The logical solution, then, is to say nothing. That will definitely change things.Purp wrote: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.
If you have issues with GMs and don't bring them to my attention, then that's on you, not me. Saying I'm 'not approachable' and trying to blame me is silly.
Godmodding is forcing other characters to react or behave a certain way. It would godmodding for me to punch your character in the gut, saying they didn't have time to react, and that they were now on the floor, coughing up blood. It isn't godmodding for someone to enter a room, put a poster on the wall, and walk out. That series of events can play out very quickly, you can still react to it after the fact, and your reaction to it is not at all designated; you are free to do so in whatever manner you choose. The poster isn't invincible. You could tear it down, burn it, whatever you wanted.Purp wrote: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.
The most infamous example is when I ran an event for my group. Guards were clearly implied to be there. A person belonging to CE ran in, tacked a flyer on the wall, and left in one post without giving anyone else a chance to respond. That is godmodding. However, after this was brought to an admin's attention, this was the response.
There were guards implied to be there, okay. I can understand where you're coming from with that. Did you get GM permission for these guards? Were the guards represented by anything, NPCs, PCs? If you didn't get permission then, in a way, having an army of invisible guards is godmodding in itself. Something to think about. If that's the most infamous example then things must not be as apocalyptic as suggested.
Nothing in the original posts suggested otherwise. If that wasn't the intention then it was very poorly conveyed, because that's exactly what it suggested.Floofie wrote: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.
If those issues were delivered via BYOND pager then no, that's not the proper way to contact me on this. BYOND pager has issues, the website pager will sometimes cull old pages, the only way for me to be notified of these issues is if I look at the BYOND website, etc.Floofie wrote: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.
If you want to give specifics in PM, I can look into it and tell you what happened and why.Floofie wrote:The last is simply a personal peeve of mine that I don't appreciate whatsoever.
In what way you could look at my replies and responses and think 'wow he just doesn't care', I don't really understand. If I didn't care I wouldn't bother replying. I do have better things to be doing, honestly, things I would rather be doing, so maybe if that's what you got out of it anyway, perhaps I shouldn't have bothered at all.Floofie wrote: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.
Originally this issue was about two people, Egil and Sarah. Any other issue that was haphazardly slapped onto it by other people was not made clear, is not relevant to the original issue, or was not elaborated on. No, you don't get to assume things 'won't change' or make up some hypothetical reaction that I or another GM might have and treat it as if it's something wrong with us. Getting disgusted/angry/frustrated/depressed about your assumptions isn't healthy at all, and it probably contributes to this feeling you have that it's one-sided; well, it's one-sided because no one bloody brought it up before.
Ultimately I am hoping that everyone will take a few days off and cool their heads, and come to their senses. Or at least, if they still have outstanding issues, be capable of wording them and addressing them in a more clear, decisive, evidence-supported manner than they did here. I am more than happy to address concerns, I want everyone to enjoy the game, and I certainly don't want anyone to leave.
But as far as the Egil v. Sarah issue goes, I have said my feelings on it. The GMs ultimately are the ones who are handling the execution of the character and all of the rest, so if they want to take a different stance than I have, they can. If not, I don't blame them.