Kistulot

Sounds neat to me 🙂

Witnessing disruptive behavior is a good way to not want to engage. I'm going to note: look at the original thread I posted. A lot of people basically only posted there because they believed that was a good idea. I cant ascribe intent behind why they don't post anywhere else, but not everyone has the time, endurance, or inclination to continue these interactions.

Sincerely? I cant blame you, and as someone else who's lost someone important to them who played? I am so sorry. I'm sorry for how these topics sound like they've caused you stress and grief. I didn't know Punchy, but they clearly meant a lot to a lot of people. I hope their memory can live on indefinitely. That is a really awesome tribute--sincerely. 🙂 Customizable NPCs would be great for us who've lost someone special, and just... think of the base ideas. Seriously. It's endless. Adding anything into the game by default would probably be risky. Even text can inject some bad things. However, it could work like a .ogg file dropped into the right folder in a base: essentially, something that's very easily modded in by user-applied resources thanks to modified base assets, etc. The statues are DEFINITELY just character models with a texture (then made into a solid entity, but you get what I mean) so something like this should, theoretically, be possible... and it would be pretty neat! Honestly, customizable "All Spectrum" NPCs, like the ones used to show off outfits in icon? Hanging a costume is a time honored tradition for heroes. I'd love this. I still feel like all of this should be additional to the continued external memorials, but all of this? I'm down with this. Again... I am really sorry for your loss, and I hope that over time the pain has gotten a little easier to deal with.

I completely respect that! 🙂 Honestly, I don't blame you from where I sit right now. The 20+ people who showed up with holdtorches however are the community that I'm here to represent, because frankly I don't blame anyone who doesn't see this as worth their time. Unfortunately, I'm a very stubborn woman! 🖤 No, I completely concur. However I stated things, or however my intent was? Legit? Sorry that I implied that. It would be stupid. It can create additional harsh feelings so I'd recommend tempering it? Because while I agree, that's the kind of talk that can quickly get moderation for being seen as stirring the pot when you're just making a valid point... But I don't think you should be moderated against or anything. If people had one before, there hasn't been any technical reason why it couldn't be done in the future. The reasons why that have been stated are, I feel, insufficient. Favoritism is a problem, so... why not just make sure everyone is respected and valued post life for their efforts to make this game something worth being a part of beyond responding to an LFG message of "ITF lf7m pst" Thank you for responding!

I appreciate your recommendation and concern. However, I would also recommend that if you believe I am simply belligerently grieving and do not have any real points that you simply not engage and report my behavior as abusive.

I do not believe this is the dismissal of anything I've said that you think it is. This is proof that they did not simply maintain the circumstances of the past. This situation is not what was required to happen. The source code was handed out. Those previously invested could well have scattered to the winds. If they did not, and chose to be a part of ongoing community efforts outside of a very small server, then this changes the situation by virtue of not being the same circumstance. I feel that's tautological, but there we go. I outright stated the illegality of the circumstance. I'm very well aware for it. I am also, however, stating something that's been very clear to a lot of people in this community for awhile: though this is essentially the continuation of pirate server days, much as you said, it's somewhat bizarre to act as an opaque monolith towards the community. I respect protecting one's self. However, that's not really the point here. So, let's say that you make something for someone else's benefit. Let's say that they then ask for something. They see it's been done before, for other people, but you insist to not play favorites, you wont be doing it anymore. I uh. yeah, I'm sorry, there's flaws here. HC could do that, but they haven't, and while they don't, it should be treated as what it is. It really feels like whenever someone wants to dismiss the idea that someone thinks something is a good idea or naturally flows from the circumstances they're called entitled. It's like people who say other people are entitled think they're entitled to pretend that no circumstances exist outside of the small bit they're nitpicking. They don't need us, but they want a community or they wouldn't have bothered. While they do, that means that the community is assumed to have some degree of consideration. Or entitlements.

