Spring Cleaning

[The Manly Torch]

Details, details....

I have a personal grievance. I haven't posted in the RoM RPG for the past... four days? I stinkin' want to, but that blasted obstacle going by the moniker, "Life" keeps yanking me away from the computer. Curses upon your blasted head, Life!

 

[twylight]

That means the Feats of Strength are up next!

Anyway, I don't really have a whole lot to complain about. It was kinda nagging at me how the Dark Alliance arc in DC revolved almost entirely around 1 or 2 people for the first major bits of it, but that seems to have more or less resolved itself now that everyone else is getting in on it. So.....yeah, I'm pretty much good now.

I admit, I hear you there. Except I think you replied to the issue in a very....non-hormonal way. Byrd had to listen to me scream, yell and insult people.

I think I called him a sexist pig too.....

I HATE THAT KEYSER GUY...

Y'all know he watches Desperate Housewives right? The sick freak...

I always KNEW there was something freaky about him!

 

[Green Lantern]

Why are you not online, Twy. I need to talk to you before I go to work.

 

[trustyside-kick]

Funny how I was talking to Harl about this a few days ago and how I was debating about posting it...

I've felt lately like since obtaining AGM abilities in the DC RPG, that people seem to have this idea of me going on a huge ego-trip and powerhungry frenzy just because I'm extremely active. But that is just it: I was super active pre-AGMship...so obviously that would not change.

I've just felt that with some comments (some out of anger so who knows how much they believe it, and some not out of anger) certain people have thrown at me--people I would never expect them from--that I was somehow in the wrong, which isn't right. DC has always been my favorite RPG and I just strive to make it the best one here.

As I said, been talking to Harl about this lately...and at one point was thinking of dropping out of the hype because of it. I just couldn't understand anyone's negative attitudes to a AGM just fulfilling their duties actively.

And regardless of that? I always try to not let the small things people do (that I dislike) get in the way of how I treat them or feel about them, and I feel like I'm the only one sometimes who thinks that. Who knows, maybe it is just the "good Catholic boy" within me. I could be a big jerk on this forum if I let every small thing get to me, so I try to avoid it. I just couldn't understand why others do not do the same from time to time...

I didn't get what I expected out of this post. I thought I took the correct approach with this. Only one person has come out and told me straight up. And to my surprise? Not entirely what I expected...but deep down an inner desire I cannot lie but shamefully say I was happy with? Apologized to me.

I'm finding difficulty in enjoying these role-playing games anymore...and it isn't fair for I have done nothing.

 

[Andy C.]

To be brutally honest, I'm also getting to the point where posting in the DC game is starting to feel less like fun and more like work. Constantly running damage control for every time one of the villain players decides to spring something "shocking" on us has gotten really, really old, and the folks on the heroes' side of things really don't have any way to come out of the current arc without a feeble cop-out fluke win.

This isn't addressed to any one particular player, but when you've got a dozen different 'shocking' events piling on all at once, it's getting to where I can't get the motivation to even bother.

 

[twylight]

What are the shocking events besides the bombing?

 

[wiegeabo]

I think what we may need over in DC is a breather for the heroes to regroup. Maybe even a lull from the Alliance in which both sides can plan out what to do next, and give us a window to carry on with our own arcs.

 

[Harlekin]

I didn't get what I expected out of this post. I thought I took the correct approach with this. Only one person has come out and told me straight up. And to my surprise? Not entirely what I expected...but deep down an inner desire I cannot lie but shamefully say I was happy with? Apologized to me.

I'm finding difficulty in enjoying these role-playing games anymore...and it isn't fair for I have done nothing.

Shouldn't the fact that no one echoed your thoughts make you happy?

And I concur with wieg, time for a breather.

 

[Byrd Man]

To be brutally honest, I'm also getting to the point where posting in the DC game is starting to feel less like fun and more like work. Constantly running damage control for every time one of the villain players decides to spring something "shocking" on us has gotten really, really old, and the folks on the heroes' side of things really don't have any way to come out of the current arc without a feeble cop-out fluke win.

This isn't addressed to any one particular player, but when you've got a dozen different 'shocking' events piling on all at once, it's getting to where I can't get the motivation to even bother.

Jeez Louise, Andy. It's the DA, man. As soon as the arc ends, we can all go back to having the heroes win all the time.


Besides, the darker we make it for the heroes. It makes the inevitble hero win that much better.


Also, yes. I think there was some talk of a breather with the DA working on something away from the heroes.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I didn't get what I expected out of this post. I thought I took the correct approach with this. Only one person has come out and told me straight up. And to my surprise? Not entirely what I expected...but deep down an inner desire I cannot lie but shamefully say I was happy with? Apologized to me.

I'm finding difficulty in enjoying these role-playing games anymore...and it isn't fair for I have done nothing.

If you're looking for a response, trusty, I'll give you one.

You're doing your job well, and I commend you for that. With the rosters in all the games being in disarray before, having someone willing to keep track of them is absolutely invaluable. So on those grounds, you're something of an MVP.

The annoying part comes when you leave no room for transition, or consideration, or arguably common sense. Like when you tell me I've not posted as Gordon for 2 weeks. Everyone's been in a war up in the Arctic, what exactly am I supposed to be doing with an elderly police commissioner who's just out of a coma? And when I say "I'm considering gradually transitioning him into an NPC", you're all like PLEASE MAKE YOUR DEFINITE DECISION RIGHT AWAY THIS VERY SECOND SO I CAN REMOVE HIM FROM THE ROSTER RIGHT NOW AND MAKE IT CLEAN AND PRETTY AND ACCURATE.

It does get grating. But it also has his benefits. When you took the same approach with Maroni, I realised that it WOULD be better to quit with the delays, cut the cord, and just make him an NPC already. And I may eventually do the same with Gordon. I'd just rather it was the result of my own creative decision, rather than outside forces trying to make me meet a quota. I'd understand if I was Batman or whoever, but Gordon's hardly "in demand".

 

[Keyser Soze]

To be brutally honest, I'm also getting to the point where posting in the DC game is starting to feel less like fun and more like work. Constantly running damage control for every time one of the villain players decides to spring something "shocking" on us has gotten really, really old, and the folks on the heroes' side of things really don't have any way to come out of the current arc without a feeble cop-out fluke win.

This isn't addressed to any one particular player, but when you've got a dozen different 'shocking' events piling on all at once, it's getting to where I can't get the motivation to even bother.

The whole point of an arc like the Dark Alliance is to put the heroes through the wringer, and - like Byrd says - the worse it gets for the heroes, the more epic the eventual win feels. This approach is what made the original DA arc such a huge success. And I think the sense of constant activity and escalation has made this a really strong season of the RPG, and great fun to play.

In relation to my offending "shocking event", it was in the plan all along. It wasn't some Deus Ex Machina. If you read the posts back at Slaughter Swamp closely, you'll see that the idea of the Hall of Justice being a diversion was set up back then. And it gave that battle a suitably dramatic ending. After all, we had people complaining in OOC that the Hall of Justice fight wasn't going anywhere, didn't we?

I don't think this adverse reaction you have Andy is any flaw on your part. It's just a sign of how these games have changed. Back in the early days, the fun was in the spontaneity and the surprise, and of the story and drama developing organically. Hence why when the DA of Season 2 pulled crazy sucker-punches like this, it was greeted with excitement over how to respond. Sadly, in the intervening years, there seems to have developed an obsession with planning everything intricately, and bullet-pointing out a whole season beginning to end, to the point where the unexpected becomes an annoying setback.

But yeah, the DA will probably fall to the sidelines for a bit, if that's what people want. I may be having to send my computer away to get fixed, so I might be off for a couple of weeks. So if the others want to lay low to let the heroes regroup and do some internal development, that's fine by me.

 

[Catman_prb]

Personally I love the chaos of the DA arc

 

[trustyside-kick]

The annoying part comes when you leave no room for transition, or consideration, or arguably common sense. Like when you tell me I've not posted as Gordon for 2 weeks. Everyone's been in a war up in the Arctic, what exactly am I supposed to be doing with an elderly police commissioner who's just out of a coma? And when I say "I'm considering gradually transitioning him into an NPC", you're all like PLEASE MAKE YOUR DEFINITE DECISION RIGHT AWAY THIS VERY SECOND SO I CAN REMOVE HIM FROM THE ROSTER RIGHT NOW AND MAKE IT CLEAN AND PRETTY AND ACCURATE.

It does get grating. But it also has his benefits. When you took the same approach with Maroni, I realised that it WOULD be better to quit with the delays, cut the cord, and just make him an NPC already. And I may eventually do the same with Gordon. I'd just rather it was the result of my own creative decision, rather than outside forces trying to make me meet a quota. I'd understand if I was Batman or whoever, but Gordon's hardly "in demand".

But how can you receive what I do as such, when all I am doing is what was changed: byrd came out in the OOC thread one day and said how it was going to be for now on. The two week thing in DC changed from "your character being available" to "your character removed" after 2 weeks of not posting.

And just because I can not be biased, and not pick favorites, all of a sudden means I'm being all serious and such? If you hit the 2 week mark? Hey, guess what? By the rules I have to do so and so even if it sucks. But it seems people are interpretting it completely off base and frankly? It is said when I find out people complaining to byrd and making such comment as "why the hell did you make him AGM?". When I look back at the of this? It is just sad that they are even complaints. If I were being biased? Or making this all personal? Well no duh it makes sense for such comments, but frankly that is just childish.

If you hit the 2 week mark it is not my fault: I was merely doing what was to be done. Don't fault me like that and treat me differently. GL said to me that in the entire RPG history, I'm like the only AGM who actually "takes it all seriously" but that "seriousness" is merely being mistaken for "activeness". How do you expect me not to active if I was active as **** to begin with? So I am being talked behind my back because I'm like the first AGM to apparently do their job? That is apparently what he says because I'm not taking this all serious, I'm just active. The tasks are entirely simple and so what if I make room to make it more efficiently done?

And the worst part is? I know who these people are, and so it only makes it that much more worse and it is from people I never expected it. My respect for you guys is spiraling downward of how idiotic it is when someone actually does the job, rather just sit back and not be seen for weeks or something.

I mean...if you know that what I do and how I do it efficiently is not personal and stuff...why ***** and moan? I don't deserve such treatment when I've done nothing.

But yeah, the DA will probably fall to the sidelines for a bit, if that's what people want. I may be having to send my computer away to get fixed, so I might be off for a couple of weeks. So if the others want to lay low to let the heroes regroup and do some internal development, that's fine by me.

Small stuff has bothered me from time to time...but the only thing I'd prefer is the pace to pick up from the villain's side is all. After all since the heroes can only sit back and watch, the pace and moving the story is all on the villains.

 

[Keyser Soze]

But how can you receive what I do as such, when all I am doing is what was changed: byrd came out in the OOC thread one day and said how it was going to be for now on. The two week thing in DC changed from "your character being available" to "your character removed" after 2 weeks of not posting.

And just because I can not be biased, and not pick favorites, all of a sudden means I'm being all serious and such? If you hit the 2 week mark? Hey, guess what? By the rules I have to do so and so even if it sucks. But it seems people are interpretting it completely off base and frankly? It is said when I find out people complaining to byrd and making such comment as "why the hell did you make him AGM?". When I look back at the of this? It is just sad that they are even complaints. If I were being biased? Or making this all personal? Well no duh it makes sense for such comments, but frankly that is just childish.

If you hit the 2 week mark it is not my fault: I was merely doing what was to be done. Don't fault me like that and treat me differently. GL said to me that in the entire RPG history, I'm like the only AGM who actually "takes it all seriously" but that "seriousness" is merely being mistaken for "activeness". How do you expect me not to active if I was active as **** to begin with? So I am being talked behind my back because I'm like the first AGM to apparently do their job? That is apparently what he says because I'm not taking this all serious, I'm just active. The tasks are entirely simple and so what if I make room to make it more efficiently done?

