Mending the break

[General Brewster]

Everyone,

About a week ago shed agreed that I would start having private conversations with most members of the "Whiskey" chat. The other discord where some members of our community also reside after the explosion that erupted on the Community RP discord. The schism that has been dividing our community has to end and that was the main motivator for me to start to have these "interviews" with the active members of the Whiskey chat.

I'll be tackling this on a point based system, sharing what I collected from the input of the 7 people I spoke to and sharing the view of Shed on it. That means the points will include changes in policy that have recently been agreed upon but it will also involve idea's that community members have shared.


New blood,

One thing that has featured 6/7 talks was the lack of new players. As Skylord put it recently, he was the newest member for years.. With Azazel recently taking up that title. A good question one needs to ask is how do you see our community expanding? After all numerous games have tried to use the Front Page Announcements with minimal to no gains. A downside is also that multiple people did join after these announcements but never stuck around, or at least not to my knowledge at this point. I would ask everyone to put together their brainpower and come with proposals. Posting on other site's to generate traffic here is something I wouldn't be opposed to. I have to admit I don't know about other boards though so that's something that can be considered.

Shed,

Also featuring heavy was the role of Shed, people know it's there, hear about it but rarely seen it is the general consensus I have gathered. Shed operates mostly on the Discord as the admins and on the forum as the people who have moderation rights on the entire RPG forum and they approve new games. That part is also not seen because it happens on our own, hidden to the public sub forum.

Since Gandalfus and I have joined shed we've been talking about things that could be/needed to be done to further our exposure and availability to the "public". This was also the reason that both Gandalfus and I have joined shed. 1, because we both have been part of the RPG community for years and 2, because we both are European's. This assures that pretty much 24/7 someone of shed will be online to patrol the discord and help around in ongoing RPG's.

Recently the most important changes that we agreed upon as Shed members include the following points. Further down this statement some other parts of the "new policy" will be discussed more in depth.

- Shed members will always be considered head moderators in RP's. Along and in collaboration with the RP-creator of course.

- Self moderation of any kind will not be tolerated. Nobody or nothing will be exempted from this. All the people currently in Shed have the responsibility to help on this front, even when they not participate in the game. Integrity on rolls should and must always be preserved.

- Shed will enact more control on game releases. An example would be Barry's Roman game, it's a given that without the participation of "major" players like LM, Gandy and myself included as Barry put it, games tend to fail. Not enough people to keep embers burning resulting in a death or pause. By taking control of the launch, Shed can actively take a role in exploring if releasing a game is fees able in the period the creator ought it too.

Be aware that Shed control over roleplays (aka "new policy") will only affect subforum proposals and not one thread ideas since they do not require much moderation beyond their creator's presence.

Respect,

Nobody that has ever graced the discord server will deny that there can be moments where people have a chronic lack of respect for each other. As I was told as a young lad, you don't need to be friends with everyone but you can be civil with everyone. It'll be no surprise that this subject featured in all the conversations I had, some to a bigger extent than others but it does point the finger on the sore spot. Flaming and toxicity has been on the rise since WOTR1's end.

Shed recognizes that it has been to kind and lenient towards these episode's of flaming and toxicity and there for we apologize. I would personally make a note that since the expansion of shed we have been cracking down upon these forms of behavior and we have issued multiple bans from the discord. Asserting our authority and ensuring a nicer overall environment to be a part of.

We also realize that to some extend the damage already has been done. After all 12 of our members are members of the Whiskey chat where some of those 12 chose to completely abandon the RPG Community discord because of the toxicity and flaming. This is something Shed wishes to restore, we are the first to agree that everyone has the right and freedom to be part of an other chat but it would be for the betterment of the community that at the very least the members that chose to leave the RP Community rejoin it. Under the insurance that toxic behavior, the attacking of members(part of the discord or not) and flaming will no longer be tolerated. When anyone feels that the situation is turning toxic you are encouraged to talk to one of the Shed members, chances are there's one of us online at any time and we will act. No longer will we endlessly try and calm someone down by being nice. Enough is enough.

Viking RP,

We have recently seen the proposal for a viking RP. Initial comments on the Discord were met with resistance. In particular there were members that did not agree with pushing Rome aside. Making something clear: development on the Viking RP started after Barry paused Sunset on Rome. During a couple of the interviews people suggested that a game where cooperation would be first could be a nice change for our community. The game centers about everyone being in the same clan who lands on the shores of England. Yes, you can be a loner who relies on himself but the emphasis should be that we(the players) work together to build a Kingdom and survive.