I am disagreeing with this stance, disagreeing with its backing points, and the options presented to supposedly get around this situation are often either impossible or miss the point entirely. You don't have to see the value of me continuing to discuss this, but I do. It's me saying that if you don't see the value in a conversation, chiming in to say it more than once doesn't present any additional value and you'd be better off doing something else for your own sake. The thought might be more clearly articulated as "I appreciate that you believe at this point this aspect of the discussion holds no more value. I would recommend allowing it to continue without your participation, as others, at least myself do, as I will be continuing this conversation in this direction."

How is "dont harrass people with bases" a new policy. Finding a new way to tell someone where they can shove it is something any social experience needs to deal with. One of these options was literally stated to be theoretically impossible. It also makes additional work for our support staff. It kinda feels like you're deciding where this effort is more valuable as though it were a neutral, inescapable thing when it is not. I can do them right now. That's why I didn't make a thread about them! 🙂 It already isn't reserved solely to those people. I'm sorry, but I don't see the point in responding to every post you make to just restate what's already been said, so I will not be in the future.

There's definitely a lack of active listening, reading, and then respectfully showing a complete understanding in a response. I believe some of my posts have been read, but it's hard to not feel like an awful lot of them haven't been. As I stated before: I believe this is important. If you don't, and you believe other means would be more productive? I would politely request that you leave the discussion so that those who would continue to discuss it to be able to. No one is stopping you from making your point, and walking away any more than they're stopping me. 1) We have multiple tributes already existing in game that did not require base work and can be seen by people who don't even know how to use a base code. 2) We have tributes in game content that are official and can be found without effort if you chose the right tutorial. 3) I have, in fact, been attempting to go out of my way with positivity towards others in game since their passing. However, I posted to discuss a respect that has already been paid to others. Favoritism already exists here, and pretending it doesn't benefit the past with this policy doesn't benefit anyone.

I believe that if someone believes someone else in the community is acting abusively they can file a support ticket. If I made a base that was solely created to harass another player, and someone reported it, I don't believe that I should expect to be able to use "It was a private base!" Slippery slope is a fallacy. Either something is right, or it's wrong, and you can specifically nix out bad possibilities as they arise or with special caution. This is often used in order to prevent something that isn't wanting now by claiming the worst is inevitable, when it clearly is not. Then I have a simple solution: Make it for everyone. I'm cool that you like that solution. However, it has been suggested that possibility may be outright impossible. Therefore, to pretend that the only solution that exists is one that may not exist is not exactly something that I appreciate! 🙂 I'm sure you can understand where I might be coming from with this.

I want to be clear: I'm as happy to argue for everyone in the community receiving this treatment. I am however responding directly to what's being said, too. If it's someone's discretion, then let me talk to them. Saying it's someone else's decision that is off over there without room for wiggling is the same as saying no one's listening. At no point have I wanted unfair treatment solely for my friend. In my experience, if you want X, and you see that in the past to get X it happened because of Y, and Y applies, you attempt Y even if you would prefer Z.

Seeing the link to this thread at the end of one of Widower's post, I decided to click. I only speak English, but I have experience with Mac OS technical support (I was apple certified and handled heavy customer support at high levels of proficiency during launches of 10.5 and 10.6, and while I may not know every last detail of it I have so much experience learning more on the fly in a busy call center environment that would be made much less stressful being able to type and not speak! 🙂 ) I have experience in Linux, and while I'm not perfect at it, I would be very happy to run a linux distro on one of my machines to be able to troubleshoot issues and perform additional troubleshooting tests and assistances. For the forseeable future? Availability is something I have in spades! I've been highly involved in roleplay in City and outside of it, and while I may not be the best at creating bases or AE maps I have extensive knowledge of both systems. Me posting here might... uh... come off as a bit nonsense. "Aren't you constantly complaining elsewhere?" I believe it's up to the community to improve things they see as issues, and if I'm not willing to put in the effort to do what I can for that, weeeeeeell... It's an awful lot of talk. So. Consider my hat way over there, in the ring.

