For the Benefit of the Future: Accept the "Complainers&

mszv · **Joined:** Wed May 10, 2006 5:28 am **Posts:** 2266

To me it doesn't matter what people say, though I hope they respect other people's opinion.

If people post - that means they are talking. Even if they say the same thing a million times, they are talking. They are here. Maybe they'll play Uru. I think it makes the forum more real. That's what I like about this forum - it's not some pretend "shiny happy place". It's real. Even with the "don't like Uru" posts - a person can get a good idea if they themselves are going to like it.

I know a bunch of people who left - no postings, no involvement, and these were long time Uru fans. They think of themselves as people who "moved on". Sure they have fond memories of their life when they played Uru, but they are gone. I mentioned Uru to one of them they other day and they said, somewhat incredulously "are you still there?". The people who post here are not gone. I think that says something. They are still involved, and maybe they will play Uru.

And hey, welcome back macnbc. I'm glad you decided to come back!

RoTahgahm · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2008 8:13 pm

zander_nyrond wrote:

It's the ones who seem to me to be being trolls that worry me.

Trolls are trolls; they'll show up no matter what. It's a fact of the Internet.

Just accept that they exist and otherwise ignore them. If you let them worry you, then they're being successful.

Romer Openfield · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:12 pm

There is complaining, and there is criticism. They are on opposite poles. Suffering the non-constructive complainers is not the way to go. They should be put in their place and ignored if they continue. Criticism can't be stated non-emotionally without guidelines and definitions by which to judge. But can you recognize the difference and deal effectively with either a complaint or a criticism?

This is such an old topic across all forums, and it implies that some people are superior to others simply by how they write their posts or "voice" their points. Often it is the people who deem themselves correct who judge others unfairly by expressing themselves in a condescending manner. I have acted that way occasionally, and so have most of you.

I think the major problem is that many of us lack adequate diplomatic people-skills here, in writing, in this forum. There is little way to make your points strongly, or wield enough authority to get respect for point of view. Some try very long posts, other try large words, some try bullying, and most don't know grammar, punctuation, or spelling. Plus the Ego often gets in the way. Some of you, even the most "seasoned" and level-headed, lace your comments with slight sarcasm or elitist attitudes and self-righteousness. And most of you cop to how long you've been with this game and how much you've "seen."

You know all of this. I'm as guilty as anyone. But we have to get over ourselves and focus on the product (Ages) and develop a more professional approach to it and to cooperative efforts. This isn't like organizing a parade. You need bosses and workers, and ultimately someone to hurt feelings by deciding what lives, what dies, and what needs to be rewritten.

Yes, we ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until we start criticizing each other's amateurish Ages. Most people who create anything feel it is good and precious. This is a nightmarish situation, but it has to be dealt with honestly and frankly. Rejection is difficult to bear, especially for amateurs in an emotional game like this. Feelings will be hurt, and power struggles will erupt. Heck, we had major problems with what Cyan created! When our own efforts begin to fall under critical scrutiny, I'm hiding.

One salve to all this might be a set of simple, clear standards all new Ages must meet. Perhaps 5 key points we could all refer to when discussing the merits of new Ages up for review. The details our experienced Writers can deal with and tweak. The new creations can be judged mostly on a set of facts, not personal opinion or emotions. There are many other ways to organize healthy development without hurting feelings. Perhaps you're already aware of all this.

I guess, overall, I think this thread just states the obvious, as does my post here. But, unlike ever before, we need to prepare and plan how we will deal with the good, the bad, and the ugly. I mean, really, truly put a plan on paper, if not a Constitution of sorts. But a simple plan, with rules, leaders, perhaps a judge and jury, and with go-to people for all sorts things. We need leadership and guidance and answers we can accept from sources we respect. If we have that, I believe the game will take care of itself.

Doo-daa.

Nalates · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:09 pm

Whilyam has a good point. While I often disagree with some of his thinking, he is perceptive and puts his thoughts out there. Yeah, Whilyam!

