Regarding Romek Pt. 2

A place to discuss the game in a general fashion that doesn't fit the rest of the forums.
Cerrik
Novice Member
Novice Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:29 am

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Cerrik » Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:42 am

I quite appreciate the detailed response and I'm not quite sure if my choice to argue against the petition has fanned the flames into becoming larger, but after so many instances of player accusations, lies, and odd disregard for Romek's player's own fault, I stepped in to argue. My point stood as - I'm always in favor of metagaming/godmodding/OOC affecting IC being addressed appropriately, but I don't quite find the GM's at fault for much of their decisions thus far so, only that I found the petition to be quite twisted to bring attention to the incorrect things. In the case of what could be addressed, that being metagaming/godmodding being punished, I haven't quite stated that I did agree with it, only that the petition should be recited. Sorry if I sound deceiving, but even if it was recited, I had no plans on signing it.

This might be an unnecessary after-post that none would care about, but I haven't been a forum-warrior ever on here, as you can tell by my stunning post count. (Not to imply people with large amount of posts are) I just figured an encore statement for myself was necessary before I drop out completely. I have bad forum etiquette, I suppose.

User avatar
Breakaway~totheweird
Intermediate Poster
Intermediate Poster
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:43 pm

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Breakaway~totheweird » Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:54 am

I'd like to clarify something.

A) The petition was drafted in a rush. Did I skim over some things? Of course. That was my fault. This isn't about omitting anything, and nobody who's made comments on the petition (which I'm still not sure if you've read the comments) are asking for thaT. Not only does the player not care about what happens with his character, we surely don't.

B) To further explain: if anything, we want some solution that isn't 'let's let one person off the hook'. Both of them should face a consequence (in light of new information).

C) Let's not forget that a large majority of people who signed that petition don't know Romek or his player. Essentially, a handful of those people couldn't care less about him.

D) We've said this during multiple different instances, and I'm also not sure how to spell it out. This was the catalyst to a surmounting amount of issues. The straw that broke the metaphorical camel's back.

E) I've provided logs of a GM saying that godmodding wasn't a one-lined post that doesn't give anyone a chance to react. It was resolved, however I felt the need to present that. No one expects the GM team to be perfect, and no one expects for them to be robotic. I do lose faith when an incident can be written off by someone who's presumably an enforcer of rules/ whatever of higher standing due to them being backed into a corner. Also, the notion of trying to "throw GMs under the bus" isn't the point and I apologize if anyone mistook it as such. I'm speaking out about this on a personal account with logs, to boot (and some of us don't have the time to crucify you team needlessly, meaning something has happened along the line).

F) A portion of people don't come to you or the GMs for exactly the reason Kunai's been screaming about for the last hour. They either believe saying anything is useless and won't change anything. Another portion of people wouldn't come to GMs for their grievances, much less you. You're not an approachable person. Sorry.

G - Z) I'm not sure what anyone else has experienced with these issues, hence making a petition that was trashed/ trolled. I brought this up after what I've personally experienced and witnessed on my own. Other have stated their concerns about SL2's possible demise. Somewhere out there, more people want to say their piece, and are scared off by whatever's going on with the opposing side.

Edit: Tl;dr Thanks for responding. If nothing else will be reviewed for some sort of reform for SL2 as a whole, then this might be the end. It was nice while it lasted.
Image

User avatar
Ranylyn
Posted to Death
Posted to Death
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:46 am
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Ranylyn » Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:58 am

*****Disclaimer: I fully expect my name to appear on the petition after this post, considering a few other peoples' names have falsely appeared. If it does, it's not me.*****

DISCLAIMER 2: Started writing this before Dev weighed in. While I fully believe his post covers this adequeately, I feel like my post still adds something about IC vs OOC and all that, so I'm still posting it, unedited.


*sighs loudly, rubbing temples* Okay. Just. People. I get it, it's the internet, and people think the internet is for having the time to listen to you whine about everything and nothing all at once, because you're one of those melodramatic fools, neurotic to the bone. But Green Day lyrics aside, let's go over this in broad strokes without bias:

- Fight happens at the arena, stated to have numerous guards present.
- Someone brings a guard to help deal with the situation; NPC guards cannot do anything
- Because people know the guard is a player who was involved otherwise, they cry godmodding, when their OOC kneejerk reaction is also entirely because they know who the player is.
- Shitshow ensues because no one is able to handle anything like a mature responsible adult.

Please. Just grow up and get over it. I still remember the time I was accused of Godmodding because someone was stalking a bulletin board and didn't see me post something in-game because my computer was shit and couldn't even Forum + Game at the same time so I had to log off to use the forums.

