@Arkandel hey hey, don't throw me under the bus because you are jealous of my monitor situation!
In more seriousness, @Z-01, I did not think that. I generally try to assume the best of others unless proven otherwise that I shouldn't. And yeah, player management is hard and a skill only few have bothered to learn. I've known a few people that are awesome at it, but it is rare.
With great power comes great responsibility. It's kind of amazing. I have one screen just for mail and IMs, two screens of code, one screen that is the product that I am changing so I can test, and the last for streaming videos about Overwatch.
... >.>
Did I say great responsibility? well.
Yeah, I definitely think it was too few staffers in that case. Sorry, I started out quoting a specific instance and then broadened up the reasons why this happens. There are also staffers that don't think player management is a focus; that plots and code and etc are more important. Or that think players will somehow manage and work these things out themselves.
For instance, I do think I've heard enough from ThatGuyThere to assume that he doesn't think player management is as important as the rest of the staff duties.
In my opinion, it's the most important and toughest part of staffing. Writing plots, writing grid descs, coding-- I could do all these pretty easily. Managing players? Even I admit that I'm not good at it. That's why having a dedicated staffer for exactly player management is good.
@Rook said in MU and Alternate Channels:
I would be clear that I understand that it is allegations, but even as allegations, I consider them worth a conversation.
Going back to this-- This. Man, why don't staff have more conversations? I know things aren't black and white, nothing is clear-cut. But if someone's making allegations of shitty behavior on another's part, why wouldn't you at least talk to the accused? You don't have to ban them or immediately give them a warning or even anything.
This is one of the things I never understood with the one complaint I put in to staff. That they wouldn't even have a conversation with the person.
To some extent, it just strikes me as a symptom of either not enough staff or lazy staffing. Not having the dedicated time for player management.
I actually like the first better, just to combo break. I think it goes better with the city of Los Angeles? Idk.
Ok, PM me your address, the random internet person. Right?? I'll send chocolates.
Sometimes when you post, I really want to send you chocolate. (You're always so grumpy! Do you want some chocolate, WTFE?)
@surreality said in MU and Alternate Channels:
@ThatGuyThere said in MU and Alternate Channels:
Real example As much as I empathize with Surrs roof hole that would not be a reason to not allow She Who Gets Namedropped on a game. (Note there are plenty of other reasons to no allow though.)
The only reason I find it relevant is that it's a pretty clear demonstration that nothing about her has changed at all. If she was interested in reforming or 'being better', she had a decade to make something actually important right and didn't. It's not hard to get from there to 'and on a game, where nothing is real and it is not very important, she's not going to give half a fuck about the damage she does to others, either', since that's been proven out long term, too. I wouldn't expect her to go around making amends for all the game shit she's fucked up, but if she's on the 'better human being' train all of a sudden, you'd think she'd make some kind of effort along the line to make major RL wrongs right, and she's not done so. I wouldn't expect people to disallow her on a game over it happening, because duh, really, but it's a big red flag re: 'has she really reformed and changed?' that people should keep in mind.
And for the record, I absolutely disagree with that guy's decision. If it were my game and you were playing on it and came to me with proof that this person who had caused personal destruction in your house was now playing on the same game? They'd absolutely be gone. Idgas that it happened off a game.
@Ganymede said in MU and Alternate Channels:
@Arkandel said in MU and Alternate Channels:
I'd say the onus would be on you to prove this, else it'd be little more than libel.
This isn't an issue of proof. You have to presume that it is true because the issue is: should staff take action if a player is telling truths to affect another player's RP.
Said another way, if I learned that Rex/Sovereign was playing on Fallen World and informed another player of this so that he/she would not RP with him, should staff take action?
And yet, isn't that what we want people to do with VASpider, in some ways? Informing everyone who they are playing so that people can avoid them.
I get where you're going with this, and basically it really comes down to not being cut and dry. You really can't say 'i'd never take action on THIS' or 'i would take action on THAT'. It depends on the situation, to me. And who I want on my game, as I /think/ you have said in the past. (Maybe not you. It might have been someone else's point in another thread way back when.)
I have no solutions, only problems.
More seriously, it is much tougher to figure out who is spreading rumors and if they are lies. You certainly wouldn't want to investigate such behavior until it was reported by the person the rumors were being spread about, and hopefully they'd have some idea of the person spreading them.
And if the person saying it claims it is true? I don't know. Nothing is cut and dry, for sure.
ok, but I have to admit. 'Drives a Fiat' had me laughing out loud at work.
But you literally just heard someone say they wouldn't associate with someone who runs a RL dog fighting ring. I wouldn't either. I don't give a shit what @Rook thinks, but if someone is doing something like /that/-- No, I am not RPing with them. (I will RP with anyone with any political stance; not really the same beast.)
So if Player A is making up a lie that is keeping Player B and Player C from playing with Player D, even if it's about their real life, why would you /not/ look into Player A lying and spreading rumors about Player D?
Someone's reputation in a game matters. If I start telling people any sort of lies about you, it shouldn't matter if it impacts RP or not. If I start telling people that you're cheating on your wife, going bankrupt, fighting dogs, killed a man in Reno, etc etc. Any lies that I deliberately spread about another player matters and should be punishable. But, if we're going to debate what should or shouldn't be punishable, then that's a different subject.
This one is, if you'd punish it on the game, why wouldn't you do it if they did it off-game.
Can you read posts more clearly, please? The idea isn't that Arkandel would be punished for running a dog-fighting ring. But if someone is going around and making that accusation against him, blatantly lying, it's going to impact his RP. Would you not punish someone for making those blatant lies against someone?
That was what the posts before you were saying. You always do this. If only you took more time reading.
I do feel like the overidentification of a person as these myriad of identities is silly. I don't get to tell them that, but sometimes it is easier to just be who you are. I am Megatron. That's all
Look, we work for the underprivileged. Our whole philosophy was based on the fact that transformer society was too classist!
Also to throw this out there, I've very rarely ever needed to refer to someone by their race. What context are you all (ambiguous term) running into this that it's becoming such a big issue that you can't just /not/ call someone an Asian?
Mostly, they like to be called their names.
You are right that /context matters/. Yes, the ability to speak about ideas and thoughts at an academic level freely and openly matters, and should be done in a respectful way. The respectful is the key. But coming in and making sweeping proclamations that all people who talk about microaggressions can fuck right off? That's not taking context into consideration, either.
I am willing to admit that I was wrong in some regards to the way I left Arx. I am also grateful to see this from staff. I think it's a good step towards creating the type of environment that anyone wants in a creative space.
I don't know if I am one of the people that @Cupcake would want back or not, but I think not coming back is all my own fault at this point, having burned bridges in leaving.
Edit to add: yeah, I realize this isn't constructive to the thread. I was just kind of musing and also thumbs-uping to seeing a problem player asked to leave.
let me back up to say that I don't think a MU* is a business; players aren't customers. But I disagree that it's like your house. Sure, you pay for it and provide it, but it's not like you get nothing back from the players that come there. They build into it, provide play and stories and put their own time and energy into it. I feel like staff that doesn't acknowledge that when they go about how much they are providing to their players is doing themselves a disservice.
It's more like a clubhouse. Yeah, you own it, but it's wasted money and a shitty, lonely building without the members that show up and contribute.