Another Open Letter

[Joshuamonkey]

Disclaimer: What I say is my personal opinion. I'm aware of GAB conversations but I'm not GAB.
This whole conversation of 4 pages has happened within the last 6 hours. I agree that players should be able to express their opinions and that it should be made clear how staff works, and players should be informed of the reasons behind decisions directly concerning them (like bans) at the time the decision is put into effect. I agree that there are better ways for staff to handle things. Unfortunately this situation is not going to be completely resolved right away, but it is being discussed and I believe that improvements will be made soon in these areas. I am willing to help how I can to resolve misunderstandings about staff.
I hold the active staff members in high regard as fellow staff and as friends, but I don't care about insults or hard words except that they unfortunately cause bad feelings and waste time. However, perhaps I should say that EchoMan is the main one defending those who were banned and is the one who brought this to the attention of the GAB.
Reading this thread makes me wish I could do everything myself to fix all these issues. Unfortunately I can't, but I think the motivation helps.

[iavatus]

The problem with this things being bottled up, is the first chance and first poor bastard to open the floodgates, gets drowned in responses.

But we're all here for the same reason, because we like this game, we like this forum, and we think that while there's definite areas for improvement, the fact that we're being heard and responded to, gives the last few weeks a very different feel.

So again, my thanks, staff who respond, staff who are acting on this, even staff who are looking at this and sighing, muttering about the good old days. Any action, is preferable to the previous state.

[Ignacius]

I am quite sure the message you received also says that the bans were out of proportion. That should give you a hint that you are not supposed to be banned. You will not get any more information until the information is available, for reasons I stated in my previous post.

It did say that. But I was again banned less than an hour after receiving that PM (and before I even had a chance to read it), which muddied the message somewhat. However, I will take your post here as assurance that we were not supposed to be banned, so thank you.

I agree with Joushuamonkey and iavatus; I think circumstances, perhaps beyond the control of anyone here, have heated tempers too much. Mine, certainly. So I'm going to take a step back from the thread for a bit. Thank you again to everyone, particularly the staff members, who've responded and who are looking into this.

[Snickie]

I'm not trying to add fuel to the fire (which seems to finally be dying down); I'm just surprised this clip didn't come up sooner:

[prometheus]

Im not in on this ban-unban situation, but I do have a bit of a...not question really.
It seems to me, in my short time back, most everything happens by group consensus. If enough players like it, it gets implemented (eventually) etc. Couldn't the same thing happen with the rules? Maybe I just don't understand, but it seems to me it would simplify things. Axiom added so much to the game that it upset a lot of people, her situation. It seems to me it would have been simpler to go 'the players clamor for it, alright'. Since my understanding of CR and similar is that it is to protect the players and game fairness?
Same with 'transparency', Yes, it is logical to assume that people who would be banned wouldn't want the information on it available, but clearly the people in question do not feel that way? Would it not be simpler to go 'ok this was the explicit problem'. I am not truly understanding the need for secrecy. If they are okay being examples, couldn't it be one others would learn from? Or even if it was just in PM wouldn't it clarify things for them?
Just trying to get a bit of understanding, thank you.

[Joshuamonkey]

You make a good point, and we value the opinions of the players (for example, polls are encouraged in the suggestions forum), but the input of players, whether it be on the forum, polls on the player page, or messages sent, isn't a reliable representation of the player base. In terms of the capital rule and how the Players Department handles things, opinions would probably be biased by those who feel a need to complain. Also, there are certain aspects of the game (like the capital rule itself) that wouldn't and I'd say shouldn't be changed even if 500 players vote against them (who may be mainly new players that may end up leaving soon anyway).

[SekoETC]

You make a good point, and we value the opinions of the players (for example, polls are encouraged in the suggestions forum)

Not anymore. The new rules say people shouldn't post polls on the suggestions forums because they create a distorted image of popularity. For example free water from snow/rain barrels gained a lot of support, even though it would break the game.

[Joshuamonkey]

Oh, you're right, sorry. I guess that's a good example.

[iavatus]

Not anymore. The new rules say ...

Oh, you're right, sorry. I guess that's a good example.

Also a perfect example of how having the rules scattered everywhere, makes for confusion and vagaries. Nebulous knowledge, transferred intermittently, doesn't really work, in any situation. Where is this rule? 3rd post, in a stickied thread. Not exactly clear or easily found.

[Joshuamonkey]

Well, I did read the rule when it happened and I remembered that the polls weren't required anymore, but I forgot that they were discouraged..and I was responding quickly without checking that.

[Alladinsane]

I think we came to the conclusion that the problem with polls is that they did not really represent the entire player base, so the 'squeaky wheels" were the ones getting the grease.

The same could be said about this thread.

But I think the issue is being addressed as we speak; not because of an open letter that did admittedly bring a problem to our attention. But because we as a department so choose to do it.

Of course other things are not getting done, but rest assured they will. A few very dedicated players have stepped up and offered their time and effort to help out constructively, but the process for training is not quick nor lacking in detail.

You have spoken and something is getting done. Whether you will like it or not is to be determined.

Be well!

[SumBum]

Not anymore. The new rules say ...

Oh, you're right, sorry. I guess that's a good example.

Also a perfect example of how having the rules scattered everywhere, makes for confusion and vagaries. Nebulous knowledge, transferred intermittently, doesn't really work, in any situation. Where is this rule? 3rd post, in a stickied thread. Not exactly clear or easily found.

Actually, this one is in a clear and reasonable location: stickied at the top of the suggestions forum. It's a forum issue specific to the suggestions forum, not a gameplay issue, so having this included in the game rules would only muddy them and make people less likely to read.

[EchoMan]

Agreed, the forum rules and recommendations are very separate from the in-game rules and the CR.

[iavatus]

And a highly placed ex-staffer, still wasn't aware of one rule, that *is* public and visible.

So, those invisible, nebulous ones. How are they measured fairly, when someone runs afoul?

[andrzejek]

If you don't like it here, noone is stopping you from leaving.
The last thing we need is people who are criticizing departments.