Posts made by GirlCalledBlu

@Kanye-Qwest said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

@GirlCalledBlu said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

Yolo is a Staffer on a game, and he also has a character. He is good about not having his character in scenes he runs, and he tries to make sure someone is always his back-up in major metaplot scenes where his character shows up so there's someone to GM his actions if necessary. He is also, while on his character, telling a pretty intense story about an NPC family member being murdered, and there's a handful of other characters participating. It's dynamic, has lots of character building stuff going on, and there's quite a few logs about it. Some other players think that Yolo is making it so his character is in the spotlight because his character is a pretty important character to this plot about the murdered family member.
Is he?

I think this goes back to what @Roz was saying about balance. If Yolo is trying to make sure his character isn't a major lynchpin in the metaplot, but has decided to run this story for his own character's development, is he balancing his role as a Staff with his role as a Player? Or should he have not run this story, because he is the main character of that particular storyline even if it he's running/telling the story as a Player and not a Staffer?

I've been give the impression that the example above is an example of a Staffer putting the spotlight on his character despite the story not having much or anything to do with the metaplot, and the story is being entirely run/told from the Player of the Character not the Staffer of the Game.

Additionally, is Yolo being an irresponsible Staffer because he decided to take his character and others through this story arc (about a murder in the family) instead of running this the story arc as a Staffer for someone else?

Is he running this story as a player-style storyteller, or is this part of the larger plot? I lean towards never being GM/storyteller in a story I'm also trying to be a player in. They're really two entirely different mindsets.

Player-style storyteller is my vision for this scenario. So the way any PC would run a storyline.

@ThatGuyThere said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

I will be honest I looked at Playing 5th World when it was open the first time. I didn't for one reason when I looked at the plot logged there were three or so characters who seemed to be the center of everything. I have no clue whether or not they were staff alts or not but I didn't want to be a bit part I MU* to be part of an ensemble.

Okay, if I can just ask for some clarification here, that'd be great!

When you were stalking the wiki, how did you determine who was the center? Was it based on how many logs they were tagged in, how many events they were in? For example, if you were looking at a wiki and Sam's name was the biggest name on the tag cloud (which I decided tonight are probably pretty detrimental if people are judging "spotlight" on how big someone's name on the cloud), and he's been in every log posted, is he the center of everything, or is he just always around for when RP happens?

@Bobotron said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

I've never understood this, but I have never been in a game where a staff PC, who was in a position of power, was abused. Now, maybe that's because of some of the background of games where I've been have most all been consensual RP, but at the same time, that doesn't seem to be an issue. The issue is asshats who abuse their power, not the fact that they're staff.

I agree here, Bob. But, we've entered a point in our community's history where bad experiences really influence how someone feels about a game the moment they create or guest log. I have, personally, had issues with Staff playing a Head of a House on a L&L game and their house abruptly becomes the biggest, baddest around despite non-Staff PCs putting in lots of effort in other houses. So, I get where people want to limit Staff from having their characters in leadership positions to avoid that kind of thing.

@TNP said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

The thing is, being staff and having a PC that you want o play like a regular PC is a tightrope to walk and takes practice to do well. It is though easier when you have multiple staffers. Then you can have your PC in events the other staffers run and have them adjudicate issues that crop up with the staff alt.

This is where I get mixed perceptions on things. So, let me give a scenario here:

Yolo is a Staffer on a game, and he also has a character. He is good about not having his character in scenes he runs, and he tries to make sure someone is always his back-up in major metaplot scenes where his character shows up so there's someone to GM his actions if necessary. He is also, while on his character, telling a pretty intense story about an NPC family member being murdered, and there's a handful of other characters participating. It's dynamic, has lots of character building stuff going on, and there's quite a few logs about it. Some other players think that Yolo is making it so his character is in the spotlight because his character is a pretty important character to this plot about the murdered family member.

Is he?