Suggestion: If these hurdles are so difficult that you feel the need to specify their theoretical impossibility, yet memorial NPCs have already been made in game... Why, might I ask, is one off the table and the other offered as the only path forward? Ascendant being added to Steel Canyon did not require additional impossible coding. Adding a fan from pre-beta days to be in the tutorial was possible. What is to stop homecoming from considering these memorial requests now, and then, at a future time, remove them and allow for the community to do so instead?

You did not attempt, nor did you by accident succeed, at insulting me--promise! 🙂 The word entitlement, imho, is given a bad reputation. I do feel I am entitled to things, that we are entitled to things. We will likely, and often, disagree on these things. But I would say that in this instance, what I'm attempting to discuss is important and I feel like we as a community deserve, and at the very least should be entitled to, something different than what has been offered. I'm also going out of my way to type in a way that while less conversational, hopefully leaves less room for misinterpretation. This does make it seem a bit self important, but there's a reason I've been emphasizing community. I don't just want any of this for me. I want the things I've discussed for us. You may very freely disagree, and insist I do not speak for you and I will not argue or try to convince you that I do. I do sincerely wish I could be more playful, jovial, and straightforward with this, but if someone comes at me with corporatese I've kinda learned you have to respond in it to be taken seriously. FWIW, I don't talk like this in casual conversation. Promise. This is a very fair point! However, I would like to emphasize: I don't feel like the benefits of HC being HC matter without its community. Being devs and GMs for an empty, dead game with no one logging in isn't really anyone's goal there. I do not desire a lack of volunteer memorialization. I simply believe that they are only one part of what makes homecoming matter to them, or to us. The server is payed for by our donations. They are donated, yes, with no expectation of authority, but to pretend that means that there's no buy in, that it's not a community effort, feels to me like it misses the point. If they want it to be just for their family and friends, they could afford much cheaper server architecture and would have no needs of crowdfunding support, official licenses, etc. We have to judge this setup for what it is, not the theoretical it could be. I don't think any of them are heartless either. If I felt no one did care, then I wouldn't be wasting my... finger breath? I don't know what to call it, but the endurance of my fingers. Respect, and thanks, can be delivered at the same time as criticism. I'm only bothering to continue this discussion because I respect those putting forth these efforts and I feel that a reasonable dialogue has merit and value. Thank you. I appreciate the time you took to express yourself, and the kindness and empathy you showed in making sure that even if you feel my methods or goals may be astray, you still value me as a human being. That feels so dry and detached, but it's sincere.

Similarly, I'm going to ask you this the same: when has this ever been a good way to start anything? I want to emphasize something: you have not as of yet offended me. Have I felt at times, many times, that you haven't been constructive? Yes. Have I been annoyed here or there? Sure. That's not the same as being offended and I can say that you have most certainly used proper civility to avoid me being able to point to anything you've done which I feel would be "objectively" labeled as offensive. (The quotes there are because I feel objectivity is overused, not to insult you, or any others. This parenthetical is not a CYOA, but because I am physically incapable of putting two sentences out at the same time and having them both be read at the same time.) If you had looked for even a moment you would see that I had already been there. If you have posted 7k times on a forum, and link to a part of it, I believe the expectation that you know it is only reasonable. If you don't, at that point, the ignorance doesn't feel like a defense--but that may be my personal opinion. This trend, I feel, does not come out of nowhere. I don't need to agree with your perspective, but if I'm attempting to do anything other than just drop a ten ton weight and act like that justifies everything, in other words, to discuss and convince, then I need to be able to show empathy. I feel it would not be shocking that I feel myself, and many others, do not see evidence of these traits in many of your responses. Considering that you just stated people don't appreciate your lack of visible empathy it feels kinda funny to say that you take issue with others not agreeing with another person's compromise. I will no longer be responding to your posts, as while I do not feel you have violated any rules, I feel your methods and goals from communicating do not align with what I believe to be constructive.

I believe we're being asked to act like adults here, right? If we're being asked to be civil in this situation, to be patient, calm, and understanding, then, might I ask, why would this not simply be the call in any situation? It does not, you are correct. However, the inverse, that disagreeing with what someone says and pointing out that their argument does not further anything in a positive manner and that while their points could be genuine they don't help anyone move forward in any constructive way, is not inherently wrong. In short: Perhaps it might be best to say that intended or not, some are entering the discourse with no desire to actually hear others, and in fact have resorted to pretending like the people involved are not aware of already visible solutions, or being so unhelpful that their responses do nothing to move anything forward but instead stoke frustrations. This is also, all perspective. At no point do I insist no one can disagree with me without being wrong. I do however feel that some responses, some lines of reactions, are not constructive, and appear to have no way that they could be: IE a thread about a request for something in game being responded to with a link to a forum thread made by the poster of the thread asking for something in game as if they are not aware that it exists. I do not see how that provides any significantly constructive input.

A thing I realize I only clarified on the discord that I'd like to note here, or at least I believe that's the situation: I attempted to appeal to Eildath's affect on the community because those with memorials had similarly impacted the community. I feel that not extending the kindnesses that were shown to members of the past is disrespectful to members in the present and the future. Expanding that? Cool. I'm down with it. In fact, I like it better than just honoring my friend. I don't think they'd ask for treatment that didn't help anyone else additionally... ...but I'm going to note if it keeps being stated that these things being possibilities are still at HC discretion... heck, give me your DMs, HC. I will happy politely discuss with you, over weeks if I have to, the benefits of this resolution while calmly and respectfully listening to the responses. If the discretion is "we didn't know them, and we don't want any blowback despite being able to make adjustments in the future, so, we're not open to discussing this" then it's not really the situation that's being described as open to discussion. I ignored this at the time, because things weren't being locked or otherwise threatened for moderation for not behaving in a respectful and civil manner, but the very tone of the initial council response, starting with "don't say I didn't warn you" comes off as not exactly encouraging calm, measured debate. Taking the original post in the most neutral light possible, it was a request for something to be explicitly decided--something that, apparently, behind the scenes already had been but for one reason or another we weren't made aware. I feel that this is kindof an important aspect to bring up, yet one that does not really feel as if it's being properly acknowledged. Therefore, how is one not supposed to feel talked down to? Warn us? At what point does a warning enter into this situation to begin with? The tone being set by the desire to go between jovial, jokey, silly "we're your best friends, eyyyyy" and "I am sorry I am not able to discuss this time be able" is insulting, and it's going to make anyone who cares about the topic discussed increasingly upset. It's not a neutral situation any more than insinuating if any members of the community can't behave then we can't have nice things. One of the issues with situations like this is that respect, and consideration, don't really need to go both ways and those who call for a certain apathy are always going to be easier to ignore their shortcomings because they aren't "causing trouble" by asking to be heard. It only takes reading a few other threads to see that the community has a very open bad actor problem, and chastising the people that get exhausted by their nonsense has to be a lot more work than it would be to deal with those problems in some appropriate fashion. Worrying about people getting upset by something and adjustments needed sure never stopped the game from getting new powersets that needed to be buffed, nerfed, or not taken for anything but thematics because they became unusable. If "reasons have been stated, move on" means there's no discussions of rationale, no examining of how the stated lines benefit people from Live and not from Homecoming's tenure, then I once again ask: is there a chance for open discussion here, or is this a situation where there was a decision made and the community's feelings do not, and could not, be held in lower regard as to the future of that situation? I want to be clear here to: this is not me stating that this is how anyone wants anything to be. This is me using evidence of what has happened, and expressing, in my analysis, what I believe that means. Choosing to reopen the thread but ignoring the substantive responses shows a desire to show something is being done to appear to listen while not wanting to engage with the subject matter, because otherwise, well, it's right there. Calls for civility and reminders of moderation tools existing implies a lack of civility, and the idea that moderation tools either weren't at the ready before or that people would be unaware that they exist. I realize it's also a "hey, don't step out of line" reminder, but I feel like we at least need to come at this from accepting that basic decorum has been a requirement of essentially every internet forum since their inception even if not officially stated. What's said, how it's said, and what is or isn't responded to are all things that deliver explicit and implicit messages. Others may not feel dismissed. I respect that. I can, however, provide evidence of carefully thought out posts which have seemingly only been responded to in the most broad of ways if at all, and I don't blame anyone else for not feeling the same that I do. I wouldn't anyway, because we're all different people with our own concerns, but I would request that examining how it would feel to put the effort into expressing these things, especially when, damn, it would be incredibly easy to just close the forum out of apathy, or to give in to catharsis and just scream into the void. I'm not saying those are valid options, but I'm saying that when one is attempting a civil discourse, and told to be civil, when they're seeing and perceiving a lack of civility, it makes them wonder why they even bothered when getting banned would feel like being more acknowledged than they have been in any substantive way.