I agree with him that how people SHOULD behave toward one another in game, on forum, actually anywhere, is right on. I disagree with his WHY of what brings bad behavior. I also am not sure what he hopes to ACTUALLY accomplish with the post. The things that cause people to respond to various things is far broader and that broadness is the reason there seem to be so few simple solutions to problems. Our own perceptions and beliefs limits our understanding of others and that is where the rub starts.

One of my psych professors had a simple rule. If you are going to complain, only complain to the person that can do something about it. If you are going to complain to that person, provide one or more solutions to your complaint. If you cannot meet both of those concepts, keep it to yourself. Basically, suck it up or woman up (or man up as the case may be). As zander_nyrond’s example of the The Cleft vs Relto is a decent example of rational debate, preference, reason why, and what one would like to see.

Gondar wants to complain without providing suggestions. He has a right to in free countries. He wants there to be a GOOD reason for the complaint. But I don’t see the point if there is no solution. Nor do I think people have any idea of what a GOOD reason might be. Why complain about the moon being made of rock and not cheese or the sky being blue? I like cheese and I think that is a good enough reason. But what will a complaint get me?

We cannot change another person’s behavior or thinking; we can only change our own. SO, for me it is never about what THEY have said, written or think. It is about what I want to do in response. In some cases the stupidity, bias, ignorance, intolerance or narrow perspective of a viewpoint needs to be challenged. (For evil to win… good men… do nothing - thing) Romer Openfield wrote, ‘Suffering the non-constructive complainers is not the way to go’ and there is truth in that. I have a choice of how I respond. From time to time it is more emotional than logical and factual and I usually regret those responses. But how I choose to respond is a choice. I can think or be run by emotion. In the later I am vulnerable to being played by others. They can push my buttons when I do emotional.

We have a choice to support free choice and personal responsibility or attempt to preempt and control. I prefer the former and believe the latter is a sure path to frustration and dictatorship or fascism. So, can we stop people from complaining in inappropriate and non-productive ways? In my world that is a solid no. Attempting to do so is an assault of personal freedom. So, I will live with it happening for the sake of freedom and I can decide how I wish to respond or not.

Whilyam’s recognizing those with perpetually negative comments and ‘demanding’ some positive contribution from them is completely reasonable. I vote for all of us adopting some measure of a similar philosophy. While ‘demanding’ would not fit with my world view, I have no trouble challenging their consistent negativity. However, in practical reality it is never easy and never without conflict, which seems to be the natural state of humans. I take it that Whilyam is attempting to head off that conflict.

On the side of those pointing out obvious problems, mistakes, blind spots, etc… sometimes we have to decide if responders are reacting emotionally to having their beliefs or desires challenged or if we are seeing their comments through our biased and prejudicial perspectives and moving into an emotional rather than thoughtful response. Our responses often say much more about us than the target of our comments. Who we hang with and whose viewpoints we adopt says something about both parties…

When zander_nyrond says, ‘I am not a moron, my glasses are not rose-colored and my reactions are not knee-jerk’, I have to concede that from time to time I do stupid, my world view gets colored by desire, and I occasionally mean person/people a knee. :oops:

I hate it when that happens. I do it and it is part of life and I believe we all do it to some measure from time to time. I believe we have to decide EACH TIME if our ego is insisting our glasses are clear, when the rest of the world can see they are not… Knowing which is which and when is the trick. So, I try to cut everyone ample slack.

With Gondar I concede he has the right to complain without solutions or suggestions.

I disagree that it may serve any useful purpose for the community and take zander_nyrond’s points (a) and (b). And while Joey Zoonishii sounds a bit elitist on ‘properly reasoned discourse’ I can’t knock his point. But I love crunching the eggshells of which he writes. However, I believe ‘reasoned argument’ and passionate beliefs (emotionally vibrant) are NOT mutually exclusive. Passion and enthusiasm are a measure of sincerity and core belief. When the emotions cut off reason, the argument is lost (think name callers).