I think this goes back to what @Roz was saying about balance. If Yolo is trying to make sure his character isn't a major lynchpin in the metaplot, but has decided to run this story for his own character's development, is he balancing his role as a Staff with his role as a Player? Or should he have not run this story, because he is the main character of that particular storyline even if it he's running/telling the story as a Player and not a Staffer?

I've been give the impression that the example above is an example of a Staffer putting the spotlight on his character despite the story not having much or anything to do with the metaplot, and the story is being entirely run/told from the Player of the Character not the Staffer of the Game.

Additionally, is Yolo being an irresponsible Staffer because he decided to take his character and others through this story arc (about a murder in the family) instead of running this the story arc as a Staffer for someone else?

This came up in The 100 advertisement thread, but as the MUSH has closed, and I have some questions on this specific topic, I figured... hey, this is what this forum is for...

It has come up a few times that Staff PCs should not be in leadership positions or story spotlights, but I feel like I have a mixed perception on what this declaration means.

So.

I want to engage ya'll in a discussion.

Here's been my perception/notions so far:

1. Staff should not play characters in positions of IC power; by default, they have OOC power because they are staffers, but abuse is always a concern when a Staffer has both OOC and IC power, and that IC power comes through their PC; if a Staff PC does end up in a leadership position, their character should be the minority (i.e. if they end up on the Senate Security Council, they should be easily outvoted by non-Staff PCs on the same council). In general though, Staff PCs should not hold IC positions of power.
2. Staff can play characters on their games, and these characters can have their own story arc that is significant to the character's development as long as this story arc does not violate point #1 or take a significant role in the metaplot.
3. Staff can play their characters in metaplot events, as long as they are there to to participate solely as just another PC (i.e. "I'm here to blow shit up" or "I'm here to get pissant drunk and sleep under the table" [or any other variant]).
4. When a Staffer is on their PC, they are not operating as a Staffer, but as another PC on the game. There should be a clear boundary, and the PC bits should not be used as an arm of the Staffer. If the Staffer has something to say/do, they should say/do it on their wizbit.

Here's where I feel like these perceptions/notions are being challenged:

1. RP from Staff PCs should be solely to help other PCs grow/develop.
2. Staff PC stories should be minimized, and PC story arcs should be mostly downplayed.
3. Staff PCs should not receive any mention in the metaplot (for good or ill). A by ill, this could be an Staff-controlled NPC being an antagonist of a Staff PC, or results within the metaplot actually causing bad consequences for a PC of a Staffer.

Ultimately, I think the question here is... what role should Staff PCs have on a MUSH, and how does their role differ from the roles of non-Staff PCs?

@GangOfDolls said in The 100: The Mush:

It makes me sad to think though that an opportunity for clarity on this issue was missed so often while the game was still running because it was all right there, just not recognized.

Yes, me too, as it appears to escalated quite handsomely.

The 100 turned into a far larger game project than we anticipated. I admit to not being prepared, or more accurately thinking I was prepared and being very wrong.

It was a failed project, and one that has caused a general upset.

Good luck on future endeavours.

Thanks.

@surreality said in Web-based icon generator (can it be done??):

I ended up doing a few things that are a little quirky for a recent design, but it required a few hoops to jump through on the initial setup. It doesn't create a single image like the wikidot icons tend to be, but the end result is similar. Mediawiki can be smacked into handling the over all formatting to transplant it elsewhere in the way an icon would or in the places an icon would be; wikidot should be able to do something similar. The initial setup is a pain in the arse, but once that's done, it's only a matter of 'crop the image to a specific proportion', which can be done from the various crop/resize websites in a pinch?

I secretly hope Wikidot can do this. This would solve my problem with some character pictures being too oddly shaped for the character information box (i.e. the ideal shape is a 300x300 pixel square).

I'll take a peek at what you sent me.

Out of curiosity, has anyone tried to create a web-based generator for icons for wiki consumption? I'm flirting with the idea, but wondering if it is an reasonable project to tackle. Up to this point, I have just had Staff responsible for creating icons, but I'm designing wiki's for games where I'm a player, and am curious about how to streamline the process of creating icons with multiple layers and unique fonts.