It breaks trust in the people themselves, not the people who attempted to honor others. I appreciate that you do not feel this is dismissive. This statement, however, does not reflect my reality. The constant discussions of internal conversations shows me that one of my core frustrations is being outright ignored to the point where I'm starting to wonder if I've been deleting parts of my own posts.

I'm also going to note that while CoH is still a much smoother community than other MMOs, which tends to be the point, the forum does not represent the full population. There have been continued frustrations with the way moderation has been handled in this, and other threads. It feels difficult to claim that your post is not further indication of this trend.

I appreciate the condolences. Sincerely. I want to stress that in my frustration with how this situation is being handled, I do appreciate the genuine kindness and caring that has come from the community, and the community involved in the staff. Here's the thing: Why are these discussions solely internal? If there's time, and they won't be done for quite awhile (no one on the dev team works in December and I respect that) then this seems a perfectly good thing to open up to the actual people affected. I'm still not really satisfied with "yeah, I don't feel like addressing that but trust me it's gone and will go poorly" but I'm willing to just kinda move past that for now for the sake of discussion. Gotta make concessions or nothing ever gets anywhere. This however, shines a perfect light on the frustration I described. I don't see why this process benefits the GMS, the devs, or the community... especially not when it relates directly to the community and the GMs/Devs will already be honored like this with no objection. Kinda comes off as "we've got ours". I want to clarify that I was not blaming the GM who sent me here, nor do I feel any desire to call them out. I knew they would be following procedure. My issue is twofold. Why, if this policy was so clearly established, was this not simply something that we could see? You've had it cause issues before? I feel like that's the kind of thing a dev digest could explain to the community and be a quick point of reference. Otherwise, no offense, it's a very "citation needed" kind of situation. It also leads to a situation where a suggestion to make a request will instantly be shot down because of a policy that the response is "you want this? well we don't. sorry." That's not really something that anyone wants to deal with, much less in this situation. This is also a situation where the corporate CYOA language of "may have been better" and so forth just comes off as a bit disingenuous. Was this a bad choice or not? Can you even accept that as something we agree upon, or do you think this was a good experience? It is, at best, an attempt to save face that insults both of us. I do appreciate that you are directly addressing my concerns. I will say however, that I feel there's an issue here that needs to be directly brought up: there are at least four people in these threads, I'm not even going to bother naming names, who are either making false arguments and dragging it all down, or, and you can look across their other threads, kinda just there to be argumentative or unempathetic with other players. I feel like starting there might be a good decision. I also feel like reopening the thread but not responding to me is, essentially, in my direction, not reopening it at all. That, is dismissive. This as the only response to everything said feels like there's been no attempt to actually read anything I've said besides to tick off PR boxes. I want you to reread over that, the idea that it's a shame we've lost opportunities, and see how incredibly patronizing it is. If a bad actor speaks up, how does that limit the opportunities? If the people with power over the conversation says it does. None of this is without responsibility, and placing that in the community's hands to have no bad actors is, again, cowardice. Especially considering that basically the response to my response is "we've made up our mind" I do not actually see how anything that I've said has had any meaning. Openness to the community seems to be "we'll hear you, tell you how we feel, and if you're unhappy with it, we will lock the thread even if you obstain from violating any rules of conduct." Essentially, everything I said is only being proved more and more and more. There's still no malice. But there's no empathy, or understanding that this side of the game and the efforts running the game are not so separated as there is an attempt for it to seem. Why is there such a concern with if someone turns out to not be dead? Why is there such an insistence that a policy has been set and will not be reviewed yet a claimed statement of being open to listening to the community? Did you even read the discussion of our poster child for npcs based on player characters? Frankly at this point it would feel less insulting if you just told me you wanted me to shut up and you didn't care.

