|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 7:46:32 GMT -5
Post by Drift on Jul 25, 2011 7:46:32 GMT -5
Well, Friday when I posted this, I wanted to fix him so that other people wanted to play with him without getting their feelings hurt. Now? After having been called passive-aggressive by one of the mods, having had a PM and an IM I sent made public but received no apology for the violation of trust, having two PMs sent with no response at all, and having my friends attacked on Twitter because they dared agree that outing PMs is uncool?
I don't know. You're right. I need to ask myself if it's worth it to even try when there's so much personal animus against me by the mod team and at least one other player.
|
|
Frenzy
Minor
Emperor of Profaningshire
Fscking Bigjobs
Posts: 339
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 8:05:43 GMT -5
Post by Frenzy on Jul 25, 2011 8:05:43 GMT -5
You know, I feel obliged to point out that the only reason the PM to Overlord was made public was because you brought it up first in public. See? I'd offered him to be killed by Overlord as part of something to make Overlord even more badass and terrifying, so at least he could bring something other than bland and fail to the game, but that offer was rejected. I apologise for being unclear in my reply to you. I wouldn't normally discuss this publically, but since you publically mentioned that I had rejected you offer You seem to object to people publicly responding to things brought up in public. It's kinda weird. Yeah, this is such an attack. I'm shaking in my boots. Truly, you are so very, very put upon.You know, I've barely been back two weeks. It shouldn't take this short an amount of time to completely unimpress me with your behavior.
|
|
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 8:14:32 GMT -5
Post by Drift on Jul 25, 2011 8:14:32 GMT -5
The issue is that publicly posting a PM is actually a violation of the TOS of most boards and blog sites. On LJ, posting a PM from a member is grounds for suspension of your account. I had presumed the same was true here, because let's face it, I'm lazy, and LJ is hardly forward-thinking in their policies.
I hadn't attacked Overlord, if you checked. I said the offer had been rejected. I gave no judgment that I thought this rejection was unfair or uncalled for. It was a simple statement of fact that honestly required no response at all. I was not saying Overlord was wrong or a jerk, in fact, I agree with the reasons I was given as to why Skyfire should NOT be killed off. I made an offer, the offer was given several reasons as to why it shouldn't happen. I agreed. Since the post was about Drift, I was shorthanding all of that into 'rejected' while talking about Skyfire in hopes we could get back to the stated topic: Drift.
I'm sorry you don't like me. I find your tone in this and your other response to me to be extraordinarily condescending and hurtful.
|
|
Frenzy
Minor
Emperor of Profaningshire
Fscking Bigjobs
Posts: 339
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 8:30:48 GMT -5
Post by Frenzy on Jul 25, 2011 8:30:48 GMT -5
Never said you attacked Overlord. I said you publicly brought the matter up, which you did.
You seem to perceive a lot of things as hurtful. Not that you shouldn't perceive me that way, since I am, well, not trying to be but also not trying not to be.
You have constantly in this thread gone on about how you're a bad person, taken the suggestions of "tone down your meta" to mean "no meta whatsoever", thrown a hissyfit over having Ovelord publicly respond to you (and in the other thread, the mods publicly responding to Barricade when Barricade made some pretty harsh accusations), called it an "attack on your friends" when someone said "Drift is kind of skewing things" (which you do), etc.
You are behaving badly and disrupting this game for no adequately explained reason. I know these people. None of them are going to arbitrarily decide they hate you based on how you play your character. The negative reactions are because of how you're behaving.
|
|
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 8:44:24 GMT -5
Post by Drift on Jul 25, 2011 8:44:24 GMT -5
You're absolutely right. I did not intend to disrupt the game. I was honestly trying to figure out how to fix him since people here have issues that I've never run into before in RP with my playing style. I was trying to learn how to adjust to the very different style here and was trying to get some advice on how to fix it.
I should never have let the conversation go to Skyfire in the first place. I was trying to keep it on the topic of Drift and I let it get away from that. Do I skew things? I don't even know anymore. I know that I said on twitter that it was uncool to post publicly PMs or IMs. Is that skewing? It's my opinion, yes. So I guess so.
You're 100% right. *I* am the problem. I apologize to you and everyone in the game. I'm really sorry. It was not my intent. I was trying to get some help and it backfired spectacularly. I cannot apologize enough for having upset people.
|
|
Barricade
Minor
Knight of the Spastic Sword
Trust Me
Posts: 372
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 8:48:16 GMT -5
Post by Barricade on Jul 25, 2011 8:48:16 GMT -5
Barricade made some very accurate accusations. And Barricade doesn't think that an apology for posting a PRIVATE MESSAGE publically is out of line. While Drift's player did bring up the topic publicly, it was a generic, non-judgmental statement that MENTIONED the topic, and did not provide any particulars. Responding by publicly pasting the private message was inappropriate and an abrogation of trust and courtesy.