@Miss-Demeanor

We're remembering this conversation very differently, which means we're probably not going to agree on what the purpose/content was, so I'm going to move on from it, and just agree that my attempt for player feedback did not actually get me the feedback I needed. You were a recommended person to come to for feedback, and so I asked you.

@Lithium

I agree with what you're saying here, but I do feel like Staffing is a community service act -- the community being this community, of course. (I do have to sit here and giggle, though as I have family members who are honored as being fabulous members of the community, and I can't really see contributions to the MUSH community ending up in someone's eulogy, but I digress...) Creating a public game means that I want to share that with the community. There is no way to please everyone (and I'm not delusional enough to think I ever could!), but I've seen enough examples where a game is avoided because a Staffer (head or asst) is a real problem. I'd rather people avoid the game because the theme isn't their cuppa, not because I staff there.

@Sunny

Okay, I appreciate your words here. It can be sometimes hard to parse where the AUGH RAWR MUTTER ROAR is constructive, because most of it comes across as just accusatory, and that sparks the need to be defensive, instead of actual self-reflection. I'll keep that in mind as I go back through this thread and reread some of the comments.

@ThatGuyThere

That's just unfortunate, but I see your point.

@krmbm said in Customize Tabs in Wikidot:

If you're not keen on self-styling, there's a decent-looking template to redesign the look of the tabs here: http://snippets.wikidot.com/code:tabview-csi

Definitely! Thanks for sharing that. Hadn't seen that before.

@ThatGuyThere said in The 100: The Mush:

How you ask the question is very important. Asking "How should I introduce Grounders?" will get you a lot more of an honest answer then "Should I introduce Grounders like this?" especially if asked from a staff bit.

You're right.

And that is how the conversation started. By the time it got to the point in the story being presented here, I had already been given answers to the first question, and was looking for feedback on those answers. That is where this thread is being picked up.

Again, I understand what you are saying, and I agree... and I guess because I had been given pretty blunt feedback from those I asked, I didn't expect perceived distrust of Staffers to impact the answers from others. But, I understand that people have poor experience with Staffers that greatly impacts their ability to trust anyone with a wizbit.

So, there you have it.

Perceptions are important.

People are presenting their perceptions of events, and -- while I do not agree with how they think something happened -- I respect that their perceptions are important and count, just as I hope they respect my perceptions.

Not once have I felt that I was abusing players, my role as a Staffer, or the way in which we ran games. Obviously that is not how some of you feel. So, best I can do is apologize for any point in my Staffing career where my actions were perceived that way. I appreciate those who have given constructive feedback.

Because I feel my perception of the whole Gideon/Grounders thing should be noted. Running the idea of two PCs being the Grounders captured and introduced to the 100 was suggested to me by a friend of mine that I have Staffed with in the past. They suggested that I ask a variety of players about how to introduce Grounders, because of the very reasons people bring up about the "echo chamber." And frankly, I asked @Miss-Demeanor because I had asked a couple other players, they gave me some feedback, and one of those players suggested I ask her because they believed she would provide me with some good feedback. She was presented as a person who would be a good one to ask, so I asked.

That's really all my intentions were, and if they were perceived as poorly, then I apologize for that.

At this point, I feel like there's really not much else I can say. I feel that some perceptions here are incorrect, and the accusations accompanying them are something I am thinking about more.

I adore being part of this community, but the impression I am getting here is that I am not a good Staffer, so there's that. I'm not going to turn into that person that people don't RP with or interact with because I made poor decisions, or thought I was doing a good job and I wasn't.

Thanks again for the feedback.

@bored said in The 100: The Mush:

lack of self-awareness

Not denying that. Feedback helps. Thanks.

Here's the code to change the entire design of the tabs for Wikidot wikis. I have kept everything very plain here, so it is easy to change to fit your wiki style guide. I've also added a few tips that I've found are helpful for redesigning the tabview code for Wikidot.