Now. Let me state that I OOCly like Romek as a character more than Remiel as a character. This is important to note because, in terms of what went down, I think Remiel had the strongest IC motivations here. Anyone who spends any time at the arena can see how attached to Delphia Remiel is. Lawbreaking or not, Remiel's actions were heavily cemented IC, regardless of OOC motivations. The shade being flung at Sarah is incredibly juvenile. Would I have personally hopped on my guard, if I presently had one, if I had been Remiel? No. Entirely because I know people would react this way. ICly, however, it makes sense that the NPC guards would make a ruckus and it would make more sense for a guard to come than to wave it off like "Nah, my player has OOC reasons to not come."

(And people wonder why I don't actively advertise all my alts and keys like some people; I know some people aren't crazy about me OOCly, so I keep that information a bit more privately so it doesn't impact IC because apparently, few people seems to be able to keep IC and OOC apart. I mean, it's not like I actively hide it, and it's easy enough to learn it's me - as recently proven by Balthie hitting me up on Skype over one of my characters I hadn't told them was me - but yeah.)

On the flip side, let's look at Romek. An IC ban on Arena Spars. What do people do at the arena? Fight. What was Romek's IC motivation for being there? I see an OOC thirst for PVP, and OOCly wanting to be there because that's where people go, but... uh... why does he go to the Arena ICly, again? Except maybe watching other peoples' fights, I guess? Listen, I'm sorry, but this really IS just asking for it, regardless of who initiates the fights. Unlike with Remiel, where it makes perfect sense to me, this just makes my head hurt.


If your response to this scenario is truly, genuinely, "Stop this shit or we'll leave" then... goodbye? At the very least we'll be able to resolve things more productively in the future without childish tantrums being thrown. I love how people have even brought up that if a GM says no to anything about your character, you have to change it. DUH!? Rules exist for a reason. Sure, I've been annoyed over being told "Oh, her breasts look to small to be 16, she has to be 13" and the like, but they're just trying to uphold the rules, and the whole loli vampire ERP thing happened. And a friendly reminder that I got called a pedoophile becuase one of my wimpy-ass characters was ICly overpowered by a loli vampire, because again, people can't distinguish IC and OOC and just immediately assumed I'm a sick fuck instead of pulling a godmod power boost out of my ass. GG, people, GG.
*loud burp*

User avatar
Floofie
New Member
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:45 pm

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Floofie » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:08 am

I would like to start off this reply by thanking you Dev, to take the time to read through this matter once more even though you were hoping that it was done and over with yesterday. However, I feel obligated to write this response to simply explain my personal opinion in regards to your response, so whether you read it or not is entirely up to you.

Nevertheless, here is what I have to say:

I've been playing games made by you for quite some time now, you're a very talented game developer with plenty of potential to make great things happen. You constantly update the game to improve on certain aspects, albeit somewhat lessening the aspects of other core features of the game. (To be frank, I feel as though the game is vastly more PVP-oriented with the recent updates and in truth, ever since the implementation of Legend Extensions the roleplay quality and quantity has plummeted. Not to say there isn't any nowadays, of course! Simply an observation and opinion!)

With this said, I will admit that I'm somewhat disappointed in how the people who were against the petition were have reacted throughout the thread and that you don't seem to grasp the true concept behind why it was made. Bria helped make the petition in hopes of bringing light to people and showing that there is a fair amount of ill-temperament in regards to instances. The only reason I refrain from giving examples is that I'm trying to prevent my head from being bitten off, since quite frankly I know someone will disagree with what I have to say and feel obligated to barge in. As previously stated, all I wish to do is state my wholehearted opinion.

In your reply, you say that we're fine with Egil's metagaming but shun Sarah for her usage of it, which isn't the case whatsoever. From what I've gathered from speaking with a myriad of people in regards to the matter, we simply believe that to say Sarah hasn't used OOC intentions to aid in the matter when there is valid proof that she's admitted to doing this for Fern, to keep Romek from potentially killing Delphia, whom we all know Fern cherishes greatly. It's noble in her mind and a compelling story to tell if it were a fairytale, although this is not the case. I don't feel as though pointing any fingers at the people who organized and signed the contract and virtually telling them that they're in the wrong will honestly do anything. I'm a firm believer in that in order for conflict to arise, both sides must have done something wrong.

Regardless, off to my next point. As I've said beforehand, this contract wasn't solely made to omit what happened between Romek and Sarah's characters, since the people who signed it firmly believe that there are things that should be improved in the SL2 community. I understand that since say, no one reported you about being unhappy with the administrative team's responses, and so on, it doesn't seem that way, but I assure you that some of us simply want our opinions to be heard and acknowledged. You also stated that no one has ever messaged you to inform you of things, but I have at a few odd points to state my matters in hopes of divulging information I felt was unjust. These were never replied to, and it's not so much that it saddens me, but I simply feel a tad disheartened that they haven't seemed to even reach you.