Two other people I spoke too suggested that the community/Shed participate more in developing an idea. This is the reason why the proposal is rather bare boned and is still open for changes. I'd invite every to go and have an opinion about it but also be productive in helping change what you, and maybe other might dislike.

Closing statement,

In my professional life I have dealt with people who couldn't lead, people who did not recognize authority and people who would enjoy lighting the embers to spark conflict. I dare say that this community is not even remotely close to the extremes I have had to deal with. Again, 6/7 of the people I spoke first mentioned that they hated the split and wanted it repaired. As long as there are people willing to work towards a compromise, towards a common goal we will always be able to mend our differences. It's my deepest hope that people recognize that Shed is working to improve the situation. That we will always be an ear to the community for suggestions and area's that could use improvement. Most importantly, this community can be whatever the community wants it to be. We can let it die because nobody can step over their ego or we can take the compromises at hand, reunite and be on our merry RP'ing ways.

On behalf of Shed,
General Brewster.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Dear shed,

1. We're likely not going to gain new members. Since we are more or less dependent on the flow of traffic in TWC for fresh faces, we likely won't see large influxes. I don't see this as even one of our top five problems right now if this community is going to survive.

2. Your efforts to curb toxicity have clearly been unsuccessful, and the failure of Sunset is direct evidence.

3. The imperial attitude of the shed towards players and members is extremely unfortunate. Speaking frankly, you're not better than us. Stop acting like it.

4. I don't see much at all of anything I discussed here, which isn't very surprising. Lack of diversity of perspective and general self awareness are two of the problems facing the shed, but always in its blind spot.

- Shed members will always be considered head moderators in RP's. Along and in collaboration with the RP-creator of course.

- Self moderation of any kind will not be tolerated. Nobody or nothing will be exempted from this. All the people currently in Shed have the responsibility to help on this front, even when they not participate in the game. Integrity on rolls should and must always be preserved.

- Shed will enact more control on game releases. An example would be Barry's Roman game, it's a given that without the participation of "major" players like LM, Gandy and myself included as Barry put it, games tend to fail. Not enough people to keep embers burning resulting in a death or pause. By taking control of the launch, Shed can actively take a role in exploring if releasing a game is fees able in the period the creator ought it too

Simply awful.

This relegates the actual GM of the game, the person who should be in charge of the game in both the creative and mechanical sense, equal to a person who may not even be playing it at all or familiar with it in any sense. This leads to point 2, that "self moderation will not be tolerated." Often, it is the only choice, and not even a preferable choice. But this new rule implies that those who self moderate (I think we all know who we are talking about here) cannot be trusted and are prone to cheating. I don't even have words for that, but absent any proof for abuse there's no reason to even address it. I can offer substantial proof to the contrary about self moderation leading to any abuses. Finally, making the shed the grand arbiter of all games that will be played in the future extends a level of control over the entire forum that can only be described as tyrannical given the tradition of free spirited gaming and promotion of initiative this forum used to have. This is why you lost BP, for example, shed's failure to deliver even a minimum amount of support for it. O tempora! O mores!

As for the shed's seemingly compulsive participation in games as moderators to avoid self moderation, it is an admirable sentiment but is unfortunately undercut by two substantial factors: (1) A lack of self awareness of your own activity and interest levels and (2) the fact that if you aren't playing the game you won't really know the context of anything or the familiarity with the rules to do anything without coaching anyway. My "Self moderation" was done by asking in the chat for a random 1-20 from players. They didn't know the context of what I was asking for, and there was a record showing what was rolled somewhere that could be referenced.

You've killed this forum with procedure, in my opinion. I wish you the best of luck but I can't participate here any more. In your efforts to be impartial and fair, you have reduced everyone here to the lowest common denominator of the playerbase regardless of the quality of their contributions or the harm their behavior has caused, and promised to fill the gaps. Your reputation for interest and activity levels necessary to plug those gaps is unconvincing at best. Games have failed due to lack of time or interest by shed members. Trust should be earned, not legislated.

[Lord William]

The shed already has too much control, the shed should diminish its control and give players more freedom.