Quote:

Also, even if they say "I'm leaving and you should to" our energies should still go into finding a solution to the problem, not waving goodbye.

I believe we should hear what was said and then I decide if I think it is valid. The ‘suggestion’ helps me know if I’m being biased, emotional or narrow minded. But if they are not invested enough to make a suggestion, there is no SHOULD placed on me. **busy waving bye to such people**

Gondor’s points on ‘A stagnant culture dies’ and ‘challenges to urge us’… Second Life has radically changed my idea of what Uru could be like. This is an important concept. SL is being successful. Except for we hard core fans, Uru has not cut it yet. Changed is needed. May be that is why it is called a Restoration Experiement.

When Whilyam says, ‘Make this game better and don't alienate people’ I agree with better. But avoiding alienating people… if Whilyam means by our behavior, yes. Even a very BIG YES. But in design, game play and opinions… that tends to move things to the lowest common denominator and I disagree. Besides, wakco's can be run off. We lock up the criminally insane.

Sudre points out the first person shooter problem and what to say to those people. I doubt what is said is important (there is a community rep thing but excluding that). I doubt there is anything to be said to provide a positive response. Sometimes saying nothing is the best response. Interestingly SL mixes combat and non-combat in game. One can get their tushie killed in SL.

CrisGer has pretty much what I consider a good view, ‘more the merrier and I will continue to happily respond in the same spirit’.

I take that as if one cannot take the heat, stay positive or have fun with it all, say out of the kitchen. And EowynCarter got about as succinct as it gets. Way to go. And Shorahmin has a point of which I never thought ‘last word’. ...ummm... I can think of some cases.

Quote:

Yes, we ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until we start criticizing each other's amateurish Ages. Most people who create anything feel it is good and precious. This is a nightmarish situation, but it has to be dealt with honestly and frankly. Rejection is difficult to bear, especially for amateurs in an emotional game like this. Feelings will be hurt, and power struggles will erupt. Heck, we had major problems with what Cyan created! When our own efforts begin to fall under critical scrutiny, I'm hiding.

I think Romer Openfield is right. What he is pointing out is that the emotional involvement, perceptions, and beliefs people have being challenged never goes smoothly. In the creative effort where people have a lot invested, it could get brutal. So this thread had value to the community. Perhaps this is where we refer or problem posters for education and enlightenment?

Gondar · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2008 11:21 pm

Good points Natales, but I think you missed what I was saying.

When you complain, don't feel obliged to have an answer ready. (By the way, when I say complain I mean it as in criticism about actual flaws, not overall whining). If you do that you'll lose a lot of the actual realization of what's going on. Sometimes you see something wrong, and have no clue what a solution will be. If you refuse to put it up because you don't know an answer, you do everyone a disservice.

When we had episodes, people complained, and never had solutions. Why? Because quite simply I'm not sure if there WERE solutions. But what our complaning about the faults of episodes did was highlight the faults it had, and what could be changed within the existing framework. And to some extent it was. Episodes came as a result of our complaints in the first place. We had times where most people would miss everything, where you couldn't spend the time in the cavern to be 24/7 and missed a lot. Where you could go months with just coming across new ages but not knowing anything about what led to them. And such. And those complaints were taken in by Cyan, who figured a solution we didn't: concentrate.

THAT is what we do. Complaints need to exist, to be heard. Even if you don't have a solution. Because the chance is that someone else out on the forum will look at your complaint and think "Hey, good point.. I wonder if this would work!" and they post it. But they never thought about it as a problem before and therefore never pointed out a solution.
Just because YOU can't see a solution doesn't mean there ISN'T one.

Seriously.

Look, people, we're not in this alone. We're a community, we share ideas and solutions and problems. The people who point out problems are crtitical.. because it's with them that we realize what we need to work together to come up with ideas to fix.

Besides, if we got rid of all 'useless' complaining as some people seem to think it is, then the maintainers or whomever authorizes user ages would end up either rubber-stamping or writing ages for the other people, eh? :wink:

mszv · **Joined:** Wed May 10, 2006 5:28 am **Posts:** 2266

It's been like this for as long as there has been a Myst series game community. People talk about how great the community it, but you have to ask yourself - if everyone says the game community is so great, why are there so many objections to all the posts? Everyone here seems to be following the forums rules - what's the problem?

For as long as I've been around the Myst series games - the email lists and game forums were filled with people saying that someone's post was wrong, not good for the game (whatever one was current) not good for Cyan, and not good for the community. It wasn't that they disagreed with them - it was that they appeared to believe that the person they were responding to should not have posted the way they did. Sometimes it seems to me that the bar on Myst series game fandom is set really, really high. You don't just have to play Uru - you have to have the exact same opinions and writing style as the person you are talking to, or you aren't a good fan.

But then, I keep forgetting this and I have remind myself - Uru is not one community - never has been. There are groups of people who get along famously, so much so that they could go camping together. Those groups of people have varying types of virtual relationships with other members of the "community", from friendly aquaintance/colleague, to cordial, to "don't recognize them", to "don't like them". And so it goes.

The good news - it's been my experience that in the game itself, Uru, it's a bit better than on the forums. Yes, there are the inevitable conflicts between the strict roleplayers and the people who don't do strict roleplay. Sometimes that was a bad scene. But, in general, people are pretty nice in the game. I think it's because people can spread out in Uru, and there are separate neighborhoods (ncluding private neighborhoods) - that helps.

On our forum - we can't really divide ourselves into different groups of people who all post the same way. it's a place where all the Uru "communities" come together. I actually like it that there are people who don't agree with my opinions on this forum, and I don't think they ever will. Now, in all fairness I guess if no one ever agreed with me on anything, I'd be sad, but if one or two people say "good point", I'm fine with it.

Sophia · **Joined:** Wed May 17, 2006 11:30 pm **Posts:** 1116

Ack are we still complaining about the complaining complainers? Let me add mine then and rest assured, it's got nothing to do with Uru, the Myst community or YOU.

It seems today's trend to say "There is no right and wrong, good and evil, intelligent or stupid, because everybody is entitled to their opinion and that makes whatever they say all right and don't you dare disagree because that is the only right opinion anyway."
Personally, that is the one thing I dislike the most in modern society, because it puts an end to all meaningful discussions and wholesome solutions. It implies that everyone *shudders* is equal.

Then again, that is only my opinion, feel free to complain about my complaint about the complaining complainers.

*shrugs*

Kero · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2008 11:47 pm

Romer Openfield wrote:

Yes, we ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until we start criticizing each other's amateurish Ages. Most people who create anything feel it is good and precious. This is a nightmarish situation, but it has to be dealt with honestly and frankly. Rejection is difficult to bear, especially for amateurs in an emotional game like this. Feelings will be hurt, and power struggles will erupt. Heck, we had major problems with what Cyan created! When our own efforts begin to fall under critical scrutiny, I'm hiding.

Nalates wrote:

I think Romer Openfield is right. What he is pointing out is that the emotional involvement, perceptions, and beliefs people have being challenged never goes smoothly. In the creative effort where people have a lot invested, it could get brutal.

Speaking from experience - both of you are right and Romer - when the fur starts to fly can I hide out with you?

One of the best Graphic Design classes I ever had was also one of the most emotionally draining. It was taught by a prof. who had also worked as a Graphic Artist in some of the nation's major Ad houses. For the first three months he praised our efforts - gave us constructive criticism where needed and pretty much had the whole class thinking we were going to be the best Graphic Artists that ever lived. Then came the second three months. In his critiques he slammed everything we did, everything was trash, and nothing worth using as toilet paper to wipe his tushie. He actually had grown men and women leaving his class in tears. Then he sat us down and explained what he had done. The first three months were the college level crtiques while the second three months were the working world critiques - not too exagerated - that we could face when we entered the working world. Then he spent the remainder of the course showing us how to seperate our Ego from our work. That no matter how much blood, sweat, and tears we poured into a project there would always be someone who didn't like it - for whatever reason.