As for the "public attack", you actually have no idea what Drift's player is referencing here, because you weren't involved in it, as it occurred elsewhere on the internet. Something which Drift's player plainly stated above.
Fortunately, Barricade will no longer be bringing accusations and comments to anyone's attention, as I will be dropping this character as soon as I can extricate him from his thread with Rampage. I have had concerns about playing Barricade for some time, but had not been able to come to a satisfactory decision regarding his status. Thank you for assisting me with that final decision.
|
|
Hellbender
Major
Mecha-Shai-Hulud
"Seriously."
Posts: 892
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 9:03:20 GMT -5
Post by Hellbender on Jul 25, 2011 9:03:20 GMT -5
Dear Drift player: I'm horning in just to offer an explanation as to why other posters aren't seeing things the way you are.
Most of us are long-time inhabitants of the Internet and have hung out on different forums (fora?) where the flaming and trolling and general behavior can get quite... childish. There are behavior patterns that are common to a debate spiraling into pointless immaturity, and when old veterans start seeing those patterns manifest, there's a certain collective "uh-oh" felt.
One pattern is one-sided debating, wherein one party (call them party A) states that another party (call them B) said something about them (call it statement C) in a private communication, and party B says they did not say C. Party A maintains they did, and puts party B in a no-win situation: either party B keeps the private communication private, and suffers A to spread the impression that B is a liar, or party B publishes the private communication, and suffers A calling them an unspeakably rude person for publishing private communcations. The more trollish A's will go so far as to threaten Internet Lawyers, copyright infringement, TOS violation, etc.
I have observed that the general consensus on how to deal with that kind of no-win accusation is that if A makes a public accusation using private evidence, then A has just implicitly declared that evidence public, therefore B can go ahead and publish that evidence. Practically, the whole thing heads for Fandom Wank or BRPS soon afterwards. This is why that whole issue is getting people's backs up; it looks like a bad pattern seen elsewhere. Possibly some people overreacted.
You asked for advice on playing Drift. You got very simple, straightforward advice: make his meta-posting a bit clearer as to being HIS thoughts, and not player narration of actual events. Simple, easily implemented, does not require you to change Drift's character or the content of your posts. It was not an attack on you or your character, or your play of the character, or your play of Dark Skyfire, or anything else.
Where this herd of drama llamas came from, I don't know. Please put them back in their corral, everyone. Take a deep breath, relax and calm down. We're not out to get you; please don't interpret everything as an attack on you. Most of us are long out of high school and don't do high school-type cliques and we don't "hate" people for having a bad day/bad reaction to things--we're human, we all screw up from time to time. It is appreciated if one recognizes that one is having a bad day and fixes things up afterwards.
|
|
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 9:14:12 GMT -5
Post by Drift on Jul 25, 2011 9:14:12 GMT -5
One pattern is one-sided debating, wherein one party (call them party A) states that another party (call them B) said something about them (call it statement C) in a private communication, and party B says they did not say C. Party A maintains they did, and puts party B in a no-win situation: either party B keeps the private communication private, and suffers A to spread the impression that B is a liar, or party B publishes the private communication, and suffers A calling them an unspeakably rude person for publishing private communcations. The more trollish A's will go so far as to threaten Internet Lawyers, copyright infringement, TOS violation, etc. I have observed that the general consensus on how to deal with that kind of no-win accusation is that if A makes a public accusation using private evidence, then A has just implicitly declared that evidence public, therefore B can go ahead and publish that evidence. Practically, the whole thing heads for Fandom Wank or BRPS soon afterwards. . I understand what you're saying except there's one thing missing. I never ACCUSED anyone of anything. I said Overlord had turned down the offer. I didn't say it in an accusatory fashion. In fact, I entirely agreed with the reasons I was given as to why it shouldnt' happen. Could I have said it better? Yes. that's my fault. But I still think it's a stretch to go from 'my offer was rejected' to 'Overlord is a dirtbag and I'm calling him out right here to defend himself'. I had said in context of the other that I'd *heard* people had characterized me that way and was trying to clear the air. We all know gossip is a psychotic sheep. (ETA 2: In my original post on Friday: though one person did step up and publicly post in that thread an IM snippet that did refer to me as 'passive aggressive' so, QED?)I wasn't pointing fingers at anyone, so again no accusation. Just. this is what I've heard, thirdhand, we all know that thirdhand is no way to actually resolve anything, so let's get this cleared up! Kind of, in my mind, the only reasonable way of trying to straighten things out. I was a mod of a game for a short while. We never outed PMs or IM logs that were forwarded to us. We took a lot of hits because we respected player privacy. It would have been easier, for example, in one case that we suspended someone to say, HEY< player X has done this this and this and that's against X Y and Z rule and that's why she's suspended from posting for a week. We didn't want to shame her. We said simply that the player was suspended for a minor rules violation. ETA: Of course, as a result, she made a series of Fandom!secrets, posts on BRPS, etc, making up some bizarre excuse from whole cloth that was entirely untrue. We knew better, we knew what she had done (IIRC, infomodding, player harassment and wank), but we could not defend ourselves without violating privacy. We had no choice. We sat, silent, and let everyone hate on us. It was not easy. I'd pretty much say that Frenzy's contribution to this thread has pretty much been an attack on me, personally. I don't see anything about Drift, or really, honestly, anything *constructive* in any of her replies. Hence, I have to disagree. The drama llamas come in when someone starts calling me the major problem in the game. I didn't do anything other than agree with her for pointing out and crystallizing what others had been saying to me already.
