Addressing Metaplay

[NightcastorKitty 2779]

At least someone finally looked at the bright pink elephant in the room.  Was beginning to think I was crazy.

 

Wait, I'm already crazy. Carry on. 

[LobsterLarry 1514]

man can yall be quiet im trying to watch the last of us stop tweaking

[Malta 2811]

larry come play cs dont be a coward

 

[Shmeepicus 4213]

4 minutes ago, Malta said:

larry come play cs dont be a coward

 

 

fr

31 minutes ago, Orlanth said:

Dude put down the bottle. This is disgusting.

 

Bro you're beating a dead horse.

[LobsterLarry 1514]

8 minutes ago, Malta said:

larry come play cs dont be a coward

 

join the call dummy me and shmeep waitin on you we gonna go to the nuke nest

[Haseroth 1740]

Yall are wild

[sam33497 7356]

@LaoTzu@ibleesianI love you 3000

[Pancho 4197]

@ibleesianthis you?

[Lenny 1615]

3 minutes ago, sam33497 said:

@LaoTzu@ibleesianI love you 3000

love you 3000 @sam33497@ibleesian @Trey@milksoda@Irene@Kylo@rigorous @Greehn @I hate you 3000@carebear@milkyi

[Rig 17580]

25 minutes ago, LaoTzu said:

love you 3000 @sam33497@ibleesian @Trey@milksoda@Irene@Kylo@rigorous @Greehn @I hate you 3000@carebear@milkyi

 

love you 3,000,000,000,000

[Werew0lf 24180]

I think the issue will only be addressed properly when all the Ferrymen are banned for metaplaying. Contact me, I’m about to ruin @Orlanthand @Mickaelhz’s whole career.

[sergisala 3451]

Greetings,

 

As much as I totally agree that metaplay is indeed a scourge and harmful for the roleplay's integrity (even after being banned for it) I still think that the metaplay rules have been so ambiguous in their writing and application that could easily be used to ban the players that the reporters or the Administration Team simply don't like to be playing within the server, regardless of the severity of the infraction.

 

So, I humbly ask the Administration Team that, if you seek to instate metaplay rules to preserve the roleplay's integrity, please make sure that such rules are clear, predictable and properly delimited to specific type of situations, especially considering that such rules have never been instated in the server before and things like planning roleplay events in TS3/Skype/Discord have been done in the server since 2011. It is a noble goal to seek to remove OOC from the server but the Administration Team should also realize that the server has unfortunately been TS3/Skype/Discord OOC oriented since 2011 and that leadership chat groups have existed for ages and that, therefore, any major changes in the server rules regarding such matter should be approached with caution and should be implemented slowly so that the community can naturally adapt to the new rules that are very different to the player culture that had been existing in the server since a long time ago.

 

For example, I think it would be a good idea to have the Moderation Team be the team that handles metaplay reports rather than having them be admin bans and to firstly contact the reported player to inform such player that the Staff has detected that they may have committed a metaplay conduct and demand such player to immediately cease their metaplay conduct, and, only if the metaplay does not immediately cease, then proceed to ban such player. That way, the player will realize that their conduct may have breached the metaplay rules and will most likely immediately stop whatever metaplay conduct that such player may have been doing and a ban will most likely not be necessary to be taken in that type of situations.

 

After all, since such rules are new and are very different to the former player culture, it is perfectly possible for players to not be aware of them or simply to not know if their current conduct may breach the metaplay rules.

 

I also would like to highlight that I am not writing this comment with regard to my personal situation but because I also care about the roleplay's integrity and, especially, about the community of this server.

 

Thank you for your time,

Sergi

[Agy 756]

Very happy to see the administration's efforts continue in regards to this issue!
Wish you lot the best of luck in your attempts! : >

[Andustar 4143]

This was actually pretty well addressed by @sergisala. The parameters by which 'Metaplay' is defined are still extremely vague. It is all well and good to establish these core principles:
 

9 hours ago, Josh3738 said:

• Organizing group relationships OOCly, far beyond that which was RPly represented
• Organizing those relationships RPly and OOCly, with the explicit goal of gaining the upper hand in future conflict
• OOCly directing in-character decisions of others to preserve certain relationships RPly
• Mass recruiting off other servers for PVP
• Writing whitelist applications for recruits
• Screensharing RP to discuss responses for favorable outcomes to overall OOC plans
• Screenshotting to consult with offline players on how to respond IRP for favorable outcomes to overall OOC plans
• Organizing personas for war and as scapegoat personas with nation affiliations

However, there is a significant flaw here - where does Roleplay and OOC begin and end respectively? There are many scenarios in which these principles can be interpreted quite vaguely, and the timeframe in which the events must happen is not specified. To give an example - A playerbase that lost a war settles in another nation, primarily motivated to do so by OOC friendships. They rebuild and contribute to said nation's development, but never quite forget the perceived wrongs that were done to them. Time passes, months even, and still that grudge festers; they would jump at the chance to stick it to the people who beat them down. They grasp that opportunity and then lash out all of a sudden. The same battle lines as before are drawn up, the conflict this time around merely has a new name. At least, this is one perspective...

The alternative is that this group merely went there because it was sensible. They approached their Roleplay with a new perspective, free of the past conflict, and were merely minding their own business. It just so happens that the group they previously fought has motivated them to fight again through some kind of ingame provocation, a year down the line.

Who is to say this is motivated by OOC or Roleplay developments? The side that won the last war might perceive it as the former, whereas the side which lost might argue the latter. Perhaps they are both correct to some extent? Either way, how do the admins reliably engage with the community productively to ascertain who is acting in good faith and who is lying? Of course, there will be clear-cut cases where the answer is obvious, but I can think of quite a few recent developments which this analogy can apply to, over the past 6 months. I can recall a number of players pointing fingers to one party, and said party pointing right back.

The Administration has not engaged with us effectively in how we should actually tackle this culture, one which has existed on the server for as long as I have played. Instead, they have solely introduced punitive measures which appear to disillusion the playerbase one way or another. First, there was outrage earlier in the week in the Church Discord over Levy_Spearman's ban, and now there is outrage in the opposite stand. The hatred is still there - what have you done to dispel it @Admins? 

I would also like to point out another issue in this post and ruling. @Josh3738, whilst I have not had any problems with you on an individual basis, you must admit that there is an apparent conflict of interest with you being at the centre of these developments. I cannot speak for your conduct as Moderation Admin in full; I am not well enough informed on the culture of the team you oversee, nor your targets and the consensus on your impartiality. I can, however, speak for an instance in which you turned a blind eye to behaviour which may well have fit the criteria you list, within the last 6 months, due to what I presume is a bias founded upon friendship. This is not something I resent you for, nor do I believe you should step down from the Administration because of it, but I would appreciate it if you might address this going forward, whether that be through a discussion on this post or in private.

Overall, that is everything I have to say for now. I will be interested to see what else happens in the coming days if the Administration carry on, which they appear determined to do.

[AstriaS 4988]