[Mary The Quene]

I think i can agree with most points out laid by the shed. I have been always of the opinion that there should be a much harsher crack down on flame wars, these flame wars have caused this recent toxicity which is essentially killing the community right now. Take away these flame wars/toxicity and we can thrive again. Infact i'm of the opinion that all our issues as of late are caused by exactly this.

1. We're likely not going to gain new members. Since we are more or less dependent on the flow of traffic in TWC for fresh faces, we likely won't see large influxes. I don't see this as even one of our top five problems right now if this community is going to survive.

I agree, although new players are always welcome.

2. Your efforts to curb toxicity have clearly been unsuccessful, and the failure of Sunset is direct evidence.

The failure of Sunset wasn't a result of flame wars persé but rather because Barry stopped the game because of lack of time and players simply had no time or interest. (sadly so)

3. The imperial attitude of the shed towards players and members is extremely unfortunate. Speaking frankly, you're not better than us. Stop acting like it.

What is that ''imperial attitude'' you are speaking off in the first place?

4. I don't see much at all of anything I discussed here, which isn't very surprising. Lack of diversity of perspective and general self awareness are two of the problems facing the shed, but always in its blind spot.

Then say here what you want to be discussed, we can't know what you want if you only say things by private messages in discord. I also disagree with the latter, you blame of a lack of self awareness but i'm seeing this problem more with you. For example you pushed your American setting through our throat while the community was not consulted whether we were interested or not. You didn't ask us we wanted that specific setting to be played or not.

This relegates the actual GM of the game, the person who should be in charge of the game in both the creative and mechanical sense, equal to a person who may not even be playing it at all or familiar with it in any sense. This leads to point 2, that "self moderation will not be tolerated." Often, it is the only choice, and not even a preferable choice. But this new rule implies that those who self moderate (I think we all know who we are talking about here) cannot be trusted and are prone to cheating. I don't even have words for that, but absent any proof for abuse there's no reason to even address it. I can offer substantial proof to the contrary about self moderation leading to any abuses. Finally, making the shed the grand arbiter of all games that will be played in the future extends a level of control over the entire forum that can only be described as tyrannical given the tradition of free spirited gaming and promotion of initiative this forum used to have. This is why you lost BP, for example, shed's failure to deliver even a minimum amount of support for it. O tempora! O mores!

It is not about whether we accuse somebody of cheating through self moderation but rather about the principle. Self moderating has contributed to the flame wars because of a lack of trust in the community and it led to people accusing each other. By removing this we take this source of concern away. And no self moderation is not the only option, you wait for somebody else to moderate and if you find it takes to long, recruit or reach out to other mods. Stop playing the victim.

Also perhaps we need some measure of control on games because if we let everyone do what they want we will see dozens of half baked ass games/proposals like GTSK revival 80000 or settings launched through our throats we have no interest and have no long term chance of survival. You seem to be all for Quantity over Quality, those games backed and regulated by the Shed tend to be much better in rules and have generally proved to have a higher chance of long term survival than those games/proposals pushed through our throat like BP or GSTK revival 400000000. This isn't the free market you know

As for the shed's seemingly compulsive participation in games as moderators to avoid self moderation, it is an admirable sentiment but is unfortunately undercut by two substantial factors: (1) A lack of self awareness of your own activity and interest levels and (2) the fact that if you aren't playing the game you won't really know the context of anything or the familiarity with the rules to do anything without coaching anyway. My "Self moderation" was done by asking in the chat for a random 1-20 from players. They didn't know the context of what I was asking for, and there was a record showing what was rolled somewhere that could be referenced.

So what's the alternative? More self moderating? whether self moderating is fairly done our not it has proved to a source of concern because it leads to flame wars and distrust. Self moderating isn't the perfect solution you seem to imagine. We are on the internet after all, a place we say whatever we want, hence why we need regulation.

You've killed this forum with procedure, in my opinion. I wish you the best of luck but I can't participate here any more. In your efforts to be impartial and fair, you have reduced everyone here to the lowest common denominator of the playerbase regardless of the quality of their contributions or the harm their behavior has caused, and promised to fill the gaps. Your reputation for interest and activity levels necessary to plug those gaps is unconvincing at best. Games have failed due to lack of time or interest by shed members. Trust should be earned, not legislated.

