I have no problem with the concept of a metaplot.
But on a pragmatic level, I think most of the time it is not implemented well, for a variety of reasons unique to each MU*, with a few exceptions (like smaller tightly themed games--run by organized and talented people. By no means does smaller or tightly themed mean that the metaplot doesn't suck. There's a lot of moving parts.)
*Staff turnover with no staff documentation--especially AWOL staff who don't leave any notes for incoming.
*Staff burnout--which leads to the above OR the natural inclination to run primarily for those they enjoy the most/who are the the most doggedly annoying or in their face (to shut them up) while directing their anger to people who "don't do anything" but who in fact have multiple months of +jobs and the like ignored/unanswered or who can't make the very limited time slots.
*Many times the same people who are great at administration (or who are willing to step up into that role) are not necessarily great STs by default, either in scenes or providing non-scene snippets (ic clues, job responses, ect.)
I don't really count player response to metaplot here, because I'm not sure it's that important. You'll always have some people respond, no matter how crappy the storytelling or how great it is. And I don't think, if you're going to roll out a metaplot, it's a great excuse to use--simply because I can think of at least 4-5 MUSHes I've been part of where staff used "players aren't responding to me" to deflect from the real issue--burnout and/or disinterest in STing for people. There were many players waiting on unanswered jobs (or mails), who would try to attend everything they could, ect--but obviously weren't reacting the way they were supposed to to the ST's "obvious" clues (protip--if "nobody" is getting what you want out of the scene the problem may be your clues aren't as "obvious" as you think!).
Metaplot is a bitch to keep track of and keep relevant. You have to have a plan. I've staffed many places and really most of the time there IS no documentation or pragmatic controls to keep track of the plan. It's not fun, it's paperwork, but not having anything leads to a lot of problems once the new shiny has worn off.
The last time I participated and really chased a metaplot on a large multiple-sphere inclusive metaplot where the people involved were not good documentarians led to me being IC penalized and screamed at ooc by a staffer for my "lack of response" over many months--until I started forwarding the many unanswered @mails I'd sent to her (this was in the era prior to +jobs) showing that I had tried weekly at first and then checked in monthly, despite no response, for over a RL year. After that, with the exception of TR's apoc-plot (which I was very judicious through whom I participated and had a lot of fun as a result), I've been extremely EXTREMELY reluctant to get involved in anything if I don't get a response. What happened to me is not at all uncommon. Usually the people who have been trying to do things in the face of staff burnout, who wait patiently and just keep paddling, tend to ultimately be the receivers of staff lashing out because of their frustrations/burnout/overwhelmedness--and usually in the context of public staff complaining of lack of player response to it.
I think if you can't be bothered to set up documentation rules and follow them for metaplot, staffside, and you are not a one-person show, then probably you should think twice about weaving in a metaplot. Sure you can blame the players, but ultimately they have no control if the implementation is half-assed, declines over time, and becomes confused and byzantine because of so much turnover with nobody keeping track of what's been done/what the direction is/what's left to do.
