I haven't read all the pages as this thread is quite something! Nobody should be making personal attacks,

I think we need to clear something up.

If I say "game element X was utter rubbish and whoever is responsible for that really isn't up to the task" that ISN'T a personal attack, even if I name that person it is still NOT a personal attack - it is an opinion based upon my observation of pertinent factors.

A personal attack would, IMO, be "that Y is an idiot" without giving any supporting evidence as to why I think that.

All The Best

Actually, when you view it plainly, it says dumping over anyone with a different viewpoint is not OK. But, I was attempting to course correct the thread, not hijack it.

 

As I stated in the Roadmap, part of opening dialog requires that we set expectations to ensure our conversations and debates remain productive. I should have already communicated the following to everyone: I completely agree with discourse, debates, and telling us about your utter dissatisfaction about something we've implemented in the game, or the way we told a story. In return, I ask for civility, commentary without the insults, and when possible, for actionable feedback.

I'm sorry for this aside, but I really can't let this point go without responding to it directly...

I haven't seen you engage in one actual, genuine conversation since you've become producer. Your idea of transparent dialogue is dumping a huge post about how balance is achieved, but where were you for the actual conversation about it? Nowhere to be seen. A set of quasi-blog posts dropped on the forum for us to discuss and you to abandon does not a conversation make. I've seen you dump info in response to posts, I've seen eric dumping info as per usual, I've seen random devs and writers dumping info, and then? Nothing. The story thread? Info dump, not a conversation to be had. The class change threads? Info dumps, no conversations to be had at all even where people make highly salient and meaningful points about things the community is genuinely concerned about...

Don't take this as any disrespect here, Keith, but your idea of a conversation and my idea of a conversation appear to be two very different things. You guys talk AT us; you rarely, if ever, talk WITH us. I think you need to stop trying to convince us this thing is a duck; it doesn't quack like a duck, it doesn't swim like a duck, it doesn't fly like a duck. It patently is not a duck. You can't market this sort of thing like that.

Sorry if that's a slight aside, but it's something I felt I needed to say.

Actually, when you view it plainly, it says dumping over anyone with a different viewpoint is not OK. But, I was attempting to course correct the thread, not hijack it.

 

As I stated in the Roadmap, part of opening dialog requires that we set expectations to ensure our conversations and debates remain productive. I should have already communicated the following to everyone: I completely agree with discourse, debates, and telling us about your utter dissatisfaction about something we've implemented in the game, or the way we told a story. In return, I ask for civility, commentary without the insults, and when possible, for actionable feedback.

 

This isn't about hiding behind a defensive wall, it's about treating others (not just the Dev Team), with respect and allowing them to provide their viewpoints without being mocked and mistreated. Not everyone likes to be bashed around and for many, they simply don't participate which narrows the view to just a few players. That's not healthy for our game, either.

 

I do apologize for jumping into this thread and derailing the conversation. If possible, let's agree to stop any further comments about this and get back to the purpose of the thread. How about we start up a new thread about forum decorum (yah, I know, but it rhymed) where I'll be happy to participate.

Another great, well reasoned post. It's funny that still some are going on about your previous post and sort of pretending like this one didn't exist as a means of justification and moving forward.

I would hope anyone reading Keith's post here would note at this point anyone going further to continue to attack Keith over his posts has not interest in the topic at hand but solely wants to in flame the situation.

Sure, we can continue to debate with one another in this rather off topic matter but I see no point to direct it back at Keith any further on the back of that post.

Keith - how about YOU start that topic as a side discussion topic? I would be interested in your thoughts on forum decorum with examples as I often myself find it hard to find that line between vehement arguing and possibly going a little bit too far into the realms of rule breaking.

Often it's like "well they are clearly making personal remarks so I will too" yet one person just ends up over line (not talking outright abuse here) and gets sanctioned or has posts removed whilst the other other does not. Where is this line? Ideally many of the posts that outright seem to attack Charles and yourself in this thread as opposed to the content itself should be deleted should they not? Warnings issued? I get you have painted yourself into a corner by actually responding now and it would seem heavily bias to do so but ... rules are rules are they not?

I'm sorry for this aside, but I really can't let this point go without responding to it directly...

 

I haven't seen you engage in one actual, genuine conversation since you've become producer. Your idea of transparent dialogue is dumping a huge post about how balance is achieved, but where were you for the actual conversation about it? Nowhere to be seen. A set of quasi-blog posts dropped on the forum for us to discuss and you to abandon does not a conversation make. I've seen you dump info in response to posts, I've seen eric dumping info as per usual, I've seen random devs and writers dumping info, and then? Nothing. The story thread? Info dump, not a conversation to be had. The class change threads? Info dumps, no conversations to be had at all even where people make highly salient and meaningful points about things the community is genuinely concerned about...

 

Don't take this as any disrespect here, Keith, but your idea of a conversation and my idea of a conversation appear to be two very different things. You guys talk AT us; you rarely, if ever, talk WITH us. I think you need to stop trying to convince us this thing is a duck; it doesn't quack like a duck, it doesn't swim like a duck, it doesn't fly like a duck. It patently is not a duck. You can't market this sort of thing like that.

 

Sorry if that's a slight aside, but it's something I felt I needed to say.

And you couldn't make a new topic about this because .... ???