No this forum is not dying because of the shed but because of the current attitude we all have contributed to, you too. That's also self awareness. The Shed also have a real life btw, they can't be online 24/7, we have kids, gf's, friends families and work/school to attend too you know. And a lack of interest can be explained by the fact settings are launched without consultation (i do not recall we were consulted about wanting an american setting) about what we want to play. You know you own personal preference for a setting doesn't necessarily reflect the interest of what the community wants to play.

Remember we are trying to cure this toxicity, it would be nice if we can drop attitudes like this and come to a consensus where we can go forward again united. Sorry if i seem to be hostile in this post but all the blame can't be solely laid at the shed.

[Mary The Quene]

The shed already has too much control, the shed should diminish its control and give players more freedom.

To what purpose? So you can launch a failed GSTK setting 500000 like many times before?

[Pontifex Maximus]

The failure of Sunset wasn't a result of flame wars persé but rather because Barry stopped the game because of lack of time and players simply had no time or interest. (sadly so)

That's not what Barry told me or what I observed. Oz did a pretty good job of putting people in places where they could RP in a manner and with other players they liked. Britain was doing quite well and then everything abruptly ground to a halt.

What is that ''imperial attitude'' you are speaking off in the first place?

Stifling paternalism that destroys player autonomy.

Then say here what you want to be discussed, we can't know what you want if you only say things by private messages in discord. I also disagree with the latter, you blame of a lack of self awareness but i'm seeing this problem more with you.

The problem is with leadership. LM isn't interested in half the games played and in the other half of the games he plays in we often end up waiting for his replies because he takes important characters. He'll be off playing CK2 and we'll all be left in the lurch in the meantime. BF has one or two days per week max where he can even be online.

For example you pushed your American setting through our throat while the community was not consulted whether we were interested or not. You didn't ask us we wanted that specific setting to be played or not.

I posted a public poll and received enough interest (I needed 4-6 players) to move forward with writing rules. One of the problems here is that so many of us still are under the false assumption that we have to create games where 10-15 people are needed to play. Nobody but me, I think, has realized that is a bad way to go. I started YATS in the same way and it had a good run (I needed six but ended up with 11) in the autumn and BP is still alive and kicking. So far BP has lasted longer than Sunset and GoT and shows no signs of trouble at all. We have five players. Nothing was shoved down the community's throat. I offered an alternative to 4-5 more players to join me in a setting that hasn't been tried for five years over...nothing. No other proposals were floating around at the time. I spoke with Barry and he said Sunset was on an indefinite hiatus. And since I refuse to join the RPG discord for obvious reasons, I don't feel like I did anything wrong at all in making my proposals. You could have actually posted your concerns in the weeks the thread was open. I can't read minds.

LM did the same things with Eldar Scrolls. Am I supposed to complain that he didn't communicate his intentions to do so with me directly? Of course not. If people want to work on games that helps everyone. If you want to join us on Whiskey I can send you a link, you'd be welcome.

To summarize, the most important takeaway here is that we do not need consensus or even a majority of players to agree on what game to play. We need games that require fewer people so they stay viable for longer periods of time. Besides, let's stop pretending that nobody secretly works on games and then rolls out a proposal, that's how 2017 started with everyone abandoning GoT for WOTR.

It is not about whether we accuse somebody of cheating through self moderation but rather about the principle. Self moderating has contributed to the flame wars because of a lack of trust in the community and it led to people accusing each other. By removing this we take this source of concern away. And no self moderation is not the only option, you wait for somebody else to moderate and if you find it takes to long, recruit or reach out to other mods. Stop playing the victim.

I would have killed for another moderator for YATS. I asked constantly. Nobody volunteered to help out in a substantial way. What, praytell, was I supposed to do? Killed off one of my own characters and burned the other one's bank down in the first few turns by the way. Sooo much evidence of cheating.

