What The Fuck???

[magicaddict]

WHAT THE FUCK????????

Guess we'd all better be really careful not to mention anything negative even in mission reports any more, if it's no longer cool for characters to be nasty about other characters in any written medium.

You know, like they are to mine all the damned time.

It was a report. A biased, non-egalitarian, single-opinion report (like all of the others were), from a character who had had a nightmare all weekend at other characters' hands. What in the world did they expect? Rainbows and fucking unicorns?

Would it have been any better had Tony posted it rather than me? I asked if he'd be up for that, and got told I was fine with it (every word of it, from the creator of the system and GM of the game in question - how d'you like those onions?), just to wait until the debrief had gone up.

I swear on my soul that I put aside any OOC feeling I had, and wrote Meek's side of things as Meek and not me. It's a bad write up. Get over it.

Gerrard gets bad IC press every time he goes out, but I don't go whining to the committee that I'm being victimised OOC. Should I start? Is that the assumption we're supposed to make now?

Comments

[helbling.livejournal.com]

I suspect skins are feeling a tad thin at the moment - it's been quite a while since
1) that particular group of characters had their arses handed to them. When you've got someone HL, you get used to them wading through enemies, so any fuck ups they make are fixed easily by application of a bit more brute force. So suddenly coming up against SUCH a brutal game will have brought them back down to earth with a bump (I anticipate this happening with Pro on Sunday). And then, not only was it hard, but they failed. To not only fail, but fail and then be explicitly told from all sides that the failure was their fault. Egos will have been not just punctured, they were just blown up with heavy duty artillery.

2) We've had such harsh demotions handed out, without some sort of semi-OOC cooperation/volunteering. To be fair, we haven't had a high level game where the stakes were so high for such a long time as well, but then, they get it wrong and are handed IC repercussions for it - things which these characters haven't been in the firing line for for years. So that would be the artillery shell taking out their pride as well.

So, right now, you have a lot of hurt, and I suspect those in question unwilling to level it at the system's creator. (Although I'm incredibly glad he was the one to run this game. I don't think any other GM would have managed it without a flounce from the people involved if this is how they're reacting to a single mission report.) But they'd like to level it at someone. And then you stroll in presenting the perfect target...

Which, frankly, sucks of them. They shouldn't be doing it. They should be putting on their grown up pants and accepting that LARP is reactive; it does not owe them a win, and should they screw up, they will lose and get consequences, and when you get to high level, the stakes are proportionally bigger. And throwing toys out of pram is freaking ridiculous. *hugs*

[same-difference.livejournal.com]

For what's it's worth, I liked your write up of Meek's report, and it's the kind of thing I'd want to see more of where possible after games. I made a point to email the committee to that effect. It might help combat some of the MMO style interaction as well, if it both helps to improve how players consider their interactions with NPC's and for GMs to put more effort into creating NPCs that can be meaningfully interacted with.

I suspect Helbling right that's there almost certainly a lot of thin skin sensitivity resulting from the games that's been brought up by the debrief, and I completely agree with her that you should not have been used as an outlet for that.
I'll admit the debrief greatly annoyed me for some of the OOC tone, and the thought processes behind it, but my response has been to raise proposals to address some of the underlying system issues. As irritated as the debrief has made me I still enjoyed what you wrote, and I don't see any reasons why others shouldn't be able to keep IC and OOC issues apart either.

[xanthipe]

I'll admit the debrief greatly annoyed me for some of the OOC tone, and the thought processes behind it

Could I remind you of this line next time we have an incident like the game you ran with the demons, please? :P

[same-difference.livejournal.com]

Please do. Anything that helps me learn and improve ;)

[xanthipe]

So as to avoid confusing you, I have moved the post to Mission Reports, mostly as a compromise sort of position (and not just because I love my Admin buttons).

[weightofeons.livejournal.com]

Yes, of course it would have been better in the debrief as comments from the GMs.
It is post game feedback, quite clearly - posted with the debrief and providing critique from the GMs/Crew point of view of the actions taken.

It should have been posted by the GMs, as appropriately presented feedback on decisions, with appropriate repercussions or just clear comment. If nothing else, in context with the great effort the GMs have clearly gone to to explain their reasoning and present points appropriately, it could have been taken in the spirit it should.
It shouldn't have been posted by someone who just in the short time I've been back on the boards and in the club has been grinding their axe heavily in the direction of an unspecified group of older players, which because it's unspecified we'll all assume we're part of, and being openly insulting face to face of new characters older players produce because they don't meet your specific criteria of what makes a good character.

Can I just confirm what you seem to have said above that the spiel was entirely written by Tony?
Part of what I've been trying to clarify has been what extent GM approval existed.


As an aside, I have spoken to Tim and he was expecting the repercussions and isn't... not sure of the phrase... isn't too concerned and understands? Yes, probably right. It's taken the PC in a new direction. Certainly he isn't angry about any of it.
I haven't spoken to Adrian, but can't imagine him being bothered, probably amused, maybe disappointed Orchid didn't get into more trouble.
I haven't spoken to Marcus, but he's had demotions for G'Mord before and been happy to embrace the roleplay.
I haven't spoken to Ryan and Reno, and can't make any guess really.

[xanthipe]

Marcus approved the original, harsher consequences.

[magicaddict.livejournal.com]

You want to open this can again? I'm game.

Firstly, and most importantly, I wrote Meek's report. I sent it, as a .doc file, to Tony and Greg, asking them if they thought it was appropriate and okay as a report (or whether I was laying it on too thick), and if they wanted to put it up under their name rather than me posting it up under mine. Tony's reponse was (and I quote):

Not sure about the laying it on thick - looks very reasonable. (I think you captured the essence of Meek extremely well, both during the game and in the document.) It's certainly milder than a lot of the other comments I'm seeing on the player's performance.