The last is simply a personal peeve of mine that I don't appreciate whatsoever. One of my friends addressed you on the matter, since Chaos' reaction to their plea wasn't very favorable. In all honesty, they should have gone to you first but that can't be changed now so I won't dread. They said what they had to say, gave you the "proof" they had gathered, and that was that. You simply replied by saying something much like you said for this forum, that this matter was blown out of proportion and so and so didn't do anything from. With that said, from what I was told you then promptly mentioned something to them along the lines of: "So and so were doing this, and you knew about it and never said anything about it." They were mystified by this, since they hadn't the slightest clue about what you were going on about and felt as though you were taking their opinion less seriously for such.

In conclusion, I personally find it a sad day when the creator of a game can't sit down and try to wrap their head around every angle of conflict. This petition and thread was only made to reach out to the ones that feel as though this game, one with SUCH great potential, has some room for improvement. Some feel as though there's too much PVP, others dislike the admins (Some from personal experience, some from things they've seen, etc...), some signed just to help their friend (In this case, Romek). All I'm saying is that was discouraged and flustered me most from your reply is that you don't seem to even care whatsoever about all of this effort that was done. Everything was made to show that people were genuinely uncomfortable with things that took place. They wanted a reason to stay, knowing that things were going to improve and not feel so one-sided, as you've seemed to reinforce.

I would like to thank everyone so very much for tossing their two cents along the thread, to Bria for trying to making all of this work, and even for those ex-SL2 players to come on, sign the petition if they could relate, or even disagree wholeheartedly. I only hope that everyone can learn from this, and that no grudges are made. I'm so sick and tired of drama happening for no reason, especially when people like Egil and Sarah are dragged and hassled over something that was blown out of proportion. But honestly? As Bria has said? Maybe it did need to be blown out of proportion, in hopes of people finally acknowledge both sides of the story.

Nevertheless, take utmost care of yourselves and I hope everyone has a wonderful day and/or night. Buh-bye~
Last edited by Floofie on Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ranylyn
Posted to Death
Posted to Death
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:46 am
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Ranylyn » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:13 am

Floofie, while I do agree that the game has become more and more PVP-ccentric and that's impacted RP and it's kind of dumb, I'd also like to argue against anything ever needing to be blown out of proportion. All that ever does is create needless drama and make people irritable at how stupid the whole scenario is. If something is big, it's not blown out of proportion if everything is talking about it, as the reaction is proportional. If something small is blown to large proportions, though? This is the equivalent of someone ordering Coke and getting Mountain Dew, and the entire restaurant rioting and jumping over the counter to take swings at the employees. There's never a reason for it.
*loud burp*

User avatar
Breakaway~totheweird
Intermediate Poster
Intermediate Poster
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:43 pm

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Breakaway~totheweird » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:14 am

Ranylyn wrote:If your response to this scenario is truly, genuinely, "Stop this shit or we'll leave" then... goodbye? At the very least we'll be able to resolve things more productively in the future without childish tantrums being thrown.
I'm sorry that you misunderstood what points were covered in the topic. If you have the time, take a moment to read through the thread. If not, or you don't care to, then that's your prerogative. Saying that you'll be able to productively resolve things with a part of the community gone might work -- if it were actually true. This hasn't been the first instance of uproar and people leaving. Yet, here we are.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but bringing up a petition and stating what will happen as a reaction to things being glossed over is far from a childish tantrum. While I have no idea what shenanigans have happened on this side of the fence (and as stated before, don't condone them), I've only spoken to Dev and Cerrik who made clear, concise arguments devoid of name-calling, unnecessary jabs, ridiculing, and the such. That is genuinely immature, but that's life.

We've said our piece, and Dev has said his. If he doesn't find the need to consider any of this further, then that's fine. Our positions were made clear.
Image

User avatar
Floofie
New Member
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:45 pm

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Floofie » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:19 am

Ranylyn wrote:Floofie, while I do agree that the game has become more and more PVP-ccentric and that's impacted RP and it's kind of dumb, I'd also like to argue against anything ever needing to be blown out of proportion. All that ever does is create needless drama and make people irritable at how stupid the whole scenario is. If something is big, it's not blown out of proportion if everything is talking about it, as the reaction is proportional. If something small is blown to large proportions, though? This is the equivalent of someone ordering Coke and getting Mountain Dew, and the entire restaurant rioting and jumping over the counter to take swings at the employees. There's never a reason for it.
Hello Ranylyn, thank you very much for taking the time to read my post, as well as replying in a calm and well thought out manner. It's greatly appreciated. I agree with you wholeheartedly on the fact that perhaps it wasn't blown out of proportion, and merely a proportional eruption. It's quite late for me on my end, and I simply wanted to spew what I had to say as well and calm as I could! ><