/*SETTINGS HORIZONTAL LINE*/
.yui-navset .yui-nav,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-nav {
    border:solid #000; /* color of the horizontal line between tab list and selected content */
    border-width:0 0 5px; /*thickness of the horizontal line between tab list and content */
}
.yui-navset .yui-nav li,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-nav li {
    margin:0 2px 0 0; /* space between tabs */
}
.yui-navset .yui-nav .selected,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-nav .selected {
    margin:0 1px -1px 0; /* for overlap */
}
/* SETTINGS FOR UNSELECTED TABS */
.yui-navset .yui-nav a,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-nav a {
    background:#FFFFFF url(http://themes.wikidot.com/local--files/rainbow-base/tabcolor.png) repeat-x -3px;
    border-top:solid #000 1px;
    border-left:solid #000 1px;
    border-right:solid #000 1px;
    font-weight:none;
    font-family:Arial;
    font-size:140%;
    color:#000;/*tab text color*/
}
.yui-navset .yui-nav a em,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-nav a em {
    border:solid #000 0px;
}

/*HOVER SETTINGS FOR UNSELECTED TABS*/
.yui-navset .yui-nav a:hover,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-nav a:hover {
    background:#DDD
}

/* SETTINGS FOR SELECTED TABS */
.yui-navset .yui-nav .selected a,
.yui-navset .yui-nav .selected a:focus,
.yui-navset .yui-nav .selected a:hover {
    background:#CCC url(http://themes.wikidot.com/local--files/rainbow-base/tabcolor.png) repeat-x -3px;
    color:#fff;border:1px solid #000;font-weight:600
}

/* SETTINGS FOR SELECTED CONTENT */
.yui-navset .yui-content {
    background-color: #FFF; /* content background color */
}
 
.yui-navset .yui-content,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-top .yui-content {
    border-color: #000; /* content border */
    border-top-color:#DDD; /* different border color */
}
 
.yui-navset-left .yui-content {
    border-color: #000; /* content border */
    border-left-color: #DDD; /* different border color */
}
 
.yui-navset-bottom .yui-content,
.yui-navset .yui-navset-bottom .yui-content {
    border-color: #000; /* content border */
    border-bottom-color: #DDD; /* different border color */
}

So, some tips:

1. You can use Google Fonts here in the font sections for content and tabs. It creates unique fonts for these features. I tend to stay away from changing the content font (hello, Verdana, my old friend), but you totally can.
2. Don't go too crazy with colors here. Try to stay consistent. I'm a huge fan of creating a palette for a wiki, and sticking to it. If you haven't played with http://paletton.com/, it is a really great website for creating color palettes that give both hex and RGB codes for colors. Those RGB codes can be really important if you're playing with transparent elements.

Here is this code in action: http://ablusandbox.wikidot.com/tabexamples

Enjoy, and happy wikifooing.

EDIT: Actually used the correct website name for Paletton. Oops.

@Ominous said in The 100: The Mush:

To be actually constructive for once, I am growing into the opinion that if staff want to have PCs that aren't on the bottom of thr totem pole, the game needs multiple spheres and if someone has a character in a sphere, they cannot staff it.

Definitely.

I just have no need to have my characters high on the totem pole.

Granted, I have had characters in places of power/leadership, but never on a game or in a sphere where I was a Staffer -- which sometimes has its own problems, where you are the lead Staff of one Sphere, but have a high power character in another, and then people are wondering if you're making Staff decisions about your sphere because it benefits your PC elsewhere. It is kind of a hard road to travel.

@bored said in The 100: The Mush:

IE, if you're a staffer responsible for running Royal NPCs X, Y and Z... maybe don't pick a top tier noble as your PC alt.

Definitely agree with you there. This happened on a few L&L games I was on where the royal NPCs X, Y, and Z were played by the same Staffer who was also a HOH. It was very, very messy.

Because people keep saying this, and I'm really wanting some information... If I can ask a question, where I am genuinely looking for a constructive response...