Could you wait until we send out the debrief (which will be sometime next week)?

I duly did, safe in the knowledge that I was functionally Tony's mouthpiece. It was functionally put up by the GMs - may we dispense with the suggestion that I sought no such permission to put it up? It just had my name on top of it, as I had played the character and given life to them in a way that the GM had intended. I have already offered to take it down and get Tony to repost it as him. The words, however, would be exactly the same. So would Meek's sentiment. It depresses me (and makes my case rather well) that it would be more credible coming from Tony than it would from me - I utterly contend that it would be to do with him being Tony, rather than the GM of the game. Had Greg put it up, I fully believe that complaints would have been received.

[magicaddict.livejournal.com]

The axe I grind OOC is the axe I have been grinding for the last ten years - I was grinding it before you left, I continued to grind it while you were absent, and it's still grinding now you've returned. Why in the world did you think I'd stop just because you weren't here? Do you paint yourself as the root of all evil or something? Far from it. So very far from it.

It was never going to stop based on who was present - I grind it against an attitude, against a point of view that has, until recently, controlled what does and does not happen within our little group with a relatively iron fist. The fact that it always ends up grinding against the same people is an expression of their espousing that attitude in every LARP related thought, word and deed. I can't change the world. I'm only one person. My axe would be dulled and destroyed long before it made a difference in the wider world. Here, however, it can be useful.

It comes with the price, however, that I have to be as positive when I see something I think is good as I am negative when I see something I think is bad. As an example, while I headdesked at the new characters some players brought out, I later publicly complimented one of the portrayals of the what appeared to inspire them as highly accurate and well done. Maybe you didn't hear that, maybe it conveniently slipped your mind. Besides, do you think it's just me who digs at other people's characters? Really? Really? Do you think I invented such pearls as 'Dork in the Desk'? 'Team Just-us'?

It comes with another price as well - I have to be that harsh on myself, or I'm a hypocrite. I would be willing to offer a sizable wager that I am the only player to ever refuse to take a given bonus point (it still sits there unused from the second druid rearrangement game, and will do forevermore). I'd be willing to offer a smaller one that I recommend myself for negatives more than almost anyone else - perhaps more than anyone else at all. I freely espouse an attitude to characterisation that would lead to more character deaths, including my own.

I don't like unoriginal characters. The world and his wife knows that's a pet peeve of mine. However, what I said was supposed to be a rib, the likes of which happen a hundred times or more in the hours before and after a typical LARP. If I was that openly insulting, that wasn't my intention. I will personally apologise to all those I dug at in such a fashion the next time I see them, including you, and make sure that I give more consideration to what I am saying before I say it in the future.

[magicaddict.livejournal.com]

Changes have occurred within the society. That which I was told was categorically bad by proponents of the attitude is now not only happening, but the same people are daring to say it was their idea in the first place (I'm thinking maps, before you demand examples). That attitude no longer has blanket control over what happens in the society, and power of veto over everything peope with a different attitude come up with. Now, if they want something to happen (or want to stop something happening), they have to follow the same procedure that everyone else does, and make a case before a democratic vote of the society. In your absence, that has caused some ridiculous throwing of toys out of the pram - consider a GM team who railed against the fact they they had to compete for a campaign, rather than it just being given to them without consideration. I mean...the injustice of it all...

I was never against certain people. I was for the right of everyone to be heard equally, and judged equally. Now I've got it, and I bloody well love it. Yes, I felt paroxysms of glee at Tony's revelation that what I had been told was bad, wrong and unacceptable for a decade was what he had planned all along. It cannot have been news to all of his contemporaries. It's one of the biggest social vindications I have ever experienced (which, in itself, is a little humbling given the wider world), and I could have indulged in all kinds of crass nose rubbing. Instead, one post, that was polite (if directed) and made a good point.

It's going to be interesting times in the future. For a start, we get you back (ask anyone I have ever talked to about my opinions on the best pure roleplayer in the society. You and Caroline sit pretty). For another, I get to put forward stuff I've never been allowed to before, and that includes my own attitude towards creativity. I know, however, that any attitude I put forward is to be weighed and measured by the same codes of practice that everyone else has to follow as well. I have no fear of going to far, for I know that if I do, actions will be taken to address it, as they will be with anyone else. I also know that it is not mandatory for people to agree with me, or follow what I preach. I learned that within three years. Others still haven't got it after fifteen.

The axe isn't going to go away. It's just going to go on the shelf, within damned easy reach for when someone else implies that they are above criticism, or should get special dispensation, or should be allowed to step outside of the practices established by a majority vote of the society. How long do you think it will be before it needs to come out again?

[weightofeons.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't go chasing after anyone until we can have a face to face conversation. At the risk of changing topic to a completely different argument, one of my pet peeves is that some characters don't immediately start to grow on time in. As long as they grow, they can't be unoriginal, only inspired.

[greg-r.livejournal.com]

To reiterate what's already been said. We received Meek's report, thought that it seemed entirely legitimate and IC as what was going through Meek's thoughts after the events of the game and gave the OK to post it. Perhaps we should have posted it ourselves as part of the debrief? If that would have caused less upset then I'm sorry and I'll try to remember that for future reference.

[weightofeons.livejournal.com]

I think this is going to end up filed under "I hate the IC boards" on top of the "I hate downtime" pile. And Doug's point stands - as far as I know I'm the only one grumping, and no one else gets it. In the grand scheme of democracy, that makes me the old man in the rocking chair, gumming furiously and probably not to be listened to.