I must have hit a size limit, or something, because I responded to everything in your post! ;-; I'll respond to this over again. Apologies if it's not as good. Well, Squeak squeak squeak! Also, if they closed the thread for that purpose, I believe that not saying so shows a lack of confidence in their moderation, or a lack of respect for the moderated. Widower's response was to express what was already set, yes, but I really cannot see why one, it went that direction, and two, when none of the suggested ideas were addressed and the ongoing issue of how the thread was treated was not resolved anyone would bother to say more. Moving on to healing? I don't believe healing comes before the problem is solved, and for me, it hasn't been. It's like sticking a bandaid over an infected wound that needs a direct balm. Maybe a burn wound? I'm a writer, not a doctor. Honestly, would a wall satisfy me? No. We have a cathedral in Echo Plaza that's nothing but a development test project posted onto the live server, then we can have a process to make further memorial NPCs in the game. Also, frankly, memorials aren't for the dead. They're for the living. Eildath never asked for this, but the way that this whole situation has been treated feel inherently disrespectful to everyone mourning our loss. People have said "I'm sorry for your loss" plenty, and while at times I respect it, I feel like if you say "I'm sorry for your loss, but..." that it loses all of its meaning. People don't die every day, not on our servers, but even if they did... 30 people a month needing to be added somewhere? Needing a verification process is unnecessary if we focus on it being for the living. The community is here, and can discuss things. I would be happy to discuss this, and more, in private with those making decisions... but honestly, I was referred to here, so... It only feels right to leave it here, and allow other voices to speak.

Mmm-hm! this is an inspirational story, and honestly one I feel the devs may have wished you hadn't posted! It's outright encouragement to harass them until then change their minds! 😄 My issue is that this is not Cryptic. This is not Paragon. This is a group of people who received illicit code, set up an illegal service, and were uplifted by the community. Let's not split hairs here: it was illegal. Was I happy for it? Yes. It's subsidized by the players' donations, which I believe is a good thing! At the same time, I feel like there's not the same level of separation between us and these devs, gms, and community support agents as there was on live. Frankly, to twist a poor argument... I never met Kiyotee. They have absolutely no meaning to me... ...but I feel like the responses of someone who would rather take this opportunity to stomp something out rather than attempt to seek a way to make it reasonable are not people that should be listened to about something like this. People die every day, but they aren't all in this game. Even if there were 30 dead players a month (which, frankly, with our numbers, would mean they wouldn't need to be developing for very long) were a process designed for it all you'd need to do was just bip. bop. boop. Push. If they wanted to, that could be doable. A lack of desire to do so, and I already discussed why i feel their response was weak, is all that prevents it. Memorials are for the living. No one is harmed by a memorial that turns out to be unnecessary. So on. I already covered this. I believe that the Outbreak tutorial getting someone there is AWESOME, and I LOVE IT. I love seeing ascendant by the telephone. ...but neither of them, and I say this respectfully, were a part of HOMECOMING. That's nothing I'm actually taking issue with, to clarify, I'm simply using it to make a point. Yes, they assisted in making CITY OF HEROES what it is, but Virtue and Everlasting are not the same. We have different people, different circumstances, so on and so forth. The person I'm requesting--and that others are--directly impacted the game that is currently here. I feel that having proof in game that can be celebrated, and denying it, is at the very least a kind of favoritism that you can't erase by saying "we wont do it anymore." That just advantages the past. It basically says "I'm sorry Eildath didn't die before the game came out, or between Live and Homecoming." I can't be the only one who finds that response unsatisfying to put it mildly. Thank you. 🙂 To clarify, I may have posted a long response, but it was not out of anger, or disrespect. I feel you made very salient responses, and they gave me thought so I felt you deserved the same. Thank you for being a part of our community. You make it better.