It keeps being mentioned that on The Fifth World, my PCs were central to the metaplot. I didn't think they were. At all. So, if anyone could maybe either PM me with details or add details here, I'd appreciate it. Perceptions count, so if someone perceived my PCs (Ellinor, Letha, Devon, and Lionel) being lynchpins for the metaplot, I'd appreciate some feedback.

Thanks.

@Auspice and @bored

I agree with the two major points you both had here.

L&L games draw players in who want major political power. TFW was a war game with a L&L component, and you're not wrong that L&L games have a certain set-up to them that might not work, but all of them have. I don't have a feasible solution to that, beyond staggering where positions of power open and provide more easily-accessible ladders to those lower on the totem pole.

To Auspice's point...

It is hard to separate the Staffer and Player bits at times. I try my best, and I have purposefully moved entire page conversations that started on my PC to my Staffer. But, doesn't always work and I think it is an important thing to keep track of.

@Sunny said in The 100: The Mush:

I think you're a lovely person, your husband as well, but I don't think either of you should ever, ever run a public game with just the two of you. You have no balancing factors, no one to reality check you, no one to bounce stuff off of. You provide an echo chamber for one another. Not always a problem with everyone who does these things by themselves in a pair, but in the case of the 100, you shut out and shut down a portion of your playerbase because of it, and y'all made some really, really bad decisions.

Fair enough, @Sunny.

You're right-- we do, do that.

Thank you for the constructive feedback.

@Glitch Cool, thanks!

@Ghost said in The 100: The Mush:

Hindsight20/20 leading off with that would have been more constructive and made me look less like a trolly cunt.

Here's my problem with what you said here, @Ghost...

Not once in this entire thing did you ever present your arguments in a way that was constructive. You've been VERY clear your job here is to basically point out all our flaws as some huge PSA to the community. And then, when we opened a private game, you decided to point an ugly finger our way as if we were doing something so outrageously heinous, that it would result in the END OF ALL THINGS.

This was never about wanting to help us as Staffers "change." And, to be honest, I have yet to fully unpack why you have decided we are the WORST STAFFERS OF ALL TIME, OMG -- which is exactly how you have presented us (until now).

TFW was an original theme, and we had developed a lot of it before it opened. It was not a blank canvas for people to paint their own vision on. When there were blank spots, we totally tapped players who would have a horse in that race to help fill those blanks. Demanding player input on everything was not feasible for that game's theme, because we had so much of it already developed when we opened. So, if that is truly what is bothering you, is that we did not ask you for input, then I have no idea how to tackle that. It has been over 2 years since the game closed, so I honestly cannot remember if you ever came to us and offered possible additions to theme.

But as you have said, you seriously need to change your approach, because I personally found nothing you said constructive, and everything you said a direct insult to us as players and staffers. And I cannot tell you how many times I asked people who know you, played with you, or had any general interaction with you what exactly we did that resulted in you thinking we took a massive dump in your oatmeal.

You keep bringing up that we pigeonhole games to be about our PCs... but, honestly, I can't even think of one instance where TFW was 100% centered around Ellinor, Devon, Letha, or Lionel. Or where it was about Nikomachos, Victor, Jeremy, or Drake. In fact, we tended to treat our PCs like total shit as Staffers (i.e. Nikomachos's dad being discredited, thrown under the bus, and his family being painted as unreliable Knights). Now, I'm gonna say that my goal with a character is always to tell their story with them at the center, but I tell that story from my CHARACTER bit, and not from my STAFF bit. So, yeah... my character's aren't flat people who are just there along for the ride or to be the supporting cast. If you got some examples to throw out where we turned our characters into the Biggest Damn Heroes on the MUSH, please let me know. Maybe your perception of what happened is far different than mine. You can either do it here in a public forum, or you can PM me, but honestly... I'm tired of this bullshit.

So if you truly want to help us BE BETTER PEOPLE (since we apparently are the worst), then be as constructive as you think you should be.

@Ghost Dude. Seriously. Transform your dirndl into a gown of ice, and sing it with me: