@thenomain Was it something particular, or the whole vibe of "don't disagree with us"?
He/Him
I would have taken it as just a vibe; I will say that I was extremely twitchy and overreacting on the public channel. This is a thing I do and I'm not proud of it and I'm owning it.
However, Creature lectured me about it not once but twice, and at the second one I asked for the same consideration that they were asking from me. This was not welcome (okay), but terms like "understand" and "not good for either of us" were used, which are typical weasel words for "I'm throwing you out but don't want to sound mean doing it", except it was presumptive and honestly kind of insulting.
I am not for a moment saying that I would've worked for the game, but I would liked to have had a chance to get away from Overbearing Staff Judgement in order to get my senses back. After staff started making decisions for me while asking for understanding, asking for a certain attitude but not affording the same, I decided that there's no sense in trying.
It seems like a great game for those who fit staff's expectations. For those who don't, good luck.
tl;dr: I didn't agree the way they wanted. Their game, their unwritten rules.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@thenomain said in Spirit Lake: An Original Modern Fantasy Game:
After staff started making decisions for me while asking for understanding, asking for a certain attitude but not affording the same, I decided that there's no sense in trying.
This, in particular, doesn't strike me as anything other than an indicator of... if not outright malevolence, something very close to it.
He/Him
I'm going with inexperience, and to push my complaint a little in their favor I'm not easy to work with when I feel pushed into a corner.
Even when I'm the one who pushed myself there.
This is why I try to repeat the mantra: Understand and ... something I forgot, but it was really poignant and I say it a lot. These people have really pissed me off with what I read as hypocracy, but I hope for the sake of people who still have a chance that it was just for me.
—
Update: I have talked to someone who was asked to leave the game because staff would not let them rework the character for a stat the player wanted to justify, and they tried to justify it with background updates.
I don’t know the details from staff’s side, but fighting over a stat in a game system where stats are said to not be that important does shake my confidence. I’m hoping for misunderstanding, but still one that denies a player access to the game is on shoulders of staff.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
Super not appropriate for an ad thread according to the standards of the board. Flag on the play, extremely excessive salt
@thenomain Can we move this to the Hog Pit? I'm interested and engaged in reading this but I'd like to respect the conditions of the Advertiser section.
I don’t read Hog Pit. If that’s where admin wants to use it, sure, but I still feel that an advertisement thread that does not allow any negative feedback, but allows positive feedback, is not useful, just as any other one-sided discussion is not useful.
My use of terms like “weasel” maybe qualifies it for the Pit, but I was and still am pissed off at any staff group that has hidden rules for what constitutes what kind of response they will accept to a lecture.
I refuse to read the Hog Pit or participate because it was and I imagine still is something of a trial of monkeys, and I’m not interested in that kind of pointless time-sink. I can spend that time helping games or players avoid games or discuss whether or not games have sincere problems.
But since sometimes even I cannot avoid shouting into the ass of the community, let the chips fall where they may, but the Pit is not the place for discussion.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@thenomain I think such a discussion could go in Mildly Constructive. We haven't used the word 'shitstain' yet, so it's still constructive.
ETA: I also agree that being unable to criticise something being advertised where it is being advertised is stupid.
He/Him
@thenomain Fair. I was more approaching this that while you are being relatively civil and constructive about this despite being angry, there's always someone who goes too far. The Hog Pit exists so we can have bad things in a bad place.
Granted, sometimes there are games that deserve nothing but scorn.
Still.
Mildly constructive for now might be a good compromise.
This particular thread is probably not the place to argue whether you agree with the mod team's stated rules of engagement for the forum section. I totally get why that debate has gone around several times, because I think it's complicated, but right now the Rules of Engagement are what they are at present.
I can be constructive about this, but I won’t guarantee that I would be nice, and as long as there are people who conflate “constructive” and “nice”, even Mildly Constructive tends to get derailed by hyperactive flailing. That and the trolls and those who want to derail it on purpose.
Anarchy just doesn’t work that way, and this board is a loose anarchy by design.
Ftr, I also think that ad threads that don't allow for bad reviews are silly. Someone make a mildly constructive post about that, too.
I'm not sure what I hate more. The stupid rule, or the people that jump around in the back seat 'helping' to 'enforce' it.
@thenomain said in Spirit Lake: An Original Modern Fantasy Game:
My use of terms like “weasel” maybe qualifies it for the Pit, but I was and still am pissed off at any staff group that has hidden rules for what constitutes what kind of response they will accept to a lecture.
Dude, seriously. I have no idea what was said between the time you bowed out of the public questions channel and the day plus in between then and now, but I saw what happened ON it and you are being disingenuous af. You were told basically one billion times to just cg a character you wanted to play NOW, and not worry about specific mechanics that won't be relevant for half a rl year at best,and had it very clearly explained several times that they didn't want to support in depth mechanics supposition, and that some things were not planned and other things were not permitted ad infinitum - and you were an obstinate pain in the ass about it.
If you actually got lectured, you asked for it. I'd say maybe you don't realize how frustrating you are, but you admit to it? So I guess just : if you want people to try and read you, learn to read other people and maybe step back and have a coke and a smile when you are not communicating well with them.
*edited to remove an errant 't' from 'pain'
@thenomain said in Spirit Lake: An Original Modern Fantasy Game:
as long as there are people who conflate “constructive” and “nice”, even Mildly Constructive tends to get derailed by hyperactive flailing
... and yet your complaint seems to boil down to "they weren't nice to me in their constructive criticism of my app".
And yet, I’ve said multiple times how I’ve been flailing. I know you want to defend the game, kind of making my point, but here’s where I comment about reading, as much as I hate it when people do that.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
I did ask for it. And I told them twice was too much for what they were asking of me, and to offer me some slack. They took this to mean that I didn’t want to work with them, which is the words that they put in my mouth that triggered this round of flailing.
I’m willing to own my flailing. I was willing to own it when you ridiculed me publicly on Arx. I am not going to let staff anywhere use that as an excuse to make me their bitch for ten seconds. No, if staff wants understanding and sincerity I’ll give it to them, but if they throw it in my face then I’m going to call them out for it.
Punish me for crimes I’ve committed, not those you think I might commit. It’s just that easy.
It's an old argument, but I see no problem with factual criticism in advertisement threads (and @Thenomain is hardly flaming here). Otherwise it's going to enforce a falsified positive view because the only feedback will be the happy players/supporters.
If people actually want a policy where advertisement threads are only that, they should just be locked and truly advertisement-only with no discussion, with discussion in parallel threads in appropriate areas.
@thenomain You did mention several times you were flailing and having a panic reaction. Several times staff and players suggested that you maybe step back and take some time to calm down. The suggestions were made multiple times, by multiple people, in considerate tones. That you did not placed the emotional burden of dealing with your reactions upon staff, which was just... not cool or fair, man. Those are your reactions. They're for you to own and handle.
@bored said in Spirit Lake: An Original Modern Fantasy Game:
If people actually want a policy where advertisement threads are only that, they should just be locked and truly advertisement-only with no discussion, with discussion in parallel threads in appropriate areas.
People wanted it, like enough that they implemented it as a rule and put it in the thread that Roz linked, the rules of conduct.
ETA: it sounds like enough of us now disagree with the rule, though! Maybe someone should start a constructive criticism thread to get it changed.
#FreeFarfalla
@thenomain I think such a discussion could go in Mildly Constructive. We haven't used the word 'shitstain' yet, so it's still constructive.
ETA: I also agree that being unable to criticise something being advertised where it is being advertised is stupid.
