[GSM]

I have no obligation to ease your paranoia. I've shared my opinions in the previous thread, and I remain sincere in my desire to see something good come from this.  Objectively people don't expect the GM's to bend over and cater, but people want more than what is currently available. 

I'm open to suggestions of compromise, I am open to suggestions. I feel that's worthwhile, but you've offered none while merely trying to smear people here as malicious in an unfair way. 

You came with an agenda from the first meme to this point here. You're not worth the time to argue because I don't think anything valuable or healthy will come from it.

You can call it paranoia if you want, but I know how multiple people saw the entire conversation in the Discord go on less than an hour before the thread went up. I came here to point out how so intensely suspicious this entire thread came across from before it was even posted to the forums, and how immensely worrying it is for this to be the face of who wants new GMs in the game.

Trust me, I love the game just as much as you guys do, I'm sure. But the way this thread even arose in the first place is artificial, the context is EXTREMELY worrying, and nothing had been immediately disproven, from my first actual, serious post. If you just want to take me as some sort of agenda-clad warrior or whatever the fuck, I'm operating on my own, and I genuinely don't care. 

Lastly, you can give suggestions or take suggestions. Sure, you absolutely can. But it's not you, nor any of the GMs, not but a single soul that can make a meaningful impact, and that one man is Dev. This is HIS game that we operate within the confines of, and as such, only his opinion proper should be enforced. I am not liable to giving suggestions to you, and you are not liable of taking suggestions at all.

We as a community are giving suggestions to Dev, and nobody else. No other one man's word is gospel, not yours, not mine, and not anyone else in this thread.


As a small note, I'm going to be skipping the entirety of FatherCrixius's post, because all it does is skip and strawman the entire point of my initial post, as well as the follow-up, in a rather unnecessarily toxic manner. Nice Cyberpunk reference, though. I heard Keanu Reeves is in that game.

Since it seems like a false narrative is being written in my absence, I suppose I should step in and intervene and express my clarification that not a single soul asked me to make this post, and it was also NOT made with the intention of running a single GM through the mud. After talking to people from different walks of the community (people I do not even talk to normally) on the very topic, the fact that there was a general consensus at all on this made it very clear - if I wasn't going to make this post, either someone else inevitably would anyway, or nothing would change, leaving a lot of people unhappy.

The idea that this comes because I'm a puppet voice for people who dislike a certain GM is ridiculous. I could point to multiple and express my concerns there, but truth be told the entire thing comes down to a fix being not in removing existing GMs, but adding more. Any distaste for how an individual GM operates is not factored into this post whatsoever, and it should not be treated like there's some malicious narrative to this. I assure you 100% that there is not one.

It just stands to reason, that outside of particular groups that not every member of the community is a part of, many of the GMs do not offer themselves a presence. They don't try to foster any sort of public relationship with the people they are serving - and that leads to people being distrustful and misguided. And as much as people can just say "oh just go talk to them", that's telling someone to reach out to someone they've been led to have a negative opinion of. And that could be alleviated by a more active presence - GMs showing the community what they're like. Making themselves seem more approachable.

And, of course, yes - GMs have their own lives. I am very much aware of this fact and have said I am. I'm not going to go around demanding people neglect their lives, but we should at least have the numbers on the team to help mitigate this risk.

This post isn't just to get some specific person in the role, either - I'm not looking to give my friends a boost and say "hey, this person should be GM". I'd be plenty satisfied with more good GMs in general.

I should not have to defend posts like this from insinuations of the narrative behind their existence, when all I want is for something positive to come of this. And the corporate tone is simply how I am when serious, and trying to be professional about things, because with topics such as this, a "ha-ha funny joke" mood really doesn't fit the bill.

It's true that there was a conversation in a public server that anyone could go to if they want to peer in about GMs, but from what I remember of it it wasn't bashing one GM. It had criticism that went towards several, but it wasn't toxic, it wasn't attacking anyone, and it was on fair merit and concern from the community.

And posts like that are why people are so reluctant to voice their desires and concerns in the community. Nobody wants the target this puts on their back from people who choose to spin their own web on the story, and the reputation it gives them.

But I don't particularly mind. Because if something good comes of it, it'll be worth all the negative reception I get.

Finally, a proper response.

I agree that it wasn't made with the intention of running a GM through the wringer, but that's how it comes across. However, the circumstances are still extremely worrying, and simply saving face by saying that wasn't the intention, nor anyone was involved, yet being knowledgeable of the very thing I was speaking of, and thinly veiling harassment as criticism, isn't satisfactory. And I'm aware that you aren't a puppet voice for people who dislike a certain GM, but the timing between both events (as in, between an hour or two, and not much longer) doesn't help the case that it felt like a specific goal for a specific reason.

I'm simply giving my own opinion on the circumstances surrounding the thread, and how wrong it felt to be on the outside, looking in. If it came off as overly hostile, then I apologize. I just couldn't stay silent about it and let it pass by. This is overall a good response, as opposed to what I was given initially.

Fun things happen when you're sleeping. Alright, let's take a crack at it.

Beyond the droll, corporate tone, which is an overarching theme of this entire post and belying its true nature, I will need to remind anyone at home not a part of the group they're within that this all started because of a collective tantrum within a Discord server, with people of varying opinions all present, melting down about how Dyst was the worst GM because she didn't do anything (???) and didn't respond to their application posts, be it public or private (horribly ironic for people who wanted transparency and enablement, and are now undergoing the same process as anyone else, but in private). It's almost like Ham pointed out; they're human too, and they've got their own lives. 


I agree that the inactivity of the GMs is a problem, but actively bashing a GM behind her back as a collective, and then pretending like you didn't while asking for further reforms is unnecessarily two-faced and sets a bad example, especially for an Event Staff member, regardless of if this is your true intention or if Apple is simply a mouthpiece for the larger group belying the surface (which is more than likely the case).

Unless it was a different Discord server than the one I partook in, this is incorrect, although I wouldn't be surprised if it was brought up many, many times over the past months as a result of how popular the topic actually is. The thing that properly prompted Apple to make this thread was a fairly long, and most certainly civil discussion about the state of the game in the Stella Trade Discord. There were biting remarks, certainly, but in a forum of twenty people, some are going to feel stronger than others about specific things. Things not necessarily relevant to the topic at hand, either.

This isn't a thread to call out any one particular GM. This thread is for the improvement of the game overall, offering criticism where it is due, and has been due for a very long time. Talking behind people's backs is common human practice, and while it obviously isn't a good thing, nobody is innocent in this regard. If being a hypocrite made you illegible to change things that needed to be changed, nothing would ever get done in the world.

There are no attacks in this thread, though, and to brand it as so is equally as disrespectful to Apple bringing something many consider a pressing issue to light.

While I can't confirm nor deny how much Slydria has been pulling weight, it's an actual hindrance to actively idolize one GM, and leave the rest dead in the water. Other GMs can give their own piece, but this is quite frankly disrespectful and distasteful to the rest of the GM team, especially with the context given above.


All of the applications up to this point have been for things we've needed to seek out approval for in the first place, be it height, age, et cetera. The rest have been for enabling players to do crazier shit with magic or just having a stronger presence within the world, which I don't particularly agree with, but I do appreciate that steps were taken to allow this kind of thing within the game's scope. If only everything was public, like it was called for, from the very beginning, and nothing had to be privately submitted. 

I do agree that some races need application, especially with how large the community has gotten and how many new races have been pushed into apparent strong points in terms of narrative, and the major implications of races being permitted to exist (e.g. Vampire, Dullahan, Lich, the upcoming Amalgama, Reaper and Apertaurus, especially), but it's of my stark opinion that we haven't gotten a race strong enough in the mechanical sense nor the lore sense that it'd actively require applications. The sole reason why I agree that some races need application is that I don't trust a good portion of the player base, neither novice nor veteran, with half of the "strong" narrative choices in race or to treat the race's legacy and lore with dignity and respect.

Just look at the reputation Liches have.

I agree with your sentiment that idolizing one GM is bad. The team should be viewed as a whole, and not as a single person. It's just unfortunate that, as I stated in my previous post, work is given to those who actively take it, and isn't given to those who doesn't. Being a GM is very much a service position, and some expectation of presence, and activity is expected. If those expectations aren't being met, it's more than fair to criticize it in a constructive manner. That being said, if you're a GM, and you're so busy with life, or so troubled it's actively tearing huge chunks of your potential service time away, it's in my opinion time to consider retiring.


I also agree with the idea of application-locked races. One of the things I wanted to do when I was a GM, was write out huge documents for all of the potentially harder races, which would have included all the lore-bits of the various lore threads, the general guidelines of how such a character would function in the world, what their musts would be, and helpful examples to inspire. This was deemed unnecessarily restrictive by majority vote, stating it would choke out freedom, and creative writing, when the opposite, and raised overall quality was the intention. Some might argue that the wiki pages should be used for this, but I digress.

Applications are a good second choice for me, personally. To blow wind in my own sails, I have never once been totally rejected with any application I have had RP-wise. That I write very few of them is likely a factor, but it is my genuine belief that anyone can write a good application if they care enough for the idea. Having been in the dreaded application manager position, it's incredibly easy to tell if someone had passion for it, or really didn't care when you read it. Passion isn't a requirement, though, because SL2 tends to be so overly lax in what it allows even a toddler could get something through if they wanted, and at times I feel it might be too lax as well.

It's my opinion that mechanical prowess should never be the true appeal of a race when you pick it. Yes, much of the game is shaped around PvP, but just because a race will be locked, should not make it inherently stronger than any of the others. The application should be purely to force the applicant to showcase their understanding of what they're about to undertake, and very little else. People shouldn't be scared of pulling up their sleeves if they want to get cool toys to play with.

This is such a needlessly contrived and convoluted reason to say that the GMs don't actively enforce their own rules that it physically pained me to paste this into a quote box. These people were literally not interacting in RP, and weren't bothering anyone, as they had pointed out themselves. Sure, I'd be agreeing if these people were rampantly doing stupid bullshit in the square and/or screaming nonstop about who-the-fuck-knows with distracting icons and names, but this was actually so minor that it's amazing that it's even in this post. 


New players don't actively take everything seriously, and if they wanted to try the game, then whatever, let them have their fun, and then let them make up their minds whether they want to stick around. This is exactly why some new players do not stick around in the community. 

Shoveling blame to the already-present GM team for such a minor thing not even within a few days of it being already being dealt with is seriously fucked up.

This example is not the best to use, I will say that.

However. SL2 has a code of conduct, and it should absolutely be policed. 80% of my work was dealing with these kinds of people, as the moderation logs in the GM Discord will happily tell you, and I'm sure the ratio is vaguely similar in the case of the current team. Regardless of how innocent someone is being, if they're not following the clearly set rules, they should be nudged to do so, and if they refuse, which a surprisingly large number of people do in reality, should be given a more strict approach.

This is why we need a lesser body of enforcement-- to spare the GMs of all the minor, petty things they reasonably have no reason to endure when they could have people to do it for them. It's a complete waste of time, and it could be spent trying to improve the things that matter instead.

I cannot get a point from this paragraph other than people are being forced to talk with GMs who they don't know, when... the GMs don't constantly interact with players? It's not their legal obligation, nor their job to interact with players just to have conversations. Their task is to make sure the game is moderated and healthy, and that people are following the rules. Even so, most players can speak with a GM about something for a quick second, be it in the Discord channels proper, or DMs, or the forums, or wherever, and most stuff is short and sweet.

This is another contrived point that I see absolutely no use in being in this discussion. The only reason I'm covering this paragraph is because I want to give my own accurate, concise analysis, instead of saying "yeah I support everything here" and moving on.

The point is clearly stated in the quote. A general lack of presence is causing issues with how people view the GMs as individuals. It's not their job to talk with people, no, but it is their job to know everything in the game, to understand everything in the game, and to be the pillars they signed up to be. It's no use if the pillars are hiding, it leaves the foundation of what you're building uncertain whether it'll fall, or not.

Just talking to people, and being open is an easy way to remedy this. Community projects, and interactions are another way to do it, and the one I would vastly prefer to simply being chummy with a couple of social circles. Actions speak louder than words, after all.

I'd rather the issues with the current GM team be resolved first, THEN we look at new candidates for being a GM. 


I DO agree that new GMs would be a good thing for the game, but you have to be EX-FUCKING-TREMELY careful about who you put up in this thread as a GM recommendation. And with the context of this thread even existing in its current state, I have fair reason to believe there are VERY few actual, worthy candidates that are either in on the creation of this thread or in the group that started this fucking mess to begin with from the first forum post months ago. If you disagree, feel free to prove me wrong by writing an essay in my DMs, be it on the forums or on Discord. I'm fairly easy to find.

The last time we even got new GMs, one of them has already resigned, as Mark has already displayed in this same thread. Are we just going to give the title of Gamemaster to a revolving door cast of people that are already extremely opinionated or extremely biased, or are we going to fix the fundamental issues with the GM team that we currently have, improve from there, and then maybe consider new GMs? Who fucking knows, because it's impossible to read what this community wants half the time.

The issue is, one GM is completely burnt out, and the others are severely lacking in actual presence in the community as a whole. The ideal solution is to bring in more people, but no one is good enough in the eyes of the hundreds of people playing the game. Each will have their own opinions of who they'd want to lead them. The issues you speak of can only be fixed through active effort, and replacement of current staff that wants to, or needs to quit, which I just don't see changing ever without a radical change to the current structure of the administrative team.

