06-02-2025, 06:39 PM
(06-02-2025, 06:06 PM)Doc Wrote: Several points:
1. I have very rarely said anything negative about moderation, and I often, even if its through gritted teeth sometimes, supported what moderation does in their role as moderation. I often defend moderation vocally and publicly, and am not on some crusade against moderation. This comment is not aimed at moderation, the members of the moderation team, or any choices that the moderation team has made in the past, and if I have a problem with some decision that moderation has made, I address it with them privately. This post was a response to the comment which I quoted above, that while building the new rules, you don't intend to have any mechanism outside of RP in "any way". That's not a "Well, maybe we revisit in the future." That is a pretty definite statement that the discussion as far as empires are concerned, is over, its decided, and whatever others wish, the rules won't be revisited. That's how I read it. I can't speak to how many others read it, but this is not a criticism of that decision. It was written more in the spirit of "maybe there is something that you all are not considering."
2. If I felt a real proposal would stand a chance, I would work one out. But As Greek said, and as you made clear, major changes to the rulesets aren't really on the table. I never got the sense that they were, at least not at the moment. The statement "There are no plans of making "Imperial ambitions" regulated in any way, that happens via RP or it doesnt simple as that. " pretty much says to me that "we will not be considering any proposals to change that rule." or the rule about empty countries from other discussions. So I am not sure who makes these vague, half thought out suggestions, but it wasn't me. I am prepared to help, I asked if anyone needed any help, and I have helped where I was welcomed to do so.
3. Of course the community doesn't owe me anything. I wasn't asking for just me, nor am I the only one who has ever asked about it. It is apparent that many people seem to think of me as this self serving monster. I don't know how I got this reputation. I use my country as an example a lot, because that's what I know and don't like to speak for other people. If that comes off as me wanting some special privilege for just my self and the country I happen to inhabit, then that's a failure to communicate properly. but I ask for the things that I would like to see, would like to use. I don't ask for those things JUST for myself and nobody else: I assume all who wish to use those things will avail themselves of them, and we can't know how many people would use them if they could when they don't exist: It may be just me, but it may be others too, I don't know. But if nobody asks, nobody gets anything. And I happen to want things.
4. Mbites, you and I get along alright, personally. But your response struck me as defensive and sarcastic, and personally speaking, I don't think my comment deserved that. I happen to disagree with a decision which apparently has been made that you expressed in the post I was responding to. I wasn't attacking you personally, or your decision making process. I wanted to engage in a discussion about it, rather than letting it just be a closed point. I feel like I am less likely to do that in the future.
I'd like to start with 4) since I think from reading the whole thread again, that some sentiment got transformed in transport here. The last part was me venting at the cost of the topic, I am sorry about that, that one was a little sarcastic, it was uncalled for, caught me at the wrong time and place. I was also not attacking you personally here, sometimes these things slide into a response of mine when I get into the 'flow' of writing.
3) "You" also meant as a general "you in the role of a player" no one owes anyone anything. And yeah, those are valid points.
1) I did not mean that you were 'attacking moderation' that got lost by my wording; What I meant with "aimed at mods" was that people expect mods to come up with an a specific proposal when someone suggests something and to do a lot of case-by-case review work. I do not feel attacked by you and I appreciate your offer of help and that you have given feedback.
2) I think that that it was my fault for miscommunicating here, the response I wrote to Drax was haphazardly written with not much thought behind it. This was not intended to mean that there can be no discussion or that it is over; It was more of a 'nodding off' what Drax said, so agreeing without any more substance behind it. There probably is some merit in revisiting the fundaments of interactivity between empty nations and maybe even play around with rule-mechanics on empire, I think those are very difficult things to handle though and as you/most people know me as a laissez-faire kind off Roleplayer a proposal from my end is increasingly unlikely since I would not even know where to start with something like that. Also what Greek said about maintenance was what I said a little more defensively; we'd like to focus on self-maintenance.
Summarily I think I should have chosen a lot of my wording better on responses and maybe should have left the venting to a different more private circle since there was not much graspable about it anyways. I hope this answer finds you in the right spirit and you can excuse my 'defensive' post from earlier, I appreciate the feedback. The rest of what I have written here do, I think, adress some of the points made here, aside from what I've misworded or misguidedly written, I do stand by in my opinion.