ArmageddonMUD, you can't be anything but incredibly impressed at how far we have come. And it's easy to forget how far we have come, because we take it for granted. Just like when you are sick, all you can think about is how sick you are, how horrible you feel, how 'normal' feels like a quality you never even had...And when you get better, you can't even remember what sick felt like.

Every year that ArmageddonMUD still exists is a year it has bettered itself -- The continuity between the past and the present shows a rich tapestry of change. Perceived mistakes are addressed, sometimes poorly, and then adjusted again, and again. Documentation for clans that didn't exist is written and implemented, and then re-written when errors or inconsistencies are noticed. Code is revamped, changed, and revamped again, constantly improving on the old, and creating where there was lack.

Communication between Staff and Players has never, in the existence of the game, been as good as it is now. Checks and balances are in place to leave a paper trail of communication between Staff, and Players. Protocol has been created, and is followed, to remain as professional as possible on a free to play RPI. Gone are the days of emails to the MUD account with possibly no response, or a response months later. Context is provided through this paper trail, so that future generations of Staff can read back and through old logs, PC relationships and histories, and so forth.

I think communication is key to any successful relationship. And our communication has never been better than it is now. Following the continuity bit, we can only aspire to achieve greater goals, to engage the player base, to make a fun game that people want to play, and to provide an experience that is unlike any other experience on the Net.

Speaking as a Storyteller, I can only say that my goal is to provide intelligent suggestions to the rest of Staff on how to make the game better, and offer my opinions on their own ideas and concepts, while attempting to weave entertaining stories for the players of ArmageddonMUD, and finishing with the icing of enhancing your own trials and tribulations. I'll reiterate that there is no Player or Staff Divide beyond what illusion of one is perceived by certain Players who feel, in their tale of continuity, that they were dealt a bad hand.

I also had 'bad account notes' with Staff in my dealings with them. I had chips on my shoulder about Nessalin being a douche to me in how we interacted with one another. I felt Staff was, at one point, out to get me. I refused to speak with Nyr at one point, due to a back and forth on a few requests I had open, and then re-opened to continue arguing, and then opened again to keep re-arguing. I asked Staff to not make notes on my account that were 'feedback' oriented unless I asked for it. Despite being a prima donna and basically being a little shit, I joined Staff, and here I am today. So I suppose I am saying, even the misfits and highly opinionated can and will be on Staff. People with opinions and passion tend to care about the game they pour their time into.

We are all on the same side of the fence, and there is no Iron Curtain. Believing there are two sides of the fence, or there is an Iron Curtain, is entirely up to you.

[Jingo]

This is a Confucius thread now.

[aeglaeca]

Maybe I'm reading a different forum from you guys, but I don't actually see that much railing against staff in the bank thread. I see a lot of pretty reasonably-phrased concerns, several requests for more details, very little arguing against the overall idea, a few knee-jerk reactions against it, and more than a few, "Wow, are you guys seriously whining about this? Just accept it already/everyone else clearly voted for it!" comments.

I really hope this thread isn't written with the intent to dissuade people from expressing disagreement or concerns with changes to the game. *Especially* not if the reasoning is, "Well, someone else probably already thought of your objections," or, "Staff shouldn't need to care about player input." Not asking for player input ahead of time is one thing; dissuading players from speaking about it at all afterwards is something else completely.

I think it's completely reasonable to ask staff for complete or relatively-complete documentation on new changes going in, which is what I read as the main concern. I also think the requests for such were voiced rather politely and with good intentions.

I sure didn't see any flame bait until this thread, which has, apparently, /really/ brought out the railing against staff. I understand the urge to defend and support Arm's staff, but insulting your fellow players by telling them they cannot possibly add anything else worthwhile to the discussion is not the way to do it.

[Asanadas]

And we admit when we make mistakes. After all, we're only human. . . . . . . . We are all on the same side of the fence, and there is no Iron Curtain. Believing there are two sides of the fence, or there is an Iron Curtain, is entirely up to you.

I am sorry, but the staff members I have interacted with have been unable to express apology or admission of mistakes. Instead, due to this specific situation, I was: fed multiple conflicting excuses and reasons for why the event happened; threatened with my character due to my dissatisfaction with the result (and eventual punitive measures at a later date, due to the two posts above along with compounding frustration on my part); misled and blamed for the events happening myself; among other things, told it was "not my place" to express my complaint against the staff in question.

I don't mean to accuse all staff members of being incompetent. However, due to my interaction with few, I cast my experience on the many. A house can be judged by its tenants.