And the worst part is? I know who these people are, and so it only makes it that much more worse and it is from people I never expected it. My respect for you guys is spiraling downward of how idiotic it is when someone actually does the job, rather just sit back and not be seen for weeks or something.

I mean...if you know that what I do and how I do it efficiently is not personal and stuff...why ***** and moan? I don't deserve such treatment when I've done nothing.

So.....you come on here, requoting your original post, and complaining about how nobody has the guts to respond to it? And when I do, and explain the reasoning behind any aggression, so its to your face, and not "behind your back", I get it in the neck?

Of course you're going to get some flack, you're the enforcer of what is clearly an unpopular rule. And one I wasn't even aware of. As far as I knew, I thought the rule was still "Your character is available after 2 weeks", with Byrd merely being stricter in enforcing that. I thought the removal of people after 2 weeks to "make it an official" was an addition you'd brought in yourself to make the roster tidier. And from what I've heard elsewhere, I'm not the only one under this conception.

If more people knew this was an RPG policy rather than just you being anal, I'm sure they'd take their grievance to OOC instead of taking it out on you. I, for one, would be quick to disagree with "you're removed after 2 weeks" as an official policy instead of "you're character is up for grabs after 2 weeks". The purpose of the 2 week rule is to allow a character not being played to be picked up by someone else, so that character is not wasted. It is not - or at least I think it's not - supposed to be a punishment for the absentee player.

But that's the explanation. I don't know if that's what you actually wanted, or if you just wanted a chance to layeth the smacketh down on your oppressors. But fact is, like I said, you're the enforcer of an unpopular policy, so you're going to get people who will say you are wrong. The question is, how do you respond to that? Getting all melodramatic and screaming "I'VE LOST MY RESPECT FOR YOU ALL AS HUMAN BEINGS WAAAAAH!" gets you nowhere.

You don't think I've taken stick in the past as an AGM, for telling people they're not welcome in the RPG anymore? I sympathise, in that position you have to sometimes make difficult decisions that won't be well-received. But as a responsible mod, your job in the face of criticism is to explain why you're doing it, and convince your detractors that you are acting in the game's best interests. Not to take it personally.

Small stuff has bothered me from time to time...but the only thing I'd prefer is the pace to pick up from the villain's side is all. After all since the heroes can only sit back and watch, the pace and moving the story is all on the villains.

So Andy C thinks we're going too fast, and trusty thinks we're going too slow. This is a predicament.

 

[trustyside-kick]

So.....you come on here, requoting your original post, and complaining about how nobody has the guts to respond to it? And when I do, and explain the reasoning behind any aggression, so its to your face, and not "behind your back", I get it in the neck?

Of course you're going to get some flack, you're the enforcer of what is clearly an unpopular rule. And one I wasn't even aware of. As far as I knew, I thought the rule was still "Your character is available after 2 weeks", with Byrd merely being stricter in enforcing that. I thought the removal of people after 2 weeks to "make it an official" was an addition you'd brought in yourself to make the roster tidier. And from what I've heard elsewhere, I'm not the only one under this conception.

If more people knew this was an RPG policy rather than just you being anal, I'm sure they'd take their grievance to OOC instead of taking it out on you. I, for one, would be quick to disagree with "you're removed after 2 weeks" as an official policy instead of "you're character is up for grabs after 2 weeks". The purpose of the 2 week rule is to allow a character not being played to be picked up by someone else, so that character is not wasted. It is not - or at least I think it's not - supposed to be a punishment for the absentee player.

You guys didn't know it was changed? Lmao. No way in hell would byrd let me go wild. byrd is byrd and of course he would keep order dude. How could you guys think it was something merely being enforced just because I thought it should? byrd announced it when the change was made, and it was announced when the first page of the rules was changed. Whenever I do have ideas for stuff? I run it by byrd.

But that's the explanation. I don't know if that's what you actually wanted, or if you just wanted a chance to layeth the smacketh down on your oppressors. But fact is, like I said, you're the enforcer of an unpopular policy, so you're going to get people who will say you are wrong. The question is, how do you respond to that? Getting all melodramatic and screaming "I'VE LOST MY RESPECT FOR YOU ALL AS HUMAN BEINGS WAAAAAH!" gets you nowhere.

