Staff, I want an open dialogue.

[Dar]

Just read that log.  The dwarf was a player, right?

If I recall the dwarf was the animation

Are you sure? Were you present? I honestly honestly honestly prefer to think it wasnt. I would probably only believe it, if Staff themselves confirmed this.  If that dwarf was really an npc, I am ... beyond dissapointed. That was baaaad play. Bardlyone's own play was shit. Suicidal and choice of attire and so on. But that dwarf ... oh my god.

And the amount of times the word 'whore' is mentioned is making me cringe. In Zalanthas, whoring is legal and accepted and marriages are rare and limited to nobility and tribals. They might have as well kept saying 'Bynner', instead of 'whore'.

[Raptor_Dan]

stuff

She tried posting it in this thread, and it was deleted within three minutes.

[Jihelu]

Just read that log.  The dwarf was a player, right?

If I recall the dwarf was the animation

Are you sure? Were you present? I honestly honestly honestly prefer to think it wasnt. I would probably only believe it, if Staff themselves confirmed this.  If that dwarf was really an npc, I am ... beyond dissapointed. That was baaaad play. Bardlyone's own play was shit. Suicidal and choice of attire and so on. But that dwarf ... oh my god.

And the amount of times the word 'whore' is mentioned is making me cringe. In Zalanthas, whoring is legal and accepted and marriages are rare and limited to nobility and tribals. They might have as well kept saying 'Bynner', instead of 'whore'.

I wasn't present but in her message to me on the forums, our forums, that's what she said.

[Armaddict]

I, except in the case of actual degradation of the game, abhor banning.  If someone refuses to stop running around fucking up the game IC so that the hardline staff policy of 'no resurrections' or 'We can't change that' becomes the inability to balance the player actions, you ban them.  That is not a liberal usage, that takes a lot of conscious effort and lack of care for the basis of roleplay.

Banning for anything else is ridiculous.  That is my 2 cents on the topic of removing my pool of players to have access to.  The ooc reaction to IC events of 'ban that motherfucker' has not happened for me in nearly two decades with this game.  It's a game, a multiplayer one, and I will avoid those characters I do not enjoy, and the more people whose paths intersect with mine (sometimes negatively), the better.

Edit:

[Nergal]

Considering that staff do not discuss specifics on player issues in public, what do the players posting here hope to get out of discussing a one-sided posting of a log?

Are you hoping staff will crack on our policy on discussing these matters with anyone but the player(s) involved? That's not going to happen. But let's not pretend that bardlyone's actions aren't out in the open, either. Any one of you could read up on what she's done over the past few years if you care to, or if you were one of the lucky few she was in contact with on the side. We gave her a chance to play despite everything, which is obvious considering she was playing again in the first place. And now we're here.

Are you hoping for some sort of concession on the rules? That's not on the table IMO. When a player commits one or more bannable offenses, particularly if repeated after warnings/other discipline, they get banned. That isn't going to change.

These are offenses that may result in banning, particularly if repeated, to sum up the rules list:
- Failing to try to roleplay
- Failing to ask for consent before proceeding with sex/torture RP
- Pursuing any sort of rape plotline
- Disrupting play by attempting to play with the same group of players across multiple PCs after being warned away from them
- Sharing IC information to attain an IC advantage for oneself or for another player or coordinate an IC action
- Multiplaying
- Using a bot/script to "play" the game for you
- Behaving exceptionally badly on the GDB (we're talking about breaking actual laws, here)

Hint: To get banned, you have to do one of these repeatedly. No exceptions. Not even the worst player gets banned without doing one of these twice. And even then, the first ban is almost always temporary.

Banning is a last resort as it is. Scaling back its use even further is impossible because of how little it's already used.

[Armaddict]

Completely disingenuous.

That log harmed nothing but a reputation that did not filter to IC events, and thus, placed little harm on the integrity of the game or the characters involved.  It swung in your favor until finding that an OOC -dialogue- led to complete removal of access to the game.  That was total self-sabotage on your part.

[Nergal]

There's a reason I listed the bannable offenses. "Posting a log" isn't one of them.

[Armaddict]

I suppose that falls under the privacy act, which of those reasons was actually used.  That's not a skepticism, that's me acknowledging that you're not going to tell me.

However, I think you really need to realize just how poorly this looks at that point and find an action that demonstrates disagreements and grievances will not lead to a banning.  That is part of the juggling act that is being alluded to in this thread as the divide grows that requires some modification of protocol and behavior on the staff side.  When I also have grievances (although minor enough that I don't consider the relationship broken), such things give me a hard time in future interactions.

I stand by that banning is incredibly severe, and should be reserved for situations where the integrity of the game itself is compromised -and- actively damaging players and their characters involved.  GDB bans are looser, because a lot of us say shitty things all the time, and is not necessary for a good gameplay experience.

Edit:  You guys really need to consider changing policy on public information.  In light of a lot of things being discussed elsewhere with reliable frequency, announcing bans and staff position on them as protocol might be wise.  Or something of that nature.  Something to go against, at least.

[Raptor_Dan]

Wow. I thought things actually had changed. I hope you don't delete your own posts, Nergal. I may be a complete asshat, but I'm still capable of seeing what's going on here, even from this thread alone. Consider me another veteran lost. Sorry to the players whose stories this affects.

This has been a futile attempt to help.

[Jingo]

Man for the longest time I thought I was the biggest, jaded butthurt cynic around here.

[Nergal]

If someone happens to break a rule and is a disgruntled player as well, they are not somehow immune to punishment.

My job is to help run the game. The "juggling act" cuts both ways here. What you're saying makes sense - staff should change what they do to reflect the playerbase's needs and wants. So let's imagine staff applying a softer touch to angrier players who also happen to be breaking the rules. What happens then? I can tell you that we'll get called out by good, honest players who follow the rules for turning a blind eye toward people actively spoiling the game. Player complaints will increase. And we'll be back to where we are now.

My point is that "the playerbase" isn't just one bloc. The "Staff-Player Divide" ignores that there are divisions between players as well. Players who follow the rules and expect an unspoiled game where they can RP on an even playing field expect staff to take out the trash and the cheaters. Players have different interests - and things that bother them, and things that neither bother nor interest them - and serving all of those interests equally is an impossibility. So we have to prioritize: the most basic thing we can and should do is maintain a roleplaying environment free from the hindrances of OOC discussion influencing IC play. The second thing we should do is keep things fun and new. And everything else will fall into place.

The last group, the players who break the rules, head off to jcarter to discuss their one side of the story with ~5 regular posters who don't care about the game so much that they're happy to show how little they care about the game by constantly discussing the game.

My suggestion to players: think for yourselves. What makes more sense: that the staff plotted among one another to mess with a player we were on the mend with over a period of months, breaking our own rules on starting plots to harm characters and the overall setting, and then covered it up? Or that a player with a long and publicly well-documented history of subversive activities toward the game misinterpreted information, falsified information, broke rules, got banned, and posted some other story as an excuse?

Hint: If it was choice #1 we would've just not banned the player and then pretended everything was normal.

[Nergal]

Thread locked. This conversation cannot continue without staff breaking its own rules on sharing information on other players, and that's not a road I am comfortable with going down.

If that's a deal-breaker for you, leave the game. If instead you want to rationally dissent then think of a way to do that that isn't trolly.