Also perhaps we need some measure of control on games because if we let everyone do what they want we will see dozens of half baked ass games/proposals like GTSK revival 80000 or settings launched through our throats we have no interest and have no long term chance of survival. You seem to be all for Quantity over Quality, those games backed and regulated by the Shed tend to be much better in rules and have generally proved to have a higher chance of long term survival than those games/proposals pushed through our throat like BP or GSTK revival 400000000. This isn't the free market you know

Stop using extreme examples to justify your argument. By your standards, BP was shoved down everyone's throats too in spite of it requiring so few players and so far we've outlasted two "officially sanctioned" games. There are only at most two game proposals going on right now, one of which has been abandoned since I'm done using TWC as a platform for my games and I don't trust the shed to do the proper thing any more. It absolutely is the free market, and I've taken my business elsewhere. Choosing to participate in a game is a voluntary transaction. In the next few weeks/days I'm probably going to add a Rome or Crusader game on my forum. People should feel free to join and play if they want to.

So what's the alternative? More self moderating? whether self moderating is fairly done our not it has proved to a source of concern because it leads to flame wars and distrust. Self moderating isn't the perfect solution you seem to imagine. We are on the internet after all, a place we say whatever we want, hence why we need regulation.

Of course not. The perfect solution is to have enough active moderators in every game to get everything done in a timely fashion without any possibility of bias. Self moderation is a last resort if any of the above isn't possible. I don't like to wait 3-4 days to have stuff moderated, and if I have to wait that long, I'll do it myself the way I described above. I ask in a chat for a number between 1-20 after having written out predetermined outcomes and take it from there. I've never been interested in cheating to win, I'm interested in storywhich I advance through objectives. Maybe that's why traditionally my GoT characters have actually been dynamic and fun to watch, they don't just sit on their ass and react to everything else. I'm sorry if the try hards of this forum can't appreciate that.

No this forum is not dying because of the shed but because of the current attitude we all have contributed to, you too. That's also self awareness. The Shed also have a real life btw, they can't be online 24/7, we have kids, gf's, friends families and work/school to attend too you know. And a lack of interest can be explained by the fact settings are launched without consultation (i do not recall we were consulted about wanting an american setting) about what we want to play. You know you own personal preference for a setting doesn't necessarily reflect the interest of what the community wants to play.

1. So there was no consultation about the latest WOTR, Sunset, or GoT?

2. RL commitments are real, but that has also become the alibi for just straight up inactivity because you're bored with a game and would rather play CK2. The latest WOTR failed because of this. Half, maybe more,of our leaderhship isn't able to dedicate the time necessary to run this forum. When the same thing happened with me in around 2012 when I was busy with school, I resigned from the Shed and left it to more active people. This is the ugly truth we're not addressing and this is the heart of the problem.

3. I would never move forward with a game unless I reached the number of interested people that I need. Usually 4-6 now. Frankly it doesn't matter if there's not unanimous agreement. We have multiple fora and multiple games can run at once, ironically it seems that the shed disagrees with this and would rather stifle games and funnel everyone into the same thing.



I rest my case. For the last 18 months I've only been able to play Civ 6 and I've had a lot of free time to help. I'v volunteered to help, LM has denied me the ability to participate in any sort of forum leadership. I do not know the reason for this, though I would be interested in his explanation now.

Remember we are trying to cure this toxicity, it would be nice if we can drop attitudes like this and come to a consensus where we can go forward again united. Sorry if i seem to be hostile in this post but all the blame can't be solely laid at the shed.

We don't need consensus, we need a quorum. It's time everyone starts to understand that. As for the shed, we can't have a group claiming all this power and then not hold them accountable for problems. If they had been more diligent we wouldn't be in this mess. I find it hard to sympathize because I've been warning them in private about the discord chat toxicity and other issues for about a year now. Their decision to largely disregard veteran players was their own choice.

I don't think you're being hostile, I think you're speaking frankly. There's nothing wrong with that.

[Lucius Malfoy]

The problem is with leadership. LM isn't interested in half the games played and in the other half of the games he plays in we often end up waiting for his replies because he takes important characters. He'll be off playing CK2 and we'll all be left in the lurch in the meantime. BF has one or two days per week max where he can even be online.

Okay this argument really has to stop.

In 2015, I played the role of Daemon IV/Maegor in our longest running GoT setting which ended due to a bunch of players dropping out as LPs and the restart lasting a long time to the point that there was nothing to do. After that, I stepped down from very important characters and went about letting others lead the helm. For the next three years, I never once was King nor lead a roleplay IC as a major leader, except for factions in WOTR. I pretty much never had a chance to be the major leader/ruler except for Sunset over Rome.