User avatar
Ranylyn
Posted to Death
Posted to Death
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:46 am
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Ranylyn » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:27 am

Breakaway~totheweird wrote:I'm sorry that you misunderstood what points were covered in the topic. If you have the time, take a moment to read through the thread. If not, or you don't care to, then that's your prerogative. Saying that you'll be able to productively resolve things with a part of the community gone might work -- if it were actually true. This hasn't been the first instance of uproar and people leaving. Yet, here we are.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but bringing up a petition and stating what will happen as a reaction to things being glossed over is far from a childish tantrum. While I have no idea what shenanigans have happened on this side of the fence (and as stated before, don't condone them), I've only spoken to Dev and Cerrik who made clear, concise arguments devoid of name-calling, unnecessary jabs, ridiculing, and the such. That is genuinely immature, but that's life.
We'll need to agree to disagree. Starting a petition as a kneejerk reaction to this kind of thing is incredibly childish. Which is eaxctly why I was mildly childish in my reply, as a way of going "If you want to be taken like an adult, act like it." Still, if you want to drop it and move on, then I'll gladly do the same, as I agree there's no longer any point to this now that Dev has weighed in.
*loud burp*

User avatar
Breakaway~totheweird
Intermediate Poster
Intermediate Poster
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:43 pm

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Breakaway~totheweird » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:33 am

That sounds fine. Thanks for giving your input.
Image

Cerrik
Novice Member
Novice Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:29 am

Re: Regarding Romek Pt. 2

Post by Cerrik » Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:46 am

I'm glad you're civil about your opinion on the matter, but I feel it's necessary to reiterate the disregard I covered about 3-4 times in my previous posts... which is one of the largest issues with the replies. Civil or uncivil, claiming incorrect statements needs to be addressed and I will do so.
Floofie wrote:With this said, I will admit that I'm somewhat disappointed in how the people who were against the petition were have reacted throughout the thread and that you don't seem to grasp the true concept behind why it was made. Bria helped make the petition in hopes of bringing light to people and showing that there is a fair amount of ill-temperament in regards to instances. The only reason I refrain from giving examples is that I'm trying to prevent my head from being bitten off, since quite frankly I know someone will disagree with what I have to say and feel obligated to barge in. As previously stated, all I wish to do is state my wholehearted opinion.

In your reply, you say that we're fine with Egil's metagaming but shun Sarah for her usage of it, which isn't the case whatsoever. From what I've gathered from speaking with a myriad of people in regards to the matter, we simply believe that to say Sarah hasn't used OOC intentions to aid in the matter when there is valid proof that she's admitted to doing this for Fern, to keep Romek from potentially killing Delphia, whom we all know Fern cherishes greatly. It's noble in her mind and a compelling story to tell if it were a fairytale, although this is not the case. I don't feel as though pointing any fingers at the people who organized and signed the contract and virtually telling them that they're in the wrong will honestly do anything. I'm a firm believer in that in order for conflict to arise, both sides must have done something wrong.
I'll start by saying that I can't speak for many people but Bria and I had quite a lengthy discussion and kept it quite civil, yet to quote you as you said exactly: I will admit that I'm somewhat disappointed in how the people who were against the petition were have reacted throughout the thread. I've been quite against the petition and not once did I slander anyone...

The second paragraph highlights the petition's supporters* disregard, or as you say, regard for Egil's metagaming. However, the petition doesn't state anything about punishing Egil but it pays particular homage to Sarah. Bria has said plenty of times that the petition was rushed, which is okay! The problem is that the perception, and reality in many unfavorable people's cases, are disregarding it and the petition only speaks about Sarah metagaming, not Egil. However, much more importantly... and I covered this about 3 times already, and to not misrepresent you I will quote you: we simply believe that to say Sarah hasn't used OOC intentions to aid in the matter when there is valid proof that she's admitted to doing this for Fern. Please go to Regarding Romek thread and read Sarah's response. She has admitted only to wanting Romek dead but she vehemently opposes the notion that it affected her character's actions. I've broken down the logs that have been incorrectly used as 'proof of Sarah's metagaming', which I would suggest you go back and read those posts. I'm not claiming that you've used those logs as 'proof', but when you claim that you believe Sarah's OOC intentions affected her character's actions, you are accusing her of metagaming and I will disagree by pointing you to the previously mentioned posts and topics.

I haven't quoted the rest of your post because it's quite fair from this point onward: You have concerns and you're voicing them, and I'd never advocate to take that away from anyone! However, when you state something incorrect someone also retains the right to correct you. Especially in the first quoted paragraphs case which paints myself, who is in opposition, in a negative light.

(Edit: Messed up the quote, HTML pls.
Edit 2: Changed petition to petition's supporters)

Locked