|
|
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 9:19:34 GMT -5
Post by Rodimus Prime on Jul 25, 2011 9:19:34 GMT -5
It did include one particular, that particular being that Overlord had rejected the offer concerning Skyfire. That particular, as it turns out, is inaccurate, and Overlord's player was attempting to correct a misrepresentation of what he had said. Perhaps he should not have done so with a direct quote of his own words, but how else is he supposed to demonstrate that that was not what he had said? Perhaps the original PM from Drift's player should have been left out. I can understand that it was intended to provide context, but on the other hand, I concede that it was a PM from Drift's player. But as for Overlord's reply, Overlord has every right to quote his own words, especially when attempting to clarify a misrepresentation of those words. I don't care whether the words were originally written in PM, IM, or anything else, a person has every right to share things that they themselves have said. It is their own words, and people should be allowed to quote themselves.
ETA: Aaaaaand two more posts have gone up while I was writing this. Still slogging through them. I will note that whether the claim about Overlord rejecting the offer was intended as accusatory or not, it was inaccurate, and people tend to not like seeing what they said misrepresented. A desire to clear it up seems pretty understandable to me.
|
|
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 9:32:19 GMT -5
Post by Drift on Jul 25, 2011 9:32:19 GMT -5
If Overlord had any concerns about what I'd intended, it might have been nice to receive a 'hey, wut?' PM or IM asking me to clarify before going off half-cocked. When in doubt, try to presume I'm NOT a passive-aggressive loser who takes nasty swipes at people not even involved in the thread (at that point)? I have no problems clarifying or editing posts, and that would have been a lot easier and gotten us back on track.
|
|
|
Request
Jul 25, 2011 9:49:57 GMT -5
Post by Rodimus Prime on Jul 25, 2011 9:49:57 GMT -5
Making this a seperate post, and attempting to move back on topic.
As I see it, there are actually two seperate issues concerning Drift's play at work here, and the problem is that they keep getting conflated. Issue one is the narrative portions of the posts concerning Drift's view of other characters. This is actually a stylistic issue, as some people like more 'internal feed' and some like less, and therefore no one approach is necessarily bad, but conflicts can arise when you have people with different preferences. My personal opinion is that the amount of internal dialogue should be balanced against the amount of actual action and spoken dialogue included in a post. That is to say, a post that contains mostly things that the other character cannot actually respond to can get frustrating to me as a player, especially when those things that my character cannot respond to center around my character. The more there is to actually respond to, the less it bothers me that there are 'internal feed' portions that I must ignore when playing out my character. Again, though, this is a stylistic preference, a case where I don't necessarily believe anyone was doing anything wrong so much as we've been having a clash of roleplay styles.
This is not the same as the second problem, which is when actual events, including the actions of other characters, are being presented though the lense of Drift's perception. Drift is, to borrow a literary term, an 'unreliable narrator.' This is fine, except that when referencing actual events, it's important to occasionally switch from the third-person limited perspective that we usually use to a third-person omniscient, i.e. it may be Drift's opinion that another character is firing wildly in his direction, but it's important to acknowledge in the narrative segment that those shots actually didn't come particularly close at all. While being able to get inside your character's head is important, when your character's reality clashes with the shared reality, it's also important to get back out of it, and not necessarily with footnotes. As a more extreme example, I play a character, Screwdriver, who is extremely delusional. If, in the narrative portion of her posts, I only included her perspective, things would get very confusing, because suddenly Overlord would be made of gumdrops and Ship constructed of gingerbread. Thus, it is important when writing her posts to not just consider her perspective of reality, which is warped, but also the more neutral shared reality.
As I said, I view these as two seperate issues. The first is a stylistic preference, and I'm not really in a position to call one style good or bad, but because the second occasionally involves interpreting other characters' actual actions, is a different matter, and I do not feel I made myself clear previously that they are not actually the same issue, for which I apologize.
|
|