Sure wish he was here for this.....but since he isn't.....I guess it will be up to all of us to try and handle the criticism we give and take in as adult a manner as possible. Without our Ego or Emotions getting in the way. Tall order I'm sure......but it might be doable.....maybe.....perhaps......just a little?

Whilyam · **Joined:** Tue May 09, 2006 1:04 am **Posts:** 4134

Romer Openfield wrote:

There is complaining, and there is criticism. They are on opposite poles. Suffering the non-constructive complainers is not the way to go. They should be put in their place and ignored if they continue. Criticism can't be stated non-emotionally without guidelines and definitions by which to judge. But can you recognize the difference and deal effectively with either a complaint or a criticism?

What suffering is there? The concept of complainers being tiring is simply because people wish to stop those complaints. I can live with people speaking their mind, regardless of how they do it.

Quote:

I think the major problem is that many of us lack adequate diplomatic people-skills here, in writing, in this forum. There is little way to make your points strongly, or wield enough authority to get respect for point of view. Some try very long posts, other try large words, some try bullying, and most don't know grammar, punctuation, or spelling. Plus the Ego often gets in the way. Some of you, even the most "seasoned" and level-headed, lace your comments with slight sarcasm or elitist attitudes and self-righteousness. And most of you cop to how long you've been with this game and how much you've "seen."

This isn't a surprise. The way to deal with this (in my opinion) is not to make mechanisms and authority, but let people speak. So what if someone says "This game sucks and so do you". Are we going to reply with the equivalent of "you suck too!"? Or are we better than that? If we are truly a greater community than those of violent games (which I think we are), then let us not use their destructive methods and instead persevere. What harm will come from arguing people on their points and not their intent? I'm not suggesting that we reply to every critic with "Thank you for your concern!

". I'm suggesting we base our arguments in what can be done and not on tearing down the critic.

Quote:

You know all of this. I'm as guilty as anyone. But we have to get over ourselves and focus on the product (Ages) and develop a more professional approach to it and to cooperative efforts. This isn't like organizing a parade. You need bosses and workers, and ultimately someone to hurt feelings by deciding what lives, what dies, and what needs to be rewritten.

Yes, we ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until we start criticizing each other's amateurish Ages. Most people who create anything feel it is good and precious. This is a nightmarish situation, but it has to be dealt with honestly and frankly. Rejection is difficult to bear, especially for amateurs in an emotional game like this. Feelings will be hurt, and power struggles will erupt. Heck, we had major problems with what Cyan created! When our own efforts begin to fall under critical scrutiny, I'm hiding.

One salve to all this might be a set of simple, clear standards all new Ages must meet. Perhaps 5 key points we could all refer to when discussing the merits of new Ages up for review. The details our experienced Writers can deal with and tweak. The new creations can be judged mostly on a set of facts, not personal opinion or emotions. There are many other ways to organize healthy development without hurting feelings. Perhaps you're already aware of all this.

I guess, overall, I think this thread just states the obvious, as does my post here. But, unlike ever before, we need to prepare and plan how we will deal with the good, the bad, and the ugly. I mean, really, truly put a plan on paper, if not a Constitution of sorts. But a simple plan, with rules, leaders, perhaps a judge and jury, and with go-to people for all sorts things. We need leadership and guidance and answers we can accept from sources we respect. If we have that, I believe the game will take care of itself.

I think the solution is not more laws and structures on dealing with complaints. I think the solution lies in letting people voice their criticisms and seeing where people think the game needs improvement. Of course basic things such as a game not dependent on the player killing or the lack of sexual themes should be kept. But the vast majority of "complainers" voice other concerns such as sustainability which we need to be thinking about.