I poured one-and-a-half years into this game as a GM. I think it's a little unfair to put me in the revolving door, even if my stay was relatively short comparatively. That's a long time to have your hat in the ring, especially so in an environment like SL2. 

This last paragraph feels like the only thing that should've been stated from the start, because this is the true intent of the entire thread. Even then, with how blatant of a disrespect this was to the other existing GMs, with Slydria coming forth to explain how being a GM sucks for him specifically, this is a slap in the face to the dedicated community and only feels like repeating points to why someone you like should be a GM and not these people that are inactive from personal issues, or trying to resist burnout from moderating the game for longer than most people have been on the BYOND platform.

Lastly, for anyone that's going to try and argue my points as part of the group that kickstarted either of these two threads, I'm speaking as earnestly and as calmly as I can. What you're doing to a game I grew to enjoy for its leaps and bounds, and came to find many wonderful friends in, is actively revolting. I'm making this long-winded post to specifically silence this backlash of sudden GM hate that's become depressingly common on the forums, and in miscellaneous Discord servers. If you want to further your own goals, and if you want to antagonize me because I'm not part of your same group, then go ahead.

Without repeating myself on why this thread isn't disrespectful on its own... Apple most certainly isn't trying to shove a foot in the door of the GM team, that idea is ridiculous. Again, if people have personal issues that actively take away from their ability, or will to act as a GM, they should consider resigning, and that's my stance on the matter. At some point, you need to sit down, and realistically consider if filling your position couldn't be done by someone more suitable, and less troubled. My condolences to any personal problems the current team might be facing, and I naturally want them be the best they possibly can, but if things aren't improving, and it's an active detriment to their ability to be the service they signed up to be, then pass it to someone more capable. There's zero shame in stepping back, and getting your life in order-- that's the commendable thing to do.

What this trend of threads is doing, is bring light to issues that spans the community, and not just the rebellious, angry group you keep mentioning. The community is actively becoming more, and more aware of the lack of clarity we were promised initially. No one is trying to antagonize anyone here, we're speaking our minds on an issue we think is prevalent, and offering solutions to how we think it could be handled. Ultimately, it's out of our hands, but as the players, it's our duty to bring attention to those very issues, even if you think they might be hostile to things you enjoy.


This got a lot longer than I initially thought it would. Well, you definitely got your essay, ha.

Another great response from Mark, to be expected.

For the first paragraph; I was given the information that it was harassment targeting one GM, and I treated it as such. As someone who's faced it multiple times in the past, and in knowing the greater community, I have an extremely harsh stance on such. I see now that it, at least for the most part, wasn't. It still doesn't wholly quell my doubts and worries with the timing or circumstance of the thread, but it's still a valuable insight. Disproving at least some of my feelings is a start, but I'm still fairly wary of the initial creation of a thread such as this.

The second paragraph is probably my favorite, and while I don't necessarily agree with the sentiment that if something pressing is stopping you from doing your service as a GM that you should retire, it's good to see that at least someone does understand my gripe with the applications system, and also understands why I believe at least a few races should be application-only. I may have been a fair amount misled when I spoke of mechanical strength (the majority of my background prior to SL2 is mostly DBZ games, which are fairly guilty of apply-only races being much stronger than normal races), but thematic relevance and the legacy of a race should be fairly scrutinized, lest we get yet another Lich making humerus jokes again.

The third paragraph I more or less agree with, though I'm not necessarily sure it requires an extra layer of staffing in order to properly monitor such cases. Power to specific people can ruin a community, and whatnot, so I imagine if there ever were a lesser GM-oid position like Moderators in your initial post, they'd have to be rather tame in ability compared to the real GM team. The reason why I didn't really want extra positions, though, is because of the unnecessary bloat of roles in power in the grand scheme of things. I wouldn't be opposed to it, but it'd certainly cause some issues.

The fourth paragraph I also generally agree with, and have no real comments on.

The fifth paragraph I must apologize for, since I didn't mean to put you in the tag of 'revolving door GM', but I meant that as a critique to the proposal of simply injecting more GMs into the game's community immediately instead of remedying the issues within the GM team themselves firsthand. The rest of this I agree with, wholeheartedly.

I do overall understand this was meant to pull attention to the issue at hand, rather than cause someone they choose to be a member of the GM team, but the circumstances are just overall strange and worthy of further scrutiny. Again, I apologize if my posts came off as combative or argumentative, or even hostile. It's just how I was taught to speak my mind from a fairly young age, and I'm still working on it.

I'll be exiting this thread stage-left. A+ on the essay, Mark.