In the three WOTR scenarios we had, the two biggest roles was when I led the Lords Appellant (which I had a lot of work going on at the time at my job and told the community my replies would be delayed due to work) and when I was the Duke of Clarence. There was a third role, when I was the Earl of Warwick, but he died within the first week of 1.0. Now, the latter role (the Duke of Clarence), I was asked to return from my self-imposed hiatus and reply in order to ensure things kept rolling. But I was away, not because I was gaming, but because I had something in RL happen. Discord server knew what was going on and understood why I could not mentally dedicate myself to roleplay at the time.

Following that, I tried to be involved in a few GoT restarts, but could not feel the pull and even admitted that. Same could be said with the YATS restarts and some other small rps.

Just because I wasn't interested in them doesn't make me not qualified nor less qualified as the games seemed to work just fine without me.

So in the past three years, there have been about... 10 major subforum rps. Of which I participated in 6 of them (3 WOTR and 3 GoT settings; Daemon IV, King in the North, and Robert's Rebellion (I feel there was a fourth, but can't remember). And all of which I never once delayed on replies (no longer than an hour or so), except for the one time that something in RL keep me from being able to write due to being mentally exhausted for a couple weeks. And when that happened, I notified the community about it right away and came back right away when I was needed. I do not need to voice if I do not want to participate in something, but will support any idea that becomes readily available to the community

I do not like it that my gaming and what I do in RL is being used as an excuse to call out on my performance as a moderator. There have been times I have tried to get a hold of Poach in the past involving GoT moderation, but he is playing Stellaris or Europa Universalis IV, but I don't hold that against him. I mean we are on a forum that involves a lot of video games for god's sake. And what I do in RL should not be a valid argument for that matter. I just like gaming a lot, this I will admit, but when I am needed in the discord server or elsewhere, I do set the game aside to do what I need to do.

[Pontifex Maximus]

You stopped posting as Gloucester and later as Clarence in WOTR leading to the collapse of the faction's viability and therefore the game. If you knew you were going to be busy, you shouldn't have taken on such central roles to the game. I'd argue that participating in 60% of the games, as the director of the forum, is quite low. As for the quality of your participation, it usually starts off strong and then falters considerably after the first two or three weeks.

How are we supposed to believe you'll help moderate games "you're not feeling" in a timely fashion that won't lead to delays in a game's progress? You're asking too much and delivering too little, I'm afraid.

[Lucius Malfoy]

You stopped posting as Gloucester and later as Clarence in WOTR leading to the collapse of the faction's viability and therefore the game. If you knew you were going to be busy, you shouldn't have taken on such central roles to the game. I'd argue that participating in 60% of the games, as the director of the forum, is quite low. As for the quality of your participation, it usually starts off strong and then falters considerably after the first two or three weeks.

How are we supposed to believe you'll help moderate games "you're not feeling" in a timely fashion that won't lead to delays in a game's progress? You're asking too much and delivering too little, I'm afraid.

This is where I have had it.

For the hundredth time, I stopped posting as Gloucester and Clarence cause, literally 30 minutes before going into work one Monday afternoon in 2017, I came in contact with my half-sister from my birth family who I had been trying to find a means to contact since my 25th birthday (2016). I told people in the community that I had to step away from posting cause I became mentally exhausted overnight. I told them, give me a week, which eventually turned into two weeks given what had happened. You cannot use that as an example against my participation and performance as a moderator. In fact, the game still lived on despite my absence. I remember it was Gandalf who contacted me, asking me to come back, and I told him I would try and I managed to. Afterwards, the games went on and lived on for many more weeks and this happened in 3.0 WOTR, the very last of the restarts for that setting. The previous two, there were no issues in my participation or anything like that.

I never once offered to moderate games I am not feeling for. In GoT, I told Poach when I wasn't feeling it and told him I would keep trying to stick around (this was the Robert Rebellion setting). I told people when I needed to vacate WOTR in 3.0 for a bit due to RL. I even said, in Sunset over Rome, I was waiting for Axis to reply so that I could get to you both at the same time. When that became obvious he wasn't gonna reply, I still moved forward with the game, but unfortunately, it had died everywhere else, not because of me! I am hardly asking for anything nor have I truly delayed anything, so stop using my RL as an excuse to pin me as a bad moderator.

[Pontifex Maximus]

I never once offered to moderate games I am not feeling for.