You don't think I've taken stick in the past as an AGM, for telling people they're not welcome in the RPG anymore? I sympathise, in that position you have to sometimes make difficult decisions that won't be well-received. But as a responsible mod, your job in the face of criticism is to explain why you're doing it, and convince your detractors that you are acting in the game's best interests. Not to take it personally.

The point of me re-quoting myself? Is that I thought what would happen with one of the people talking behind my back? Would follow suit for the rest. That person came up to me, and told me straight up, and after I saw their side to it? And gave them mine? We both understood each other and apologized. But how can I do the same with the rest if they do not see my side and see that what they thought was not true? I can understand plenty of things getting misinterpreted...but I'm not willing to compromise if the rest won't.

 

[Catman_prb]

Very sorry if I have just misread this, but you seem to be saying that you have the chance here to be the bigger man and apologize if you have annoyed anyone with your new effeciency, but have decided not to because no one will apologize to you first. This doesn't really seem to make sense to me *shrug*

 

[SenseiofCheese]

When it comes down to it, I agree with trusty. Because rules ARE rules, and he's doing what he should be doing as an AGM, and that's enforcing them. I don't see how he can be faulted for that.

And as for the DA arc, I wasn't around for all the big arcs that are talked about so I'm still in wide-eyed wonder of the epicness of it all. I'm really glad to be a part of it, and as someone who doesn't see the fun in planning out every little detail of every little post of the season, the random chaos is what I'm enjoying the most.

 

[wiegeabo]

When it comes down to it, I agree with trusty. Because rules ARE rules, and he's doing what he should be doing as an AGM, and that's enforcing them. I don't see how he can be faulted for that.

I agree. If trusty didn't remove players, then byrd would just do it. Same difference.

And trusty, if byrd did it, they'd ***** and complain to him too. Of course, byrd would just tell them to either start posting or shut the **** up.


I think most of the problem people are having with the enforcement of the rule is that this is the first time it's really being strictly enforced. And people aren't used to that. People don't handle change well, and this is a big change. So they're going to complain and vent until they get used to it, or the other RPG's start following suit.

 

[Green Lantern]

As I told him last night, I see it more of HOW he's enforcing it and doing the other duties. Every other GM I can think of has done their jobs quietly and in the shadows. Much like good mods do. The mods that everyone complains about? They're the ones that are overly vocal, and try too hard to enforce the rules. Yes, Byrd wants a list of characters who are close to the 2 week mark to get posted. But I agree with Keyser that it shouldn't be so damned cut and dry. There should be common sense that goes with it, just like every other position of supervision. At Wal-Mart we have a test one must pass to get a leadership position. All the questions are common sense leadership oriented questions. If someone can't at least fake enough common sense to pass it? They don't deserve the position.

 

[SenseiofCheese]

What do you mean when you say common sense, though?

 

[Green Lantern]

I mean, that it will give you a problem and then four choices to deal with the problem. There is one clear cut great answer in each set, even if that isn't HOW YOU would deal with said problem, its common sense to tell them what they want to hear from somebody they're going to put into a leadership position.

 

[SenseiofCheese]

Yeah I get that part, but I mean what kind of common sense is it that trusty is not displaying?

 

[wiegeabo]

I think trusty's doing fine. He gives everyone approaching the two-week limit a warning. Then tells people when they hit the limit. And I think he's even started giving them a couple of extra days after that to get a post in.

I don't remember trusty taking a character away when someone said they're having computer problems or will be out of town, or whatever. (If it did happen, I just don't remember it.) But if people are having a problem with trusty taking away characters, then all he has to do is let byrd take the character away. Byrd has no problem with dropping the hammer on someone, and no one's going to complain about byrd doing it (and get anywhere with him). So I don't know why people should complain when trusty does it since it was byrd that appointed trusty to the position.

 

[SenseiofCheese]

Seconded.

Suck it, Cats!

 

[wiegeabo]

Holy crap, I just got seconded by sensei!