To clarify, I was not calling the Council members or GMs trolls. I was saying that their behaviors were encouraging such behavior. I feel that this is important. If it ends poorly for me, I feel that reflects as much on others as it does on me, and I'm ok with that. If the desire is to act like a clean, crisp, opaque company then I'm sorry, but yes, it is their job to know what the policies are on things and have them clearly deliniated. Now, do I think this could be a learning experience and they could adjust this? Yes. That said, I think this is the equivalent of calling for customer support for a broken iMac, being told to go to the Apple Store, and you wait around to be helped after describing the issue only for someone else saying that your issue shouldn't be attended to and they're agreed with. Sorry, but that's really not what I call professional, or good community building. You are free, of course, to disagree as you seem very wont to do. I'm not calling it outright malice. I'm calling out the issues that I feel are harmful. Harm does not indicate intent: it indicates results. You have a very good point though, people are not trying to cause harm here. I believe that firmly. If I felt there was no point in having this discussion, then I wouldn't be having it... and that means I believe people can be reasoned with! 🙂 ...I basically just thought out loud, but you gave a thoughtful reply so I felt you deserved a thoughtful response! I don't go onto the forums long enough to really be able to comment on that, but I will say that I have had multiple people who do in private express that there are bad actors being ignored... and I believe we can see some in this discussion. If it's unresolveable, then as far as I see it making it clear as day to everyone is the only solution. That said? I want to try to make things better. I want to try to push for the changes this community needs to be sustainable. Because, frankly, getting NCSoft's okay isn't really enough to keep people around. We were here before it. We didn't care then. If the trust in the GMs and Devs dissolves completely, at a certain point, you get real competition. This isn't a situation where no one else has the ability to do so. ...plus, like... I believe the best in people, even if it may not seem it. I believe that pointing out issues is the only way they can be fixed, but it doesnt mean I think that anyone can't change their actions going forward. As said by others, I know the post is long but if you want to respond to it? Please read it. This isn't debate club. If you want to annoy people and not have an actual conversation, they're going to point it out, and they may not feel the need to do it in a defensible way like I am because I feel like the moment I make a single mistake my entire discussion will be derailed. I really appreciate your support in this matter. I could say more, but uh... Thanks. I appreciate you. Gonna be honest. I laughed. I believe they're implying that changing someone's behavior after 7k posts would be very difficult. I believe, however, it is possible, if the person desires to change. That said, consistency is worth considering in situations like this. This. This. This. I was requesting something after being told to try requesting it here. Silence. Someone else complained about the idea of someone requesting it and... I REALLY tried to take it in good faith, but the more that discussion went on the more it became clear, at least to me, that it was not, and THEY got a response while my response was effectively ignored. It's at best a mishandling. At worst it's, as I described in the subject title, feeding the trolls.

I would also like to note something: A majority of players do not use the forums. That's simply true. The forums as the primary considered method for interaction is not only archaic, but when the feeling of division is so dramatic, it discourages posting--much like when people who are acting in bad faith or simply not wishing to engage in an open way are responded to while people making heartfelt requests are suggested the wrong direction... ...then ignored.

It's not a bad idea. 🙂 Possibly something that might be good to have discussed as one of those possible alternatives by someone capable of talking for what might be done. 🙂