On your five guidelines. For Age review there needs to only be two considerations (in my opinion): The Terms of Service, and bugs. Therein lies the key to this. Do we go against what even the Maintainers want and introduce "quality" as a guideline to age writing? Do we spawn hurt feelings for the benefit of... what? Or do we focus on what can be? The only way you get people's feelings hurt is by judging the "quality" of their work.

Nalates wrote:

I also am not sure what he hopes to ACTUALLY accomplish with the post.

To stop people from alienating other players because they have complaints. To help the game grow and get better.

Quote:

One of my psych professors had a simple rule. If you are going to complain, only complain to the person that can do something about it. If you are going to complain to that person, provide one or more solutions to your complaint. If you cannot meet both of those concepts, keep it to yourself. Basically, suck it up or woman up (or man up as the case may be). As zander_nyrond’s example of the The Cleft vs Relto is a decent example of rational debate, preference, reason why, and what one would like to see.

And not everyone is a professor of psychology and, unless your profressor is really good, I'd be willing to bet Uru that he went against his own advice at least once. We are all only human and we all have times when we simply wish to complain. But that withstanding, with MORE if someone complains on the forums then they are complaining to someone who can do something about it (us!) and those suggestions should be argued on their merits and not on their intent. So what if someone wants to try and bring Uru down with constant disgust at what they see? You think they can do that? You think they convince over a thousand people that the game they believe in passionately is wrong and deserves to die? I don't. Because if there's one thing I know, it's that this community will never give up on this game. Oh sure our intensity will wax and wane, but it'll never go on its own. We'll be here 'till the lights go out for good. Until Cyan falls apart or the Miller brothers either move on over time or grow old and pass on. This community will never stop, and if anyone thinks they can do otherwise then let's show them they have another thing coming and make this place stronger every time.

Quote:

Gondar wants to complain without providing suggestions. He has a right to in free countries. He wants there to be a GOOD reason for the complaint. But I don’t see the point if there is no solution. Nor do I think people have any idea of what a GOOD reason might be. Why complain about the moon being made of rock and not cheese or the sky being blue? I like cheese and I think that is a good enough reason. But what will a complaint get me?

That would be true if what was being discussed were as fixed as the substance of the moon or the color of the sky, but it's not. Not usually. When was the last time you saw someone suggest something really impossible (well, ignoring my idea

)? When have you seen anyone ask where the weapons are? People know who we are, they know what we stand for and they respect that (the majority, at least). Look at the people who doubt MORE can succeed now. They say they loved Myst and Riven and the universes Cyan made. They say they're so happy that we've gotten another chance, but they don't think it'll work. They're fine people who (I think) will be proven wrong. And if that day comes, I don't doubt that most will come in and see what we've been up to and be amazed.

Quote:

We have a choice to support free choice and personal responsibility or attempt to preempt and control. I prefer the former and believe the latter is a sure path to frustration and dictatorship or fascism. So, can we stop people from complaining in inappropriate and non-productive ways? In my world that is a solid no. Attempting to do so is an assault of personal freedom. So, I will live with it happening for the sake of freedom and I can decide how I wish to respond or not.

Agreed. I hope no one is thinking of some way to stop complaints deemed irrelevant. That way is far beyond what I'm talking about.

Quote:

Whilyam’s recognizing those with perpetually negative comments and ‘demanding’ some positive contribution from them is completely reasonable. I vote for all of us adopting some measure of a similar philosophy. While ‘demanding’ would not fit with my world view, I have no trouble challenging their consistent negativity. However, in practical reality it is never easy and never without conflict, which seems to be the natural state of humans. I take it that Whilyam is attempting to head off that conflict.

I'm demanding nothing. If you want to come in and rant then that should be your right. I'm only asking that we focus on the positives of what we can do. What is at the core of their anger and how can we resolve it? Can we resolve it? Most of the time it is and only needs work done on it. Work that has been quelled and stifled for years. What you see of the community is only a fraction of what is possible if we truly open up.

Quote:

On the side of those pointing out obvious problems, mistakes, blind spots, etc… sometimes we have to decide if responders are reacting emotionally to having their beliefs or desires challenged or if we are seeing their comments through our biased and prejudicial perspectives and moving into an emotional rather than thoughtful response. Our responses often say much more about us than the target of our comments. Who we hang with and whose viewpoints we adopt says something about both parties…

When zander_nyrond says, ‘I am not a moron, my glasses are not rose-colored and my reactions are not knee-jerk’, I have to concede that from time to time I do stupid, my world view gets colored by desire, and I occasionally mean person/people a knee. :oops:

I hate it when that happens. I do it and it is part of life and I believe we all do it to some measure from time to time. I believe we have to decide EACH TIME if our ego is insisting our glasses are clear, when the rest of the world can see they are not… Knowing which is which and when is the trick. So, I try to cut everyone ample slack.

And keep in mind I am not saying anyone is bad for not being some perfect angel and being nice and smiling at all times. No one does that. The only people who smile broadly 24/7 are in insane asylums. I only hope people will keep these thoughts in mind and let it help them truly stay positive. Because the greater form of "positiveness" is not just being positive about Uru, but also reflecting positively on other people. And that does so much more.

Quote:

With Gondar I concede he has the right to complain without solutions or suggestions.

I disagree that it may serve any useful purpose for the community and take zander_nyrond’s points (a) and (b). And while Joey Zoonishii sounds a bit elitist on ‘properly reasoned discourse’ I can’t knock his point. But I love crunching the eggshells of which he writes. However, I believe ‘reasoned argument’ and passionate beliefs (emotionally vibrant) are NOT mutually exclusive. Passion and enthusiasm are a measure of sincerity and core belief. When the emotions cut off reason, the argument is lost (think name callers).

I believe solutions and suggestions can come out of criticisms like that. It doesn't matter if a critic doesn't have the answer, someone else may. But if the only response is "this isn't the game for you" "go play WoW' then those solutions are never voiced and it remains without them. I believe that you can be passionate about something and still think reasonably but I also think that it's a balance.

Quote:

When Whilyam says, ‘Make this game better and don't alienate people’ I agree with better. But avoiding alienating people… if Whilyam means by our behavior, yes. Even a very BIG YES.

Yes, that's what I am talking about. But it's very important because our behavior is what helps mold our opinion of what someone is and that can lead to a rush to judgment and a stifling.

Nalates · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 1:35 am

Quote:

Good points Natales, but I think you missed what I was saying.

No, I think I got it. We just see it differently. I think it is in how we understand the words; complain, criticism, and what has been left out 'voicing opinion and preference'. The latter being possibly either a complaint or criticism depending on how it is voiced.

To complain means to express discontent, displeasure, unhappiness, displeasure, resentment, or accuse. - Notice the frequency of emotional connotations in the definition.

To criticize means find fault with, express an unfavorable judgment and can mean merely to evaluate without necessarily finding fault; however, usually the word implies the expression of disapproval. - Notice the lack of emotional connotations in the definition. Finding fault does not have to be emotional. By definition to complain is emotional. There is a much narrow emotional context in criticism. Some insist critique be constructive which is to some measure also what we are talking about.

In my understanding of the thread we are talking about complaining but undoubtedly it gets mixed... So when one says they hate my chocolate cake and stop, it is a complaint or may be an insult. When they say the cake has too much whatever it is a criticism. I can do something with the criticism. Other than punching them in the nose there is little I can do with the complaint. Which is why I think the whole topic has carried on this long.

You seem to think of the words interchangably... I may be wrong on that... whatever, the words mean different things. So may be we could say, I don't want to hear compaints but your criticisms are welcome, preferably contructive ones.

Artic_Wagon · **Joined:** Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:00 pm **Posts:** 4095

@ Whilyam

Quote:

When have you seen anyone ask where the weapons are?

I would suggest you pay a visit to the GoG's forums and ask them if
they ever saw these type of questions while they working on shifts.