It's only natural that you would trust your superior's version of events compared to mine, and have no issue when he is the one who closes his own complaint without addressing the material within. You are busy with your own clan maintenance, and it's not your calling to reach out and try to understand my issue, especially when I've clinged onto it for so long. I should just get over it, right? I mean, I wasn't even one of the three people "affected" by it.

As of today, no staff member has reached out to me in an attempt to discover what my complaint is/was about (furthermore, no attempt was made to have a sincere dialogue with me -- in an environment I felt comfortable -- regarding my complaint); they were content to accept the version of the staff member that led it -- this version, which I expressed was a lie and not an honest account of events, and consequentially was pulled aside and admonished for breaking "trust" along with threats against my character should I try to "sow dissent" again.

In my experience, it is some form of sedition to request accountability alongside a call that staffers admit their mistake and move to correct it. If you continue to disagree with the dishonest excuses given to you, you will be reprimanded. I was punished for clinging to my standards (and experience, as a former role-play medium head administrator, myself) in hope that I could somehow convince these few staff members to set things right for these three players. However, the blame lies solely on us... despite the forced action mandated by these few staff members' actions, combined with the flawed implementation of code that flied in the face of what these few were attempting to do.

Eurynomos, apologies if I am misinterpreting your statement,
If "the history of our experiences together" "fabricate" "[an illusion of a] Player and Staff divide"... does that not serve as evidence there is one? What is being fabricated, and what is real? In the theme of our enlightened dialogue trope so far: can there be a waterfall, without water? I trust by your response you are sincere and willing to sacrifice for the principle of your players' enjoyment; can the same be said of all that are on the staff team? In my experience, no.

[Saellyn]

You should probably show some proof of stuff like that, and put in a formal staff complaint if you're being treated like this.

[Asanadas]

I already have submitted repeated formal staff complaints. I would show proof, but it is against the rules of this forum to discuss events that happened less than a year ago today. In this particular case, there's an argument that the events are still relevant and pressing, and to discuss them would be breaking that rule.

[wizturbo]

Asanadas,

Since you're airing this all out publicly, let me give you a non-staff opinion of the situation that has you still so upset.  I think my non-staff opinion is quite informed, and since I was pretty upset about the exact same issue as you, I think I'm more likely to be sympathetic to your concerns than basically any other player.

The short of it, for those who don't know, is that there was an RPT (a totally bad ass one, I might add) where crim-code triggered and killed three PC's in the space of about 10 seconds.  It was caused by multiple OOC mistakes,  (my own mistake probably being the worst of the bunch)  based on faulty assumptions of how the code worked, and how the particular situation was setup.  It sucked.  No one was happy, staff least of all judging by clan GDB posts and my own request tool exchanges on the subject.  Resurrection requests were made, and because resurrection policies are very black and white, the requests were denied.  Now, I personally think the resurrection policies should have a little bit more wiggle room to work with, but I can understand that they've been forged over decades and things like that can become institutions.

You seem to be an egalitarian type, suppose they made an exception and went ahead with the resurrections, how fair would that be for the countless other similar situations that were denied?   Not fair at all.  Either they'd have to change the policy or stick to it.  They stuck with it.  I was bummed, I whined about it too.   I bet they received numerous similar complaints about it.  They were also in the middle of running perhaps the most aggressive series of RPT's I've seen in Armageddon, some of which were practically HRPT sized.  I decided to just let it go.  You didn't.  You kept going on and on about it during practically every forum post you made, regardless of the topic, always hinting at some massive injustice going on beneath everyone's noses.  It probably started to irritate some people, and certainly wasn't the OOC behavior I'd personally associate with someone in a leadership position.  I thought you were out of line...and I even agreed with what you were being out of line about! 

A 7-day GDB forum ban sounds like a warning rattle, and from where I'm sitting it seems like you kept pushing and got bit.  And even after getting bit, you had an opportunity to cool off and keep your character and stay in the clan (which screams opportunity for redemption to me), but you got pissed off and now you're still angry about it 3 months later. 

You hung on too tight, you lost your edge. 



If you want my advice (which you probably dont...but tough, you've already read this far) you should go out, have some beers, sing karaoke, play some volleyball,  and come back to playing when you've gotten over this incident (which you will...you obviously really love this game, and it'll still be here once you're over this).

[Kismetic]

Wizturbo, you've really won me over with your Top Gun images.  I recommend we broach this player's divide, and engage a high-five.

No, I really didn't read this thread.  How do you find the time?

[Case]

Holy crap, endless and off topic couched bitching nobody can respond to or answer for. Take it to its own thread or somewhere else. Honestly, if your communications to staff read anything like your posts, no wonder nobody can be bothered with your shit, regardless of what's at fault.