1. You just announced a policy which makes you a moderator in every game and forbids GMs from running their games 100% the way they want. You promised you will moderate in any game to avoid self moderation, and you have implied that anyone who self moderates will be subject to discipline.

2. So you're saying that you do not believe your absences have in any way affected games for the past few years?

3. The fact you're the director of this forum and refuse to shoulder any of the blame for current problems is unfortunately pretty telling.

These solutions laid out in the OP don't fix anything for me, in fact it makes things worse.

[Lucius Malfoy]

1. This policy was just made and, as you can see, there are no games presently active. And let this be known that this was not just me, Ponti. This was agreed on by the whole of Shed, so stop pinning me as the number one culprit.

2. The only time my absences have truly affected games was 3.0 WOTR and this I knew about when Gandalf approached me during my hiatus. It was a completely valid reason for me to step away, one that you have continuously used against me this whole time (beyond my gaming), and that I came back to when I was asked to. I know that I do not always get to replies right away, sometimes I do not have the mood. But hey, I still get to them eventually.

And with that, I have said my piece and will not speak anymore. I have made my reasons clear time and time again, but they are continuously ignored and overlooked to grasp at straws for any excuse to pin me as the main culprit for roleplays failing, for activity being low and for new roleplays not being present.

[Pontifex Maximus]

1. Are you the director, or not? You can be in charge and accept responsibility, or not. It's an all or nothing deal. Are you saying that in the shed forum you were not in favor of adopting these rules? Did you vote against them? You're also missing my point completely - my point is that I simply do not believe that the shed will step in and offer moderation help for the reasons I outlined above.

2. It was a valid reason to step away. You should have passed the reins to someone else to ensure we weren't all left in the lurch in the meantime. It's not hard to step down from stuff, you continually refuse to do so and we all suffer from your absences. You haven't addressed my question, you're just deflecting.

This isn't doing much to instill confidence this forum can work again, especially since your response addresses only a tiny fraction of my original argument. Somehow I don't think those questions or arguments will ever be addressed.

[Lord William]

To what purpose? So you can launch a failed GSTK setting 500000 like many times before?

Already with the condescending tone, I mean who the hell are you?

I agree with all of Severus's points

[Pontifex Maximus]

There's no need for hostility, we can have civil discussion.

[Mary The Quene]

Uhh, TWC lost my post with replies...............

Well, i can't forbid you from moving away obviously but mind you splitting away from our community is not going to be beneficial for both our communities. I mean we're thinning out the population even more. If you are determined to move away whatever the cost then i think its pretty much useless to discuss this even more because you apparently did choose your path already and nothing will change you from that. It's sad it has come to this but the only way to survive this is to look onward at this point, dwelling on this point will do us no good.

Already with the condescending tone, I mean who the hell are you?

I agree with all of Severus's points

Calm down, we're trying to have a civilized conversation so this kind of language isn't appreciated here.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Check the restore post option, it might still be there.

I feel the choice was made for me, moving off site was my last resort because things seem to be getting worse to me, not better. It's still a lose/lose but at least I can run my games the way I know they need to be run. I'm marginally happier off site than I am on here, and there's certainly less red tape standing in my way. Anyone is free to come over and play BP if you want, it's an open game, as will any other future games hosted there. So far the only rule on Whiskey and the other place is just don't be a jerk. Pretty simple rule I think. It's working so far at least

[Mary The Quene]

Yeah, i did and its gone unfortunately.

Alright, it is what it is now, i wish you best of luck then.

[Lucius Malfoy]

Ponti, I would ask that you not promote your alternative website on this subforum, as it is not relevant to the discussion and thread's topic at hand.

Please keep such promotion to private messages or over discord chat.

Thank you

[Pontifex Maximus]

You can come too LM

[Gandalfus]

Probably a moot point by now, but oh well.

The idea behind making shed the "moderators" of every game was not to get in the way of the GM and how they run games. It was intended to be a system where shed sit back and let things run smoothly until their help is requested, either for moderation purposes or to resolve a dispute between players and the local GM. In this manner even if the shed aren't currently playing they can still contribute to helping current roleplaying games run for as long as possible with as much activity as possible. Its not intended to infringe upon anyone's personal freedoms and we want people to continue being just as creative as they have been in the past.

Also, yes, we all enjoy playing Crusader Kings 2.