@ Whilyam

Quote:

And keep in mind I am not saying anyone is bad for not being some perfect angel and being nice and smiling at all times. No one does that. The only people who smile broadly 24/7 are in insane asylums.

I have seen a few of them in here. Am I in an asylum ? :shock:

@ zander_nyrond

Quote:

I am not a moron, my glasses are not rose-colored and my reactions are not knee-jerk’

I just love that one. thumb's up

@ Nalates.

Quote:

You seem to think of the words interchangably... I may be wrong on that... whatever, the words mean different things. So may be we could say, I don't want to hear compaints but your criticisms are welcome, preferably contructive ones.

That is pretty near my kind of logic.

Romer Openfield · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:37 am

I am glad that some of you will "let" others complain. Very big of you.

There are a lot of good points here, and a lot of pompous hot air and specious logic. This is a business with a product and a creative community with a purpose. There is more to learn here than how to build Ages or what is polite to say and not polite. Dispassionate listening and lots of note-taking might be in order. Do we have a scribe or group of scribes to comb through these threads for good ideas?

Perhaps you experienced Second Lifers can post some notes and lessons learned that might apply to our efforts.

And thanks for all the counterpoints to my long post. Very thoughtful and well-meaning.

CrisGer · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:38 am

Whatever happens in the end i think for MOUL MORE to survive and grow, it will need all of us.. so i hoipe we can all help it keep going and just get better and better...............ALL of US

Dr Britcom Mom · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:29 am

RoTahgahm wrote:

Being optimistic is one thing, but let's take off the rose-colored glasses, or at least be kind and respectful to those who choose not to wear them. We all need to realize at this point that Uru is not perfect. Yes, we should be very appreciative of what we have. I'm thrilled that MORE is allowing it to live once again. We're all still here because we love Uru. But it's not perfect, and it's going to take a lot of work to get there.

We also need to realize that Cyan is working with a greatly reduced staff; that further development of the game rests in our hands, as Cyan does not have the staff or the resources to revamp the game alone; that it is a given that the initial release of MO:RE will be the MOUL that closed April 10th, 2008; and that we are responsible for growing MO:RE into a community/gaming experience that will EVENTUALLY, with our efforts and support of CYAN, have more of a CYAN input on the game content.

This really is a grass roots effort. We will initially be paying for the servers, the game content development is in OUR hands. The technical aspects (bugs, areas needing updating) will, of necessity, be dealt by CYAN when they can devote the resources to this task. Maybe some of the computer experts here can be helpful in that task as well.

For me, MO:RE is a leap of faith, faith in the community that we can keep the game alive.

Calam · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:44 am

I'll repeat what I said in another thread:

Quote:

I simply cannot grasp why this is even a point of discussion.

There will be complainers wherever you go. The more attention they get, the more they complain: and they should be ignored.

HOWEVER, constructive criticism is a totally different matter. Allow me to demonstrate:

Complaining: "How do you people even like this game/community/product!? It has problem X, Y, and Z! This is not worth my money. We should find a better game, like Game X. Game X doesn't have these problems. I'm leaving, just as soon as I finish making 1,900 other posts about why I hate it here."

Constructive Criticism: "This game has problem X, Y, and Z, and they need to be addressed for this to be a better game, and it needs to happen for this to be successful. (Here's how...)"

As you can see, the complainer is the one who should be ignored because they are irritating, whiny, and offer no solutions other than throwing a hissy-fit. The complainer's resolution is often to find as many other complainers as possible to agree with him. Most of the time they are mad and are venting in public (Re: hissy fit.)

The criticizer is being critical because they care: and should be listened to, even if their revelations are a bit raw.

Regardless of who you're dealing with, be they whiner or criticizer, friend or foe, just keep in mind that being respectful gets you farther than descending into an argument. You can't change a whiner's mind.

For the Benefit of the Future: Accept the